State of Sutton - A Borough of Contradictions

 

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Foreword by Councillor Paul Scully Leader of the Opposition Sutton Council 

A report on the successes and failures in different policy areas affecting the lives of Sutton residents. Summer 2009

 

 

Table of Contents 

Table of Contents  Foreword by Councillor Paul Scully

ii

Introduction

iv

Adult Social Services:

1

Transforming The Hidden Service Which Can Affect Everyone Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear

25

Decent Homes: Raising The Bar In Public Housing

41

Education and Young People:

55

Opening the Door of Opportunity to Local Children Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision, Sport and Leisure

79

Transport, Planning & The Environment:

99

Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions

139

Acknowledgements Undertaking the writing of a tome such as this is quite a daunting prospect. It was made very much less so by the assistance of the many council officers and people from Sutton’s various partner organisations, who gave their time freely in explaining the operations within their departments and the challenges that they face. As ever, they were professional in their approach. We never asked them to step over the boundary into party politics. po litics. They never once did. Tours of departments and field visits were organised and it was clear that they were rightly proud of what they were doing. Our policy group process is designed to be as party neutral as possible. We have our Conservative principles to apply to the issues, but we are keen to ensure that we are helping to build a Sutton for fo r everyone. Therefore the input from people with a particular expertise or interest but not associated with any political party was invaluable. David Armitage is but one example. A local magistrate, junior football referee and active member of a popular church in Wallington, his extra input was vital. Similarly Mike Whalley, retired director of Microbiology at Great O Ormond rmond Street allowed us to ask questions that with our collective experience, we would not have considered. Jane Pascoe brought her considerable experience as a long-standing local chair of governors and educationalist. Finally, our thoughts have been put into words by the inestimable Jason Hughes, the Conservative Group’s Political Researcher. His meticulous research and patience has made this ambitious project come alive. The footnotes, a particular joy to him, are all his. Careful proof-reading saved his bacon on more than one occasion, but there’s bound to be a few mistakes. That’s the joy of sticking your head above the parapet. 

i

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Foreword by Councillor Paul Scully Leader of the Opposition London Borough of Sutton Sutton I moved to Sutton

ensure that the Council reflects their

twenty-two years ago. In

wishes. We need to ensure that we have

that time, I’ve moved to

looked at all that is good and bad about

Carshalton,

the Council and what other Local

commuted to London

Authorities are doing that might work in

and Brighton and

Sutton. This report is the start of that

worked from home. My

process.

two children went to local nurseries,

In “The State of Sutton: A Borough of

primaries and now two of the excellent

Contradictions”, we have reviewed almost

secondary schools in Wallington. Like

every area that the Council touches on,

many residents in the Borough, I enjoy

identifying the areas that need further

living here. The location is convenient,

investigation in order to develop a robust

there are many good parks and it is an

strategy to deliver a better service with

attractive place for people who want to

value for money at the forefront of our

raise a family.

minds. We are entering an austere period in local government. At a time when

Only the most tribally loyal Liberal

Westminster is abuzz with talk of giving

Democrat would disagree with the notion

Councils increased powers, the recession

that Sutton could still be a far better bett er

has meant that money is unlikely to

place to live. Sutton Council benefits

follow. So, we need to find fresh thinking

from some very hard working staff and it

to do better with less.

has become ever more apparent over the last couple of decades that one thing is

It may be that the Council is not the best

missing from the jigsaw; a strong

organisation to deliver some services. For

political leadership from the lead

example, the relationship with the

councillors elected to represent the

voluntary sector is strong in Sutton. It

Borough’s 180,000 residents.

may be that we just need to be better organised to address these real concerns.

It is not enough to take what is given to us by the Council, paying ever higher

The core overarching contradiction

Council Tax bills to do so and then

uncovered in this report is that Sutton

gratefully tugging our forelock to our

has limitless potential for delivering a

political establishment.

borough that is the subject of envy around London utilising our natural

Neither is it enough to simply want to

assets. These include the green

manage the Council better than the

characteristics of our suburban

current administration. Councillors are

surroundings, the renowned excellence in

elected by residents of the Borough to set

our schools, our low actual crime rates,

the strategy of the Local Authority, to

our proximity to London and our relative

ii

 

Foreword by Councillor Paul Scully Leader of the Opposition London Borough of Sutton  affluence. However the barrier to fulfilling

Not everything that the Council does is

this potential is the tired political

played out in the public eye. The green

leadership of the Council. Symptoms of

garden waste fiasco brought together

this are shown in poorly thought out

thousands of people from different

planning, degrading our suburban

backgrounds. Contrast this to the delay

inheritance, the high fear of crime that

to the building of Stanley Park High

reduces the quality of life for our

School that means that the new moderate

residents, the ingrained inequalities of opportunities for resident pupils, the

autistic unit may not be able to take the first eight children in 2010. Assuming

appalling state of our council housing

that they are educated out of the

and the gulf between the Council and

borough over their remaining seven years

local residents in communication.

at school, the cost to the taxpayer t axpayer will be more than a million pounds. Often,

This document is also about forward

factors beyond the control of the Council

thinking, meeting the challenges today

can have a significant affect on the

and reaping the benefits tomorrow. For

budget, such is the nature of local

example, understanding why Sutton is

government finance. We need to be

well above the national average for young

mindful of this as we address the issues

people with Special Educational Needs;

of the day.

meeting the challenges of transforming adult social care to promote

Sutton Conservatives are ambitious for

independence rather than over-reliance,

the Borough. The world does not stand

as one of the last local authorities to

still and we cannot preserve Sutton in

dismantle Victorian long-stay hospitals.

aspic, yearning for days gone by. However, we must decide on the Borough

All of these issues require bold and

that we want Sutton to be before we

ambitious leadership and being open to

decide what policies to introduce and

new ideas, not gimmicks, not bluster but

which initiatives and pressures that we

real commonsense action. There is plenty

should resist.

to build on here in Sutton. There are many examples of excellent innovative

This report is the first stage in tackling

thinking in other local authorities. We do not need to reinvent the wheel. Boldness

these difficult questions and I hope that the ensuing debate will highlight the

is very different from recklessness. There

benefits that have been seen elsewhere in

have been several times over the last

London, and are long overdue here in

couple of decades, when Sutton has

Sutton.

sought to pioneer projects without due consideration. Fortnightly bin collections, gas-powered rubbish trucks and the £35 per bag green garden waste collection Councillor Paul Scully

were all decisions that had to be reversed in a hurry at great cost to the taxpayer. The controversial £8.5million Sutton Life Centre risks being another project that is put in peril by pride rather than t han logic.

iii

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Introduction Although we have tried to make this report as comprehensive as possible, we have not been able to tackle every issue within wit hin these pages. Whether it be whole topics, such as Street Cleaning or particular topical problems like the shortfall of school places in the Borough, we take them just as seriously as the topics that made it into the book. We will continue to work on them in the weeks to come in order to formulate effective solutions to the problems identified. Analysis has been as objective as possible. Politicians can debate our differences of opinion, it is a discussion document after all, but we hope that typing errors will be treated with caution. The grey boxes within the chapters are additional commentary. There is plenty of leeway as to what is commentary and what is narrative, narrative , but you will get the picture as you read on. Please do let us know what you think and join in the debate.

www.changesutton.org.uk [email protected]

iv

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service Which Can Affect Everyone

1

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Sutton Council should examine how

Introduction 

accessible its services are in this area. It should look at whether it is promoting

The Hidden Service

the services residents are entitled to. 

Adult Social Services accounts for the

Personalisation: The Independence and

second largest spend in Sutton Council at

Empowerment Agenda

1

£71.2million.  As a local authority, its social care function is an area of huge

Independence and choice in adult social

importance in the Council’s work. It is

care are core themes in the policy

also an area of policy going through an

changes currently taking place. The 2005

era of very significant transformation,

Government Green Paper Independence,

affecting the lives of many of Sutton’s

Well-being and Choice 2  sets out a vision

most vulnerable residents.

for maintaining the independence of the individual by providing greater control

Yet it is a hidden service. It does not

and choice over how their needs are met.

dominate local newspaper headlines, nor

In short, it is intended to be centred on

does it ride rampant in party political

the person.

leaflets. It is not high profile and it is not

It also sets out to shape a vision for adult social services with an emphasis on

glamorous. But it is vital to so many people. This presents a seemingly core contradiction in our ‘Borough of

preventing problems and ensuring that

Contradictions’, as a low profile service of

local authority services and the work of

paramount importance to a significant

the NHS come together on a shared

number of people in the borough.

agenda. It also seeks to help maintain the independence of individuals and, notably,

Most people will need some kind of adult

that any risks in attaining greater

social service during their life whether

independence are shared with that

through age, disability or intermediate

individual and balanced against the

care following hospital. Sutton should

benefits.

examine what more it can do to raise the profile of its hidden service. 

In 2006, this vision was reinforced in the White Paper, Our health, our care, our

An additional contradiction might be that

say: a new direction for community

as a consequence of its low profile

services.3  This paper detailed the radical

hidden service nature, many Sutton

and sustained shift in the way in which

residents who are entitled to social

services are to be delivered, ensuring that

services in this area may be missing out.

there is greater personalisation. It sets

This may be because people are unaware

the goal of giving people a stronger voice

of their entitlements, lack sufficient

so that service-users themselves are the

confidence to access them, or may be too

major drivers of service improvement.

proud to ask for them through fear of stigma.

These shifts in policy are to be welcomed because they aim to present high-quality

1. Figures from 2007/08, from total gross spends of £404.9million. 2. Department of Health publication, 21 March 2005. 3. Department of Health publication, 30 January 2006.

2

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone support, meeting people’s aspirations for

will place on adult social services. Sutton

independence and greater control over

is not immune to this. It is, in fact, on the

their lives, and also making services

frontline of dealing with the ‘time-bomb’.

flexible and responsive to individual

For example, the closure of long-stay

needs.

hospital Orchard Hill, in Carshalton, has increased the number of adults with

As a local authority, Sutton is at the

learning disabilities in community-based

frontline of policy and service transformations. It is fortunate to have

residential services, tailored to individual needs.5 

such hard working and dedicated staff in embracing this agenda, working to make

Because of Britain’s ‘cradle to grave’

it reality in the delivery of council

welfare system some people will need

services.

lifelong care services. Presently, 20% of Sutton’s budget in this area is for life

Transforming social care carries a degree

long services and 80% is for adult social

of risk but the rewards will be great.

care services.6 With the elderly population

Promoting independent living means that

rising, Sutton Council has a clear cost-

the Council will have to become a

imperative for fostering intelligent

‘helping hand’ rather than a ‘crutch’. 

commissioning. This can cause frictions

The Demographic Time-Bomb: Intelligent

between what is termed as ‘need’ against ‘eligibility criteria’. The policy shift

Commissioning

towards personalised services in the transformation agenda will inevitably

‘Commissioning’ is jargon for how

have a knock-on effect as to how we

Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) fulfil their

commission our services.

duties to provide effective health and care services that meet the needs of the

These are tough choices for any local

local population. It includes

authority. As the demographic time-

responsibilities ranging from assessing

bomb ticks and the policy ethos of social

population needs, prioritising health

services modifies accordingly, smarter

outcomes, the procurement of products

commissioning and the maximisation of

and services, and managing service providers.4 The pressures of

value from tight budgets becomes critical.

commissioning on PCTs vary considerably.

This should be viewed as an opportunity as well as a challenge. Commissioning

The United Kingdom’s ageing population

should be seen as a vital tool in fostering

has been described as a ‘demographic

greater independence and the delivering

time-bomb’ in terms of the pressure it

of the personalisation agenda. 

4. A useful definition can be found at the Department of Health website, see: http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/ Managingyourorganisation/Co Managingyou rorganisation/Commissioning/DH_8 mmissioning/DH_865 65   5. Orchard Hill was home to over 100 adults with learning disabilities and formed the last of its kind as an oldstyle long-term care hospital. Some adults with complex needs remain in NHS care. 6. Figure provided by Mr Shaun O-Leary, Executive Head of Learning Disabilities, Disabilities, Adult Social Services and Hous-

ing, Sutton Council. 17 July 2009. 

3

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Cherishing Our Voluntary Sector In A Post 

area. Their work, often on shoestring

-Bureaucratic Era

budgets, complements the transformation agenda with the creativity

It has too often been the case that local

and dedication that characterises the

authorities think that they are the only

voluntary sector. 

organisations in a position to deliver for elderly or vulnerable residents. Too often

As a local authority, Sutton must examine

voluntary sector organisations succeed despite Sutton’s local political leadership,

what more it can do to help our voluntary sector organisations to flourish. They are

not because of it. They do not need n eed to

the engine room of Sutton’s community

wait for Sutton Council committees, focus

and without their input, the

groups and consultations to come up

consequences would be disastrous for

with answers. They know what needs to

vulnerable residents, their families and

be done and they just want to get on with

carers. 

the job.

First Contact With The

Voluntary sector organisations like the

Hidden Service 

Sutton Centre for Independent Living and 7

Learning (SCILL)  and the Sutton Carers’ Centre (SCC)8 are critical. SCILL’s Sherwood Café in Collingwood Road is an

The Access Team

excellent example of an extra facility,

Behind closed doors in the Civic Offices,

which is open to general public as well as

tucked away behind the scenes, lives ‘The

service users. The flexibility of SCILL and

Access Team’ call centre. This new team

its staff is obvious and their work is

is the first point of contact for adult

having a beneficial impact on the

social services. They deal with issues at

vulnerable adults who use their services,

source or they ‘signpost’ them to other

helping to develop skills, independence

available services which do not require

and confidence.

assessment. Calls might cover:

SCC, in its own words, is there to provide

•

“care for those who care for others” . This organisation works for and with carers in

•

Sutton. It provides advice, activities,

•

health and social events to enable carers

emergencies via Safe Call requests for occupational therapy (OT) adaptations to homes assessments of need for adult social services.

to have a life of their own. Calls are entered into the Paris computer The rise of voluntary organisations like

system. A breakdown of the types of calls

SCILL and SCC signifies one of the last

handled by the Access Team are shown

death knells to a ‘bureaucratic era’.

9

below in Figure 1. Over a three month period since April 2009, the volume of

We support the powerful contribution of

calls dealt with through first contact at

voluntary sector organisations in this

source or signposted to other available

7. A registered charity, and part of The Princess Royal Trust for for Carers, see: http://www.scill.org.uk/ http://www.scill.org.uk/   8. See: www.carers.org/sutton  www.carers.org/sutton  9. We will examine the concept of the ‘Post-Bureaucratic Era’ and its significance for the London Borough of Sutton in the Council Culture chapter. 

4

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone Figure 1.10  Access Team T eam Calls June 2009

10%

Children Social Services

7%

Safe Call Info and sig sign n posting 40%

Sign posted to assigned worker 

43%

services has risen. Safe Call has also

service needs can be adequately logged,

increased.

signposted and dealt with in different departments.

The number of calls solved at source at first contact have increased from 68% to

OT and ICES11 (Integrating Community

72% from April to June. Although it is still

Equipment Services) forms the largest

early days and data is evolutionary,

part of the Access Team’s referrals using

preliminary call volume data seems to

the Paris system, as shown below. Figure

indicate that as the Access Team

2 shows the trends from the older system

becomes more established, its

which had duty desks (Social Worker First

effectiveness effectivenes s in dealing with issues at

Contact, East and West District and

source (without the need for signposting

Learning Disabilities). It shows an

for other services) is increasing. The

incremental decrease in the number of

Access Team brings a more holistic

referrals in the East and West districts,

approach to dealing with first contact

and in OT/ICES, since the transition to a

social services calls so that different

united Access Team. This coincides with

Figure 2.  Trends Analysis All Referrals Oct 08 - June 09 700 600 First C ont ontact act

500

East

400

West

300

OT/ICES

200

Learning Disabilities

100 0 Oct08

Nov- Dec- Jan08 08 09

Feb- Mar-  Apr09 09 09

May- Jun09 09

10. Figures provided by the Access Team on 10 th July 2009. 11. ICES is a Department of Health funded initiative across health and social care to develop community equipment services in England to remove unnecessary barriers for users and to modernise services.

5

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Figure 3.  2008-2009 Comparison of End of Month OT Waiting Lists L ists 180

  s   r 160   e 140    b   m 120   u    N 100    t   s    i    L 80   g 60   n    i    t    i   a 40    W 20

159

 

158

136 101 99

 

108

2008 2009

60 45

 

43

39

0 Feb

Mar

Apri l

May

June

Months 2008 vs 2009

the rise of calls being solved at source

The creation of the Access Team is a step

since April 2009.

in the right direction. It’s 96% ‘Good’

The OT/ICES services can help disabled

caller satisfaction rate is a reflection of

residents stay in their homes after ‘crisis

the Access Team’s professional and

point’.12 It can include adaptations to the

motivated staff. Speedy resolutions

home such as handrails, a level-access

improve the quality of life for residents in

shower, a stair lift or a ramp for

need of adult social services. Any

13

measure which gives residents a quicker

wheelchair use.  

solution to their problem is good news.  These early results are encouraging because the figures show that the

The Hidden Service: Why

amount of referrals is reducing in the

Transform It?

East and West districts, as well as for OT/ ICES referrals. This is happening concurrently with the increasing numbers

Demographic Time-Bomb Disposal

of caller issues being solved at source – thus giving callers a quicker resolution to

The demographic time-bomb facing

their issue.

Britain is ticking. Our advances in healthcare, public health and society

OT services are invaluable to residents.

changes mean people are living longer.

They help to maintain independence and

Expectations of what is needed to live a

residence in the traditional home.

dignified and independent life have never

Performance data for OT end of month

been higher. Life expectancy has

waiting lists also shows impressive

increased dramatically with the number

improvements with the establishment of

of older people doubling since 1931.

the Access Team (shown in Figure 3.).

Between 2006 and 2036, the number of

12. This is a term used by social workers to define the point at which a vulnerability/disability takes place creating creating a social service need.

13. Useful definitions can be found here: http://www.independentliving.co.uk/ot.html 

6

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone people aged 85 plus in England is

Dual Imperatives—Resources and

projected to rise by 180%, from

Independence

14

1.055million to 2.959million.  Current figures for Sutton show that 19% of the

In diffusing the demographic time-bomb,

population is aged 60 plus. This is

let us first look at resources. Local

expected to rise to 21.8% in 2026. 15 

government is already feeling the budgetary pressures; a recent survey

With an increasing part of the population living a lot longer, conditions such as

from the Local Government Association (LGA) shows that a large majority of local

dementia will rise, along with the number

authorities (84%) are facing additional

of children with complex disabilities

costs for 2009-2010 as a result of

surviving well into adulthood. The

demographic change, equating to an

projected numbers of people aged 50

average of £1.715million per authority.18 

plus with learning disabilities is expected

Sutton faces the same challenges and is

16

to rise by 53% by 2021.  In Sutton, there

changing accordingly. The old system is

is likelihood that the comparable rise will

simply unsustainable.

be higher because of the closure of Orchard Hill and Sutton’s above average

Secondly, prevention is better than cure.

percentage of young people with learning

Sutton Council’s ‘high level vision’

disabilities.17 Local authorities are having to change in order to meet the needs and

provides that ‘the emphasis should be on enablement and early intervention to

aspirations of an ageing population,

promote independence rather than

providing them with the best opportunity

involvement at the point of crisis…To

and support to live as independently as is

achieve this sort of transformation will

possible.

mean working across the boundaries of social care with services such as housing,

Depending on the individual’s level of

benefits, leisure and learning, transport

need, the tailoring of services or

and health .’ .’19 The old social work concept

‘personalisation’ provides that it is

of ‘Care Management ’ is no longer

preferable for people to live as

deemed appropriate. The emphasis is

independently as possible in their own

now on people taking control of their

homes. In turn, this also enables the maximum support and resource

lives through ‘self-directed care’. Thus with early signposting and prevention,

allocation to go to those with the greatest

people with needs will be able to avoid

need. Personalisation has dual strategic

their crisis point and therefore find

imperatives; firstly, the effective use of

themselves better prepared for a needs

resources and secondly, the promotion of

assessment to maximise their

independent living.

independence.

14. Local Authority Circular , Department of Health. LAC (DH) (2008) 1, 17 January 2008, p.3. 15. Sutton and Merton PCT: Joint Strategic Needs Assessment, Nov 2008. 16. Ibid. 17. 7% of Sutton’s school populatio population n have a Statement of Special Education Need – above the national average of 3%. SEN Statements have a wide spectrum of needs, widely varying in severity and complexity. See: Reducing Reli-  ance on Statements: An Investigation into Local Authority Practice and Outcomes , Anne Pinney, Audit Commission,

(DfES Research Paper) 11 February 2004  18. LGA, April 2009.  19. High Level Vision for Personalisation in Sutton (Version 3.0) , Adult Social Services and Housing, Sutton Council. Executive Report, December 2008.

7

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions

Personalisation: Sutton’s Route To Independent Living? The Green Paper, Our health, our care,

“The purpose of direct payments is to

our say: a new direction for community

give recipients control over their own

services , summarises personalisation as

life by providing an alternative to

tailoring services to the needs and

services they receive.’20 Service users can

social care services provided by a local council. A financial payment gives the person flexibility to look beyond ‘off-the-peg’ service solutions for certain housing,

live their lives as they wish without the

employment, education and leisure

heavy handed control of old fashioned

activities as well as for personal

care management.

assistance to meet their assessed

preferences of service users. The ‘overall vision is that the state should empower citizens to shape their own lives and the

needs. This will help increase

In practice it means re-examining the

opportunities for independence,

relationship between the service user and

social inclusion and enhanced self- 

Sutton Council as a service provider.

esteem.”

21

 

Service users shape their own care model freed up from professionally devised care

It is intended that the users of adult

models. The person becomes the centre

social services will become empowered

of the service. Service users will receive

by the use of direct payments, enabling

support from Sutton Council staff to

them to choose, independently, what they

design their own support and care

will spend their budgeted money on. It is

arrangements based on that which suits

intended to reduce service users’ reliance

them best. Care planning is therefore

on the professionals employed by the

unified with the service users. This policy

State to determine, in lieu of the client,

shift brings in directional control of

what care services are required and how

resources by the service user. Direct

resources should be used. As stated

payments and individual budgets are how

above, this signifies a re-examination

service users will have that resource-

and a readjustment of the individual and

based control over their care services.

the Council, as an organ of the State. The

Direct Payments: An Empowering

role of a local authority is shifted to that of a facilitator for services through the

Alternative To Social Care?

administration of direct payments.

Sutton Council has a duty to administer

This philosophy is to be welcomed

direct payments under the ‘Community

because it empowers individuals and

Care Services for Carers and Children’s

forms a route to independent living. To

Services (Direct Payments - England)

use a term often used in political science,

Regulations 2003’ . The guidance

the terms of the ‘Social Contract’ are

accompanying this item of secondary

being rewritten.

legislation states: In reducing the reliance of service users on Sutton Council, the quality of life of its 20. Our health, our care our say . 2006  21. Direct Payments Guidance: Community Care, Services for Carers and Children’s Services (Direct Payments) Guidance England 2003

8

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone clients will increase because of greater

Sutton Council considers all applications

independence and self-enhancement.

for direct payments but currently people

The deprivation of liberty that can

who are assessed as ‘Medium Low’24 or

accompany the need for adult social

below on the Department of Health’s

services is therefore reduced.

adult social care eligibility criteria are not eligible for direct payments.25 

An individual’s need for adult social services should not deprive them of the opportunity and ability to live an

Clients with direct payments can choose to use them for a combination of

independent existence. 

services, for example direct payment for home care/personal assistants and the

According to Sutton Council’s Direct

provision of a day centre place. Sutton

22

Payments Policy,  the following people

Council assesses whether the allocation

are eligible to receive payments:

of direct payments to clients is at least as cost effective as the directly provided

1. Older disabled people people aged 16 years

service otherwise arranged. For example,

and over who qualify for ‘Fair Access

the long-term value will be considered in

23

To Care Services’.  Defined as people

administering direct payments for home

with any kind of impairment, and

care to avoid higher residential costs.

people disabled by illness (for example, this includes mental illness,

The dual imperatives of cost and

arthritis and HIV/AIDS). The disability

independent living can be met by such

may be short-term as well as long-

long-term calculations. 

term. 2. Carers aged 16 and over over who provide

In keeping with the emphasis of choice

or intend to provide a substantial

and empowerment, Sutton’s clients can

amount of care for someone aged 18

pool their direct payments.

or over where the council is satisfied that the person being cared for is

The assessment process for a direct

eligible to receive community care

payment is conducted through a normal

services. Carers may receive direct

assessment of need.26 This includes

payments in respect of services to themselves but not for services in

financial and risk assessments. This is followed by developing a written plan

respect of the person they care for.

detailing care services designed to meet

3. To be eligible for for direct payments a

the identified needs of the client,

person must be willing and able to

accompanied by a discussion with them

manage direct payments (alone or with

regarding the type of services they wish

support) and must also be willing to

to receive via direct payment. Once the

set up a separate bank account for

care plan is agreed, the level of direct

direct payments for audit purposes.

payment is sought from a manager and then administered through the Adult

22. Direct Payments Policy , Adult Social Services and Housing, Sutton Council, Version 4, January 2009. 23. Fair Access To Care Services – Guidance on eligibility criteria for adult social care , Department of Health, 1  January 2003. 

24. Ibid. See eligibility criteria, pp.4-5.

25. Direct Payments Policy , p.6. 26. Section 47(1) National Health Service and Community Care Act [1990]. 

9

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Social Services’ finance team to the

Case Study: The Kent

client’s separate or nominated bank account.

Card, Kent County

The inclusion of the client in the

Council

assessment of direct payments is encouraging. After all, it is for their care.  

Conservative-run Kent County Council

The rates of pay for personal assistants is

has embraced direct payments with the ‘Kent Card’.

set by the Council and reviewed annually. Personal assistants are employed by

Working with the Royal Bank of Scotland,

service users via direct payments.

it has produced the card to administer

Specialist skills for personal assistants

direct payments for individuals thus

may be taken into account when setting

removing the need for cash, bank

remuneration rates on an individual

accounts, cheques or any other

service user basis. Round-the-clock

paperwork. The Council loads the Kent

respite care can be funded through direct

Card with the agreed direct payments

payments but for not more than four

funds for the client. Kent Card holders

weeks in any two-month period. Day

can then top-up their card with any

services can be purchased via direct payments but permanent residential or

additional contributions.  

27

nursing home services cannot. It is still early days for the direct payments scheme as a part of the personalisation agenda. Any scheme which promotes independent living to increase the wellbeing of clients with adult social service needs is to be encouraged. The Kent Card is VISA associated and can There are risks associated with independent living arrangements like

be used in over 20 million outlets worldwide and in nearly 850,000 in the United

direct payments. It signifies the removal

Kingdom, online and over the telephone.

of a ‘crutch’ to clients from a centrally

All Kent Cards are protected with Chip

planned and administered care plan and

and PIN technology, which cardholders

its replacement with a ‘helping hand’.

will be asked to use when making face to face transactions. It is also ‘RBS Secure’ in

This means that the Council and its

association with ‘Verified by Visa’, thus

clients should be risk aware, not risk

enhancing security online when making

averse. Independence carries risk but the

purchases with participating merchants.

rewards are great. 

27. Guide to Kent Card ¸ KCC Administrator Guide Version 1, November 2007.

10

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone The card circumvents some of the

Throwing Away The

problems associated with typical direct

Crutch: Risk Aware, Not

payments including complex and costly record keeping, the auditing of accounts

Risk Averse

and the difficulty and anxiety for some clients in opening and maintaining conventional bank accounts.

The public sector is often accused of

The card provides an audit trail, giving

being culturally risk averse. Recent research shows that public sector

the local authority greater structural

employees have a lower risk tolerance

control over the finances and seeing that

than their private sector counterparts.29 

funds are properly spent. It is easy for the

This is particularly the case when

client to use, and they can even nominate

financial planning is at the heart of the

a secondary cardholder to support them

service area in question.

in the use of the card. Cardholders experience reduced dependency on care

As the need for intelligent commissioning

managers to manage finances and care

grows and cultural frameworks adapt in

plan expenditure.

order to accommodate it, financial planning finds itself at the heart of the

The Kent Card scheme has notable benefits for individual cardholders. It is a

provision of adult social services in Sutton. The policy shift and service

convenient and secure method of

delivery changes in adult social services

receiving direct payments. The card

do not lend themselves to traditionally

reduces dependency and gives the

risk averse cultural predispositions in

individual choice and freedom over how

local government social care services.

their allocated money is spent. The fear of failure in traditional care The scheme carries benefits to Kent

services can paralyse much needed

County Council as the service provider.

reforms and service improvements – in

The use of the card, with its ease of

short, trying new things. Public services

access and convenience, has made direct

fail daily in a variety of different ways, for

payments more attractive to more people.28  With less less paperwork, paperwork, not only

example, failure to prevent crime and the fear surrounding it, family breakdown,

is bureaucracy reduced for the service

persistent unemployment and other

user, it is also reduced for the local

social problems which face our

authority in administering the scheme.

community. But without an agreement among decision makers, political or

Sutton should look closely at this

administrative, to accept risk and take

imaginative way of delivering the

responsibility for bold decisions to

personalisation agenda to see what it can

improve our council-provided services,

learn from the Kent Card.

needed change will not take place as effectively as it could and should.30 

28. Presentation made by Jean Penney, Project Manager, Independent Living, Kent County Council, to the Smart Card Networking Forum 2nd May 2007, Wolverhampto Wolverhampton. n. 29. Evidence of lower risk tolerance among public sector employees , Michael J Roszkowski, John E Grable, Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology, Psychology, Volume 82, Number 2, June 2009 , pp. 453-463. 

30. See: 5.6 ‘Risk Aversion’ in A Strong Society: Voluntary Action in the 21 2 1st  Century , Responsibility Agenda, Policy Paper No.5, Conservative Party, June 2008, pp.63-64.

11

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions A positive attitude to risk and decision

Assessments of need, under the National

making is at the heart of transforming

Health Service and Community Care Act,

our social care services.

can carry life-long cost burdens as a consequence of a cradle-to-grave welfare

Even a Department of Health guidance

state. In effect, one piece of paperwork

document acknowledges that there is a

can cost millions of pounds and can lock

need for a ‘good approach’ to risk in

the client into a lifetime of dependence

order to meet the personalisation agenda. Independence, Choice and Risk:

on the Council. There can be frictions between eligibility for services and real

A Guide to Best Practice in Supported

demonstrable need. At worst, an

Decision Making

31

overemphasis on eligibility can

 says:

inadvertently form a crutch to some ‘The governing principle behind good

clients and an aversion to the inevitable,

approaches to choice and risk is that

yet healthy risks that come with more

people have the right to live their

independent living.

lives to the full as long as that does not stop others from doing the same.

The Council should be a helping hand to

Fear of supporting people to take

the client wherever possible. It should

reasonable risks in their daily lives

ensure that the individual is risk aware,

can prevent them from doing the things that most people take for

rather than risk averse, thus enabling them to shape their own destinies

granted. What needs to be considered

through independent living.

is the consequence of an action and the likelihood of any harm from it. By

The Council should lead by example and

taking account of the benefits in

be risk aware rather than risk averse.

terms of independence, well-being and choice, it should be possible for a

Sutton is fortunate to have forward-

person to have a support plan which

thinking staff who fully understand the

enables them to manage identified

need to embrace personalisation and the

risks and to live their lives in ways

helping hand rather than the crutch role for Sutton Council. 

which best suit them.’

The fear of failure has previously become

In transforming social care services, there

paralysing in local government and it

is a huge role for the market to play.

must not do so here in Sutton. The

Bureaucratic in-house care management

determination of elected politicians to

services are not as competitive at driving

avoid having to save face can cost the

down costs and promoting independence

Council’s clients improvements to their

as flexible private sector market forces.

services. The Government’s reform model32  In achieving the personalisation agenda,

highlights key roads for the

Sutton Council must have a realistic and

implementation of the personalisation

proportional attitude to managing risk for

agenda, designed to achieve the goal of better care and support in adult social

its clients.

care, see Figure 4.

31. Executive Summary, 21 May 2007, pp. 1-2.  32. Local Government Circular (LAC DH 2008 1) & Our health, our care, our say (2006).

12

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone Figure 4.

Shaping a flexible market for social care

Clients who are treated as consumers/

provision is a key to the personalisation

customers will have the power of choice

agenda. It will enable greater choice for

that they lacked with the old-style

the independent client as well as helping

controlling model for social care under

to tackle the budgetary pressures which

the care management culture. 

accompany traditional care management services. Low risk in-house care services

Often, when people find themselves

are expensive. Managed risk through a

coming to the Council for adult social

more business-focused approach to adult

care services it is a last resort. The point

social services can make significant

of crisis at which a need becomes clear

savings as well as helping the client off

has been described by frontline staff as

the social services crutch. Intelligent

akin to “bereavement” . The Council can

commissioning will help to shape a

achieve the aims of transforming social

strong, varied and flexible market in

care at this point of bereavement by

social care provision. A market-

becoming a helping hand in utilising the

orientated business-like approach to the

benefits of a localised social services

management of care services that uses

market and all the choices that it can

choice and a consumer-based focus, can

bring.

be used to drive up the standards of William Beveridge came to describe the

Sutton’s adult social care services.

attitude of the welfare state as giving a

13

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions man with a broken back a crutch because

alike have said that despite Sutton

all it sees is the limp. 33 Sutton Council

providing a good service they feel “kept

needs to throw away the crutch for as

in the dark ” with a lack of information

many clients as possible, and by mending

being adequately disseminated in

the broken back of reliance, clients will

general.35 

need the crutch of care management less Inadequate communication with staff and

and less.

clients can prevent the personalisation A key obstacle to Sutton Council offering

agenda from filtering down to those who

itself as a helping hand in the provision

would most benefit from its changes. If

of adult social care services is breaking

potential clients are not adequately made

down the stigma attached to the service

aware of their entitlement to social care

and communicating entitlement. 

services, they are not empowered as individuals. Empowerment is at the heart

Promoting The Hidden

of the personalisation agenda.

Service: Tackling Stigma

Both stigma and poorly communicated

And Communicating

entitlement pose challenges to the

Entitlement

residents. The Council must do all it can to break down stigma and to promote

accessibility to adult social services for

accessibility. The simplicity of messages

Whether we like it or not, adult social

can help to achieve this. 

services is not always accessible to those who need it. For some, the service carries

Adult social care professionals in Sutton

a stigma and many people are simply

have told us that there needs to be

unaware of their entitlement to services.

simplification in how personalisation

The language of social services has been

services are offered. As outlined earlier,

described as having stigmatising content

the ‘point of crisis’, at which a disability

‘embedded’ into its framework.34

becomes apparent and the need for care arises, can have much of the emotional

Social stigma can prevent disabled people

hallmarks of bereavement. One professional at SCILL told us: “Learning of

from claiming what is entitled to them through pride – particularly among older

a disability is like a bereavement, and the

people – thus impeding care services and

last thing you need is a pile of booklets

consequently having a negative impact on

and paperwork to deal with.” The Council

their quality of life.

should therefore make this point of crisis as easy as possible to come to terms with

Staff surveys commissioned by the

and to overcome.

Council have found that many within and without Sutton Council feel that they do

Professionals working for Sutton Council

not know what is going on with the

and in the voluntary sector have told us

current pace of change. Clients and staff

33. William Beveridge, 1st Baron Beveridge, closely associated with the development of the welfare state. 34. Choosing Language: Social Service Framing and Social Justice , Dr. Colleen Vojak, British Journal of Social Work, (2009) Volume 39, pp. 936-949. 35. Social Care Focus Groups 2009 , Research Report by Westminster Council, London Borough of Sutton, March 2009 – Executive Summary. 

14

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone that jargon often scares clients and staff

This is a step in the right direction, but

alike. The staff survey indicates that

the Council should do more to make

communication and briefings are needed

adult social care services more accessible

on an increased scale. But we need to

to those who need them and to those

remember that these are trained,

who may be avoiding them through pride

dedicated and experience staff who still

and fear of stigma.

find the jargon frustrating, so what about described by one very experienced

The Council must realise that such packs can be daunting and even intimidating to

voluntary sector worker at SCILL as a very

some residents, especially those coming

real “fear factor ” for clients.

to terms with their disabilities after their

clients themselves? Jargon was even

personal point of crisis. Home visits from care support officers provide information and explanation on

The Council needs to realise that there

services like direct payments, financial

are many residents who need care but are

monitoring and ‘brokerage’ support. This

unaware of its existence. In turn, the

kind of personalised service can also help

Council is unaware of the people who

to address some of the more daunting

need care. It needs to look at better and

implications of personalisation for some

more comprehensive ways of raising

clients, for example, the personal management of finances via direct

awareness of the availability of adult care services, thus improving accessibility. It

payments. Some social services clients,

should be noted, however, that it should be a safety net rather than a fishing net. 

many of whom will have been reliant on controlling care management, find it

Transforming Social Care:

difficult to cope with such changes and will still require more traditional social services direction.

The Views Of Staff And

The Council has to accept that to many

External Clients

residents, this truly is a Hidden Service. A

The Council’s personalisation staff survey

significant number of people are simply

provides valuable insight into how the

unaware of what is available to them and as a consequence are unknown to the

transforming social care agenda has performed in the eyes of staff and

Council. One resident has told the

clients.37 The key findings illustrate:

Council: “A lot of people are just not known to social services at all, but badly need care.”36 The Council has put

together a new Adult Social Services &

•

A lack of information in general.

•

Positive attitudes to change, but practical examples are needed rather

Housing Information Pack for residents.

than just theory.

The pack contains eight booklets •

explaining services such as Safeguarding

Staff criticisms of correct implementation and uncertainties for

Vulnerable Adults, Direct Payments, Fair

 job security.

Access, How to Get Help For Others, and Vision and Hearing Services.

•

Staff would like more training.

•

More support needed from managers.

36. Ibid, p.10. 37. The staff survey consulted over 100 staff and 25 external clients. The focus grounds are not designed to be statistically reliable but rather to produce a sounding board for ideas and for discussion.

15

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions The majority of views expressed by staff

of staff said that Sutton had previously

indicated that there is a perception that

been “Not good at managing change.

the new policy arrangements will tailor

They don’t consult people who are at the

the service more to the individual client

frontline of change.”

and that the client would have greater control over his life, but that the sheer

It was felt that information was not

logistics of the agenda and how it would

circulated effectively and that this

work in practice caused worry.

impeded the creation of a consistent core message. One employee even went as far

There were some specific criticisms on

as to say that Sutton Council was

how well briefed frontline staff felt they

“Disastrous on some changes.”

were on the personalisation changes, Understanding Change

because it is frontline staff who will be facing questions from clients.

The perception of poor communication Frontline staff need to be fully briefed on

means that some staff do not feel as

the personalisation changes. They are at

though they know what is going on with

the coalface of service delivery. They

the current changes. As highlighted

must be in a positive, informed position

”. One earlier, they feel “kept in the dark ”.

to handle queries from clients. 

employee said: “It seems very general. What the

Change Needed

government has sent are these

The survey found that the staff felt that

directions down and Sutton has to

despite Sutton Council providing a good

comply with them, but as far as I

service, change was needed. Many felt

know that’s as far as I’ve got. I’ve

that bureaucracy was an issue, with one

got absolutely no idea the effect on

participant describing the situation as “a

me personally and that’s my biggest

big muddle” . Another staff member

concern ..””40 

complained: “They want us to spend a lot of time in an office-based situation

Some employees described themselves as

rather than being with the service that needs your input.” 38 Target driven

“bewildered ” at the changes and that some think that managers themselves

bureaucracy was seen as unhelpful, with

don’t fully understand the changes. ch anges.

staff favouring more emphasis on The views of staff are very important.

providing a good standard of social care 39

They are the people spearheading

instead.  

personalisation on the frontline. Senior staff in the Adult Social Services and

Experience of Change

Housing department (ASSH) should look Staff members have mixed views on how

into holding regular or semi-regular

changes had been carried out in the past

focus groups, similar to those carried out

and a degree of suspicion dogged the

by Westminster City Council earlier this

changes currently underway. A member

year. 

38. Staff Survey, p.3. 39. Ibid, p.4.

40. Ibid. p.4. 

16

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone Staff concerns over their difficulties in

changes had not got off to a very good

understanding the changes are reflected

start and that more needed to be done to

in their concerns for service users. A care

understand more about certain groups,

worker commented: “I’m not clear at the

for example older people, so that

moment how its going to work for people

changes can be shaped around these

that don’t have the capacity to manage

needs.

their finances and to orchestrate their care plans.” Another said they thought

This is an important element of the

there would be greater risk of financial

personalisation agenda. The goal is for

abuse as a result of the personalisation

person centred care plans. Understanding

changes. The concerns were primarily

the needs of certain groups is essential.

focused on older clients who may have built up many years of reliance on

Similar to our suggestion with staff, the

prescribed care management and would

Council should look into regular, planned

therefore find it difficult, if not

social care focus group exercises to

distressing, to deal with some of the

evaluate clients’ perceptions and

changes.

experiences of personalisation changes.

The goals of the personalisation agenda

This can be used as a type of ‘market

are worthy and demonstrate a huge cultural shift in the provision of adult

testing’ for services in the development of a flexible, varied and strong local

social care. But we need to remember

market for adult social care services.

that some clients will not adapt to the changes easily and that some are

Every decent business knows its

dependent on more directed care

customer base. With the Council acting as

management. This is particularly the case

a helping hand through the provision of

for older residents. These different

direct payments and Individual Budgets it

abilities to cope with change need to be

should use direct communication with

ingrained into the Council’s work in this

clients, through focus groups to

area.

understand priorities. This will then enable the Council to shape a strong local market according to these needs.

Frontline staff are telling us that not everyone can cope with independent living via the personalisation changes.  External Clients

The general opinion of surveyed external clients placed an emphasis on the link between the quality of care provided and training. Some clients thought that changes were being made because of financial implications rather than an 41

increase in provision.  From the client perspective, there was a feeling that the 41. Ibid, p.10.

17

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions rather than a traditional day centre. In

The Second Hidden

1996 it became fully independent as a

Service: The Voluntary

registered charity. Since then it has flourished from only providing day

Sector Case Studies

services, to providing numerous services designed to help people with disabilities

There is a second Hidden Service in the

live full and independent lives.

world of adult social care in Sutton. The voluntary sector is often out of the public

The Centre provides courses and

eye, but works tirelessly to provide

activities for disabled local residents to

support services to adults with social care

achieve personal goals, and encourages

needs and those who live and work with

them to learn new skills to gain

them every day. Many of us will never

independence. Courses and activities

encounter their services, but for a

include computer classes, a fully

significant number of residents they form

accessible gym, individual cooking

a life-line.

sessions, creative expression, craft, pottery and art.

Sutton is fortunate to have such a vibrant voluntary sector as the beating heart of

SCILL offers a comprehensive range of

our borough’s civil society. The British tradition of voluntary action is strong in

support, including a payroll service and a financial administrative service (FAS) for

Sutton. The Sutton Centre for the

people who find it difficult to open a

42

Voluntary Sector (SCVS)  is an

bank account, or those who choose not

organisation which we can all truly be

to handle the finance side of direct

proud of. SCVS works to promote a

payments. It offers a Person Centred

innovative and effective voluntary sector

Planning (PCP) service. Several Sutton

in our community.

Council employees work with people with learning disabilities to help shape

Two voluntary sector organisations, in

achievable plans for the future, in order

particular, are having a very real impact

to realise goals and aspirations through

for adults with physical and/or learning

structured plans.

disabilities, these are Sutton Centre for Independent Living and Learning (SCILL)

Representatives Representative s from the Conservative

and the Sutton Carers’ Centre (SCC).

Group have visited the centre in Robin Hood Lane. What they saw was highly

Case Study: Sutton Centre

impressive. They met Charlie, a man with

for Independent Living

volunteers at the SCILL-run Sherwood

learning disabilities, who himself Café. Charlie serves tea and coffee to

and Learning SCILL)

customers and helps out in the kitchen. The café is open to disabled adults as

SCILL was set up in late 1994 by Sutton

well as members of the public and it was

Council, following consultation with

clear by the volume of customers that it

disabled adults who asked for a centre

was popular. In the 2nd quarter of 2009 the café has turned a £3000 profit.

which would promote independence

42. See: www.suttoncvs.org.uk  www.suttoncvs.org.uk 

18

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone Councillor Paul Scully met members of

Case Study II: The Sutton

the PCP team who told him that the new

Carers’ Centre SCC)

‘personalised’ planning model had achieved excellent results. One member of staff told Paul how one of his clients

The definition of a carer is someone who,

had ‘woken up ’ after spending literally

without payment, provides help and

years of sleeping through his day services

support to a friend, neighbour or relative

in the corner. Now, through PCP, he was

who would otherwise be unable to

awake and alert with a plan to realise his

manage because of frailty, illness or

personal aspirations by learning skills to

disability.

foster his own independence. The transformation was described as

Most carers would not recognise

“amazing” . Conservative visitors also saw

themselves under the term 'carer'. They

a painting class in progress with adults

are just people trying to cope as best

enjoying the supervision of trained staff

they can while helping to look after

in painting and etching.

someone who needs their help. This is where SCC steps in. The stated aim of

It was obvious that the staff at SCILL are

SCC is to ‘care for those who care for

deeply motivated and enthusiastic about

others .’ .’ It can often be the case that

what they do. It was disappointing that some staff members told us they felt

carers have an undiagnosed and

much more could be done by the Council

SCC provides advice, activities, and social

to break down “bureaucratic barriers and

events to help carers live a life of their

red tape ” for example, the heavy use of

own.

unrecognised need for care themselves.

 jargon and overly technical technical and formal meetings, in order to help SCILL to work

SCC provides carers, young and adult, a

closer with the Council. Staff members

place to go with voluntary sector

told us that they felt as though they were

professionals to talk to. During a visit to

outsiders at some meetings because of

the Centre in Benhill Avenue, Councillor

the use of impenetrable jargon.

Scully met a carer who had come to SCC for advice. The carer had reached her breaking point because her husband’s alcoholism had recently deteriorated. She

In short, SCILL is the voluntary sector avatar of the personalisation agenda. 

was her husband’s carer despite being SCILL provides an invaluable service to

wheelchair bound herself.

the people of Sutton who need their help; they do so on shoestring budgets and on

SCC advice, information and support

their own initiative. The least the Council

services cover a wide range of topics

can do is to live up to its partnership

including money matters, assessments,

working credentials and make meetings

aids and adaptations, carers’ respite and

more accessible for this jewel in our

much more. SCC has a Young Carers

voluntary sector crown.

Service Manager who provides a focus on young carers too. The Centre also runs a free benefits check service to see that carers and their ‘cared for’ 43 are receiving

43. The term for the disabled person cared for by the carer.  

19

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions the right levels of financial support. A

Case Study Conclusions:

welfare benefits specialist from the

Voluntary Sector

Citizens’ Advice Bureau is available at the Centre weekly to advise carers of their entitlements.

The Engine Room of a Post-Bureaucratic Approach

Our look at the voluntary sector in Sutton has not been all-pervasive but, instead, has been an attempt to show that the hard work of our voluntary sector is the engine room of Sutton’s civil community. Conservative Leader David Cameron has said that the ‘old politics’ of controlling centralisation and “bureaucratic neatness ”44 is simply not working. He is

right. In May this year he set out his Sutton Carers is one of 144 carer centres across the

vision for a wholesale re-examination of

UK, part of a network created in 1991.

how we approach voluntary action in our public services and the relationship of the

As has been outlined earlier in this

State accordingly. He wrote:

chapter, too often residents fail to claim their entitlements either through a lack of

‘[T]he argument that has applied for

awareness or through stigma. The SCC

well over a century – that in every area

staff have shaped a comfortable and

of life we need people at the centre to

understanding environment for carers to

make sense of the world for us and

seek advice.

make decisions on our behalf – simply falls down. In its place rises up a

Unclaimed benefits like a carer’s

vision of real people power. This is

allowance, disability allowances, pension

what we mean by the Post- 

credit, council tax benefit, income

Bureaucratic Age. The information

support, housing benefit and working tax credit can make a real difference to the

revolution meets the progressive

quality of life for the carer and the cared

about big state power; committed to

for.

social responsibility and non-state

Conservative philosophy: sceptical

collective action. The effects of this

SCC make a large contribution to the

redistribution of power will be felt

quality of life of carers and consequently

throughout our politics, with people

those receiving care in Sutton. However,

in control of the things that matter to

we still do not know how many carers are

them, a country where the political

unfamiliar with the SCC and the helpful

system is open and trustworthy, and

services it provides, and how many carers

power redistributed from the political

are simply missing out.

elite to the man and woman in the street.’

45

44. Speech made by The Rt Hon. David Cameron MP, 12  May 2008.  45. A new politics: The post-bureaucratic age , The Rt Hon. David Cameron MP, The Guardian, Monday 25 May 2009.

20

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone Strengthening a vibrant voluntary sector –

It is clear that a reduction in bureaucracy

as enshrined in the laudable aims of the

and the ability to turn and retain a profit

Sutton Centre for Voluntary Services – is

would be a valuable tool for Sutton’s

real people power for Sutton. It signifies a

adult social services-based voluntary

shift from the inflexible notion that we

sector.

have to wait for our local council or a government department to give us the

It is our contention that there is more

solutions to problems. Volunteers dealing

that the Council can do to help the

with vulnerable adults know what the

voluntary sector. There has been talk of a

problems are and they know what they

‘Voluntary Sector Hub’ for some time, but

need to tackle them. The concept of

this proposal has not come to fruition.

moving out of a bureaucratic era of top-

Conservative-run Conservative -run Thurrock Council

down administration has particularly

provides such a hub, called The Beehive

strong ramifications for the provision of

Centre. Such a hub would bring most, if

adult social services in Sutton.

not all, of Sutton’s voluntary sector organisations under one roof. At present

A strong and vibrant voluntary sector is a

organisations are sprinkled over many

key component in delivering the

different venues across the borough in an

personalisation agenda. The Council

uncoordinated and haphazard way.47 The

works in partnership with the voluntary sector in this area but feedback received

preference is for geographic hubs of activity to have shared premises.

by us indicates that the institution of the

Once again, the Conservative Party has

Council is somewhat impenetrable in

shown its commitment to increasing the

some areas and that, for example, the

strength of the community and voluntary

scrutiny process is not as accessible as it

sector through more devolved control of

could be.

‘community assets’. A voluntary sector hub in Sutton would be such an asset.

Nationally, the Conservative Party has

The Council should look at whether it can

stepped up its commitment to the

provide such a site with a low or

voluntary sector and its enormous

peppercorn rent. The Carers’ Centre, for

contribution to the provision of services

example, would benefit from such an

on behalf of local government. The Shadow Charities Minister has announced

arrangement, as would others paying market rents.48 

that a Conservative Government will enact reforms to radically cut

A hub, bringing all services under one

bureaucracy and to allow voluntary sector

comprehensive and accessible roof,

organisations, which are charities, to

would not only benefit the financial

make a profit from public sector

viability of our voluntary sector

contracts.46

organisations, but would be a key way for Sutton Council to show its appreciation of the work they do.

46. Speech made by the Honourable Nick Hurd MP at a Russam-GMS hosted event, Wednesday 13th May 2009.  47. Building effective local VCS infrastructure: the characteristics of successful support for the local community and voluntary sector , Final Report, Rob Macmillan, Sheffield Hallam University, June 2007, p.4 48. This is a problem identified by the Quirk Review. See: Making assets works: The Quirk Review of community management and ownership of public assets , May 2007.

21

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Direct payments are giving service users

Conclusion

a tool to shape their own care and purchase the services that they want,

Most people will need some kind of adult

when they want.

social care at some point in their lives. In Sutton, the cost of providing these services is eclipsed only by one other budget - education. For many, social care is a Hidden Service, but for some it is very visible and vital to their quality of life. This report has sought to outline some of the challenges posed by the United Kingdom’s demographic shift to an

Independence and choice can lead to a real

increasing ageing population. The old-

improvement in quality of life.

style controlling care management model

Of course, there are teething problems

for adult social services is simply

and there are risks involved but staff and

unsustainable for the future, both in

client surveys show that service users, on the whole, want the fundamental freedom to choose the best care and services for

financial terms and that of hindering independent living.

themselves – and frankly, who better to

The contradiction in the expensive care

make those decisions? Moreover, we are

management model is clear: despite the

told that some clients have embraced the

noble intentions of the care model it

changes and are using them in very

actually hampered the welfare-

creative ways. We have also been told

maximising opportunities presented by

that older clients are more likely to be

greater independence through

daunted by the changes and we need to

overdependence.. Some vulnerable adults overdependence

tailor our approach accordingly. Not

were not given sufficient flexibility and

everyone is equipped to deal with

freedom to make key choices over their

independent living and the Council must reflect that.

own destiny. As argued throughout this report, we

Personalisation offers a solution to the

welcome the liberty-enhancing potential

dual imperatives of meeting the

which personalisation gives clients.

demographic shift (and the budgetary

Nationally, this area of policy is being

pressures it presents) and maximising

transformed. Some have even described

the freedom of the individual through

the transforming social care agenda as a

person centred planning to meet needs.

kind of “liberation ””..49 Staff from the

Kent County Council, for example, has

Council and the voluntary sector have

been highly creative and successful in

already told us that this is making a real

their application of the changes with the

difference to the quality of life for clients.

49. Liberation Welfare: Imagining welfare without dependency , Barry Macleod-Cullin Macleod-Cullinane ane (Portfolio Holder for

Adults and Housing, London Borough of Harrow). 

22

 

Adult Social Services: Transforming The Hidden Service That Can Affect Everyone Kent Card. The London Borough of

their entitlements, thus negatively

Harrow has embraced the changes and

impacting on the quality of life. This

boasts 20% of London’s Direct Payment

presents a contradiction; the services are

users.50 We should examine what other

there but many are not taking them up,

local authorities are doing in this area to

either from a lack of awareness or the

collate best practice models.

risk of perceived stigmatisations despite needing help and support. The

We wholeheartedly support the work of

Council has taken steps to make the

all staff, within and without the Council,

Hidden Service more accessible, but it

who are implementing this change

could still do more to shape easy to

agenda. From the Access Team as the

understand messages to promote the

first point of contact, through to council

service and residents’ entitlements to it.

officers working in the PCP section at Our case studies have looked at the

SCILL.

voluntary sector in Sutton. Our view is clear on the topic: we are very lucky to

“ We welcome the liberty-enhancing

have such a strong voluntary sector. In promoting independent living and providing support to carers they are truly

 potential which  personalisation gives clients.”

invaluable. But are we doing enough to support them? The Council should seriously look at more ways it can assist the voluntary sector by helping them to promote their work, thus raising

Improvements in communication between

awareness and increasing accessibility.

senior staff at a strategic level and those

The concept of a voluntary sector hub

on the frontline can and must be made.

can help to achieve this, especially with

Independent living is more than just a

favourable rent from the Council. Sutton

concept, it is a quality of life-enhancing

Council owes this sector a debt of

opportunity for Sutton’s adult residents

gratitude for the excellent services it

with physical and/or learning disabilities.

carries out.

We need to address the contradiction that has reared its head here: staff are

Sutton’s Hidden Service is being

working hard to implement these

transformed, and the changes are

changes but they do not feel adequately

ambitious. Sutton Council should be

briefed, with some describing their

equally ambitious for our residents in

situation as being left “in the dark ””..

helping them to shape their own lives

Regarding communication, this report

free from overdependence on traditional

has also expressed concern over the

Council-directed controlling care

accessibility of the Hidden Service. We

management services.

have concerns that the traditional language of social services still carries

There are no limits to what can be

stigma for some and that as a

achieved.

consequence residents are not taking up

50. Ibid, p.3.

23

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions

24

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear  

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear

25

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Introduction 

•

Perception and reality on crime and antisocial behaviour are disjointed.

Wherever you go, crime and antisocial

•

Constant reassurances from the

behaviour is consistently a top priority for

Council, the local police, and the Safer

residents. Unsurprisingly, this is the case

Sutton Partnership do not make local

in Sutton too. In comparison with other

people feel any safer.

London boroughs, Sutton has a relatively low crime rate, according to official

In order to tackle this issue we have to

figures, but, as will be explored later, this

understand why there is such fear of

does not collate with the fear of crime in

crime.

the borough. Sutton, an outer London borough, is also low on the Metropolitan

Policing used to be about bobbies on the

Police Service’s priority list for manpower

beat, catching criminals and keeping an

and resources. Met figures in Figure 1

eye on the neighbourhood through

show that Sutton has the third smallest

community policing. That is how it was,

police force out of the 33 London

and that is how people want it to be. In

boroughs.

reality, policing across the United Kingdom is constantly changing

As in other areas of policy, Sutton is a

according to social, political and

borough of contradictions with issues surrounding crime, antisocial behaviour

governmental priorities. Because Greater London has the largest police force in the

and the perception of community safety.

country, nowhere else can this change be

According to official figures crime rates

more visible than with the Metropolitan

are low but the fear is high. The majority

Police. As a constituent part of the Met,

of Sutton residents do not feel safe. Local

Sutton has also been at the forefront of

Conservatives contend that:

change in policing.

Figure 1.1  Five smallest Met Police forces in Greater London Police Officer Strength

360.61

Bromley (population 300,70 300, 700) 0) s h g u Bexley (population 222,100) o r  o B Sutton (population 185,900) n o d Richmond upon Thames (population 180,000) n o L

352.97 320.22 305.2 289.93

Kingston upon Thames (population 157,900)

0

10 0

2 00

300

400

Police officer strength strength

1. For a full list of Police Officer and PCSO Strength in the Metropolitan Police Service of end of November 2008, see: http://www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/issues/police-n http://www.mpa.gov.uk/downloads/issues/police-numbers/police-numbers.pdf umbers/police-numbers.pdf

26

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear  

Where We Are Now, The Mechanics of Community Safety: Safer Sutton Partnership

Safer Neighbourhood Teams 

The Safer Sutton Partnership

combination of organisations working co -operatively across the private, public,

In 2005 Sutton became home to a unique

community and voluntary sectors.

organisation called The Safer Sutton Partnership Service (SSPS). The SSPS is a

Partnership working is keenly promoted by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG).3 

 joint enterprise between Sutton Council and the Met. The Head of the Safer Sutton Partnership brings police officers, police

The relevance of ‘partnership’ is not

civilian staff and council officers together

immediately clear to people outside local

into a ‘single structure’. The current Head

government, who will be unfamiliar with

of SSPS is a police superintendent who

the jargon.

functions as both a police officer and a council officer. These dual roles work

The SSPS can improve accountability in

well, bringing the managerial expertise of

policing priorities, because the Head of

an experienced police officer together

SSPS reports to the elected councillor with

with the skills of a civil servant, servant , as a council officer. This is especially the case

responsibility for community safety. But is this communicated effectively to

given the fact that the post manages the

residents? No, because the majority of

following areas (though this is not an

residents are totally unaware of this

exhaustive list):

accountability structure.

The Police Safer Neighbourhood

The SSPS police/council partnership

Teams for each of the 18 ‘Wards’,

claims it has delivered improvements, but

known as SNTs.2 

does it make residents feel any safer?

•

Drugs and Alcohol Action Team.

Figures and research suggest otherwise.

•

Two Safer Parks Teams (SNTs for parks

•

and open spaces).

It is obvious that the majority of the

•

Antisocial Behaviour Unit. Police Licensing.

public do not care how  policing  policing and community safety priorities are delivered

•

Schools and Youth Crime Unit.

as long as the job gets done.

•

‘Partnership’ working and the SSPS Partnership? What is it? And what does

arrangement means little or nothing to

that have to do with policing?

most people outside of Sutton’s police stations, SNTs, and the council offices.

Sutton Council is keen to emphasise its ‘partnership’ culture, and the SSPS is a

There appears to be a contradiction here.

good example of this. ‘Partnership’ is

‘Partnership’ doctrines imply greater

local government jargon for a

co-operative working with the public and

2. A ‘Ward’ is an administrative area within a London Borough. Typically they will take their name from the local area, for example: Cheam, Carshalton South and Clockhouse, Worcester Park, etc. A rose tinted description of Council Wards can be seen here: http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1490 3. For an account of ‘partnership’ in local government, see: http://www.communities.gov.uk/localgovernment/ performanceframeworkpartnerships/localstrategicpartnerships/

27

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  other organisations to deliver on local

Throughout the 1960s the nature of

priorities for local improvements, but is

localised community policing was

this evidenced? Also, what evidence can

radically altered with the introduction of

be used to measure the success of

‘Unit Beat Policing’ and the greater use of

Sutton’s efforts in community safety?

patrol cars, and radio communication to centralised control rooms. The catalyst

It is our view that measurement of the

for this process began during the 1950s

fear of crime is a key indicator.

in the Met, with expanded use of patrol cars over foot patrols, being

Safer Neighbourhood Teams: Bobbies

implemented by Sir Harold Scott.7 The

back on the beat?

view at the time being that patrol cars could cover a wider area than the

In April 2004 the Metropolitan Police

traditional foot patrol, which was

began establishing ‘Safer Neighbourhood

increasingly being viewed as too

Teams’ in each of the 624 electoral wards

demanding on manpower.

in London. Each SNT typically consists of one police sergeant, two constables and three Police Community Support Officers (PCSOs).4 The SNT model is an attempt to recapture a local policing ethos with known officers policing a specific area, much in the old style of foot patrols in localised areas, ie ‘neighbourhoods’, perhaps reminiscent of the idealised local policing featured in the BBC television series, Dixon of Dock Green . The Met itself describes the SNT model as: “A truly local policing style: local people working with local police and partners to identify and tackle issues of concern in their neighbourhood.” 5  A visible police presence is a high

Highly visible localised policing has long

priority for residents

been popular with the public. Research carried out by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate

The shift continued and marked the near

of Constabulary has shown that 70% of

eradication of the traditional ‘bobby on

surveyed residents think regular foot

the beat’ by the 1970s, in favour of ‘rapid

patrols and dedicated local community

response’ patrolling police cars. By the

policing will have the greatest impact on

2000s the introduction of the SNT model

6

crime and antisocial behaviour.  

for policing can be seen as a response to

4. ‘About Safer Neighbourhoods’ see: http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/about.htm http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/about.htm 5. Ibid, see FAQ: http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/faq.htm http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/faq.htm 6. Narrowing The Gap: Police Visibility And Public Reassurance – Managing Public Expectation And Demand , HMIC Thematic Inspection Report to the Scottish Executive, (Dec 9 2002) 7. Sir Harold Scott was Commissioner of the Police of the Metropolis 1945–1953. 194 5–1953. He was a civil servant with no previous military or policing experience. This was untypical at the time, with many Commissioners having been drawn from military and policing professional backgrounds.

28

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear   that the PCSO role is intended to be

the increasing public criticism that the police are not visible or accessible.  

largely non-confrontational.10 Unlike

Figures provided to the Police Federation

regular police officers their powers cease

from the Audit Commission, from a

once they are out of uniform.

8

survey on police performance, show that 80% of residents said that they were we re

Given the limited powers of PCSOs the

dissatisfied with the levels of local

public must not be mislead into believing

policing in their area.

that SNTs are fully comprised of regular police officers with full powers. 11 The

In Sutton, as with elsewhere in London,

officer complement of Sutton’s SNTs

each ‘Ward’ has an SNT which typically

should not be misrepresented to

has one sergeant, two constables and

residents. There should be a demarcation

three PCSOs. There are exceptions with

between warranted police police officers officers and and

some of Sutton’s wards having four or

PCSOs.

five PCSOs. For example Beddington South and Wallington South both have

It is important that residents are given

five PCSOs in their SNTs. 9 Sutton South

clear and unambiguous information

Ward has one less constable than most

about their local police force and its

other Wards, although it has four PCSOs,

powers.

leaving it with only two full time police officers with full powers. Some of these

Back on the Beat: Community Intelligence

fluctuations and variances can be

in Policing?

accounted for because officers move on and replacement and recruitment is

SNTs, among other things, are an attempt

pending.

to recapture the traditional ‘community intelligence’ model for local policing. It is

It is therefore accurate to say that some

aimed to give the framework for police

areas in Sutton have better police

officers with their ‘ears to the ground’,

provision than others.

armed with a strong information network and connectivity with local residents, in

It should be noted that PCSOs are not

order to understand the neighbourhood

warranted police officers with the same powers as regular police officers. They

which they police. If the SNT model is to succeed then local knowledge is key. This

were introduced by the Police Powers Act

is the return of ‘community intelligence’

[2002] to work with the police, with the

as a vital ingredient for policing and

same powers of arrest as any normal

Sutton is a part of this change.12 

citizen. Home Office guidelines provide

8. Figures used by the Police Federation as some of the background for the use of Special Constables, see: http:// www.polfed.org/FederationPolicy_Special_Constabulary.pdf 9. A full list can be seen at: http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/boroughs/sutton/ http://www.met.police.uk/saferneighbourhoods/boroughs/sutton/ saferneighbourhoods.htm 10. See: http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/community-policing/community-support-officers/ http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/community-policing/community-support-officers/ 11. It should be noted that opinion is divided on the use of PCSOs as salaried uniformed officers working alongside the police. Some have claimed that the money could be better spent elsewhere, whilst others consider them to be a valuable visible police presence. 12. Innes, M. and C. Roberts (2007) ‘Community intelligence in the policing of community safety’ , in J. Warren, E. Hogard and R. Ellis (eds.) Community Safety: Innovation and Evaluation. Chester: Chester Academic Press

29

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  The return of focus to localised policing

Constabulary, by Manchester Council,

based on ‘local knowledge’ is to be

and in the London Borough of Sutton via

welcomed. Intelligence gathering is an

the SSPS. Professor Martin Innes is the

essential tool in combating crime and

Director of the UPSI.

antisocial behaviour. Each area has a ‘Ward Panel’ which aims to feed local

The methodology for this intelligence-

priorities into the policing plans for each

gathering project is for SNT officers to

area. They are public panels and reviewed

interview members of the public in their the ir

on a quarterly basis. The Sutton

homes using laptop computers. The 13

Community and Police Forum (SC&PF)  

laptops have special software with

also operates as a public forum for

questions designed to identify the ‘signal ‘ signal

policing matters, with non-members of

crimes and signal disorders ’ which

the committee invited to ask questions of

influence the fear of crime and feelings of

senior police officers on policing matters.

insecurity in local areas. Professor Innes

SC&PF is an evolution of a committee set

provides the following definitions for

up as a recommendation from Lord

‘signal crimes and disorders’:

Scarman’s report into the Brixton Riots. It is intended to provide ‘effective

•

A signal crime is crime is any criminal incident

consultation’ between the police and

that causes a change in peoples’

public.

behaviour and/or beliefs about their security.

SC&PF meetings have the potential to be

•

A signal disorder is disorder is an act that

a valuable forum but they are generally

breaches established conventions of

poorly attended by members of the

social order and signifies the presence

public.

of other risks. They can be social or physical in nature.15 

Some members have described the SC&PF as a “talking “talking shop ” which gets “little “little if anything done ””.. Like many other council committees and forums, just because they are public does not mean they will be well attended. Intimidating groups of youths in public

i-NSI: Knowledge is Power

spaces frequently form a signal disorder.

Sutton is also a part of a research project

Information from the interviews is then

being run by the Universities’ Police

sent to analysis at the UPSI at the

Science Institute (UPSI).14 The ‘Intelligence ‘Intelligence

University of Cardiff which then releases

Through Neighbourhood Security

detailed confidential reports made

Interviews ’ (i-NSI) project is an

available for ‘partner agencies’, ie the

intelligence-gathering model currently

local police and the SSPS.

being trialled in the Lancashire 13. See: http://scandpf.com/ 14. See: http://www.upsi.org.uk/

15. The Signal Crimes Perspective: A Sixty Second Briefing , National Reassurance Policing Programme, Dr. Martin M artin Innes, University of Surrey, (Sept 2004).

30

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear   An i-NSI report carried out in Sutton

the high street are also of concern to the

South in June 2006 16 uses local interviews

respondents to this specific survey.

to form trouble hotspots on a grid for

Benhill Road was rife with signal crimes

signal crimes and signal disorders. This

such as domestic disputes, noise,

method of highly localised crime

damage, verbal abuse and public

mapping provides an example street-by-

violence.17 

street account of incidents that create fear and avoidance  in  in a map form

The result is that SNTs are given highly

(example Figure 2).

detailed sources of information in a stable and structured way with the i-NSI

The Ward is divided into grids based

interview process.

upon the i-NSI interviews (in blue). Areas affected by signal crimes and disorders

It provides a rich picture of the area and

are indicated in red. The map below

its problems by engaging with residents/

shows areas, roads or points where

respondents in a direct and confidential

respondents have indicated that, through

way. Sensitive descriptive data is

fear, they would actively avoid.

sanitised.

For example, in Sutton Central,

i-NSI has the potential to provide long-

respondents indicated that they would

term and detailed intelligence to SNTs in

avoid the areas around ASDA and the

Sutton.

alleyway by the side of the supermarket building. The railway station and pubs in

This is to be welcomed as it arms SNT officers with highly localised knowledge.

Figure 2.

16. Community Intelligence Report on Sutton Central Ward, Sutton , Colin H Roberts MA, UPSI, June 2006. 17. Ibid, page 9

31

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  The i-NSI project has attracted the praise

disproportionately high and we need to

of the Audit Commission. Praise was

understand why. The Liberal Democrat

particularly given to the initiative in its

administration repeatedly falls back on its

enabling the Council and its partners to

purported status as a ‘safe borough’.

target areas with specific issues with appropriate responses.18 

We contend that: •

This creates a perception that the

A key success is that ‘appropriate’

Council and its partners are largely

responses are needed for differing areas.

ignoring local peoples’ concerns about

One size fits all policing in a borough

crime and antisocial behaviour.

like Sutton will only prop up existing

•

The Liberal Democrat administration

contradictions between the incidences of

of the Council has shown a clear

crime and the perception of crime and

unwillingness to use new tactics, such

antisocial behaviour.

as the judicious use of dispersal orders, to tackle antisocial behaviour in Sutton.

Projects like i-NSI can help to break down these contradictions in order to deliver the policing which Sutton

This is an area of weakness, showing a

residents demand and deserve.

lack of demonstrable political will to drive crime, and the fears associated with it, down even lower. In accordance with

Safer Sutton: Fact or

Sutton’s ‘safe’ image, figures from the

Fiction?

year 2007/08 show that the number of offences in Sutton were reduced by

The Council and the Metropolitan Police

13.4%, which accounts for a total of

routinely assure residents that Sutton

2,068 fewer offences.20 Yet in the same

borough is the ‘second safest’ in London.

year residential burglary offences

But most residents feel differently. The

increased by 23.6%, accounting for 155

fear of crime in Sutton is

offences, and ‘gun enabled crime’ rose by 15 offences, giving a percentage increase of 55.6%.21 

Figure 3.19  Total Crimes No. of crimes (12 months to November 08). No. of crimes (12 months to November 07). % change

Sutton

Met Total

13,618

848,033

14,176

881,781

-3.9%

-3.8%

18. Audit Commission, Corporate Assessment, para. 105, page 32, (Nov 08) 19. Message from Borough Commander, Chief Superintendent Robert Reed, Metropolitan Police Authority publication: Local Policing Summary, Sutton. 2008, page 4 20. Message from Borough Commander, Chief Superintendent Robert Reed, Metropolitan Police Authority publication: Local Policing Summary, Sutton. 2008, page 4 21. See Met crime figures at: http://www.met.police.uk/crimefigures/index.php.

32

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear   Despite reductions in reported offences

perception does not tally and the political

overall, Sutton appears to have a ‘seesaw’

leadership of the Council fails to

effect when it comes to the reduction of

appreciate this.

crime in some offences, marked by a spike in others. At the time of writing,

National crime statistics from the BCS can

Sutton is comparable with the Met as a

prove to be misleading as a source of

whole regarding reported crime figures,

victim study. Its findings are arguably of

with an average reduction of 3.8% (Fig 3).

limited use in setting policing priorities and have been subject to criticism.

24 25

In contrast, figures from the British Crime

The Council and SSPS should use

Survey (BCS) show that over a longer

localised knowledge and research in

period the overall crime rate in Sutton is

assessing crime figures, rather than

below the England and London average,

national statistics.

 

in accordance with government targets (Figure 4).22 BCS also shows that recorded

Constant reassurances from the Liberal

crime remains relatively static.23 

Democrat Executive Member for

It should be noted that as a London

Community Safety that Sutton is safe, and

borough, Sutton is judged against official

that any view to the contrary is

figures indicating crime hotspots like

“scaremongering ” will only continue to

Hackney, Tower Hamlets and Croydon. It

breed resentment and a lack of

is not surprising that it compares

confidence in the political administration

favourably in figure 5. Yet the public

of the Council.

Figure 4.

22. Note: the Y Axis is based on a points scoring system used by the Neighbourhood Renewal Unit at the DCLG to quantify performance on ‘floor targets’ issued by the Home Office aim of reducing crime by 15%, 1 5%, with the baseline at 2003. See: http://www.fti.neighbourhood.gov.uk/ 23. A view shared in The State of Sutton: An Economic, Social and Environmental Profile of Sutton , Capital Ambition (Local Futures, Dec 2007), page 8. 24. Government Government figures ‘missing’ two million violent crimes , The Independent, Tues 26 June 2007 25. The BCS has encountered criticism from the former Shadow Home Secretary, Rt Hon. David Davis D avis MP, on the Today  programme,  programme, see: From 7.34 a.m. 22 July 2004. http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ thursday.shtml

33

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 5.26  Total Number Number of re ported ported crimes (Jan 08 to Jan 09)

Sutton

13790

Croydon

32459

Tower Hamlets

27910

Hackney

29862 0

50 00

10 00 0

15 00 0

20 00 0

25 00 0

3000 0

35 00 0

Numb er of offen offences ces

Recent studies show that despite its ‘safe’

The reassuring media (Figure 7) will do

status, 64% of residents are worried

little to tackle the perceptions of

about antisocial behaviour.27 Moreover,

residents.

62% of residents feel as though their area has got worse as a result of crime and

Figures recently presented to the Sutton

antisocial behaviour, as shown in

Community & Police Forum (April 2009)

Figure 6.28

show that Sutton is slipping in its overall reported crime figures, falling from 5 th to

If a Council tells its residents that they

6th in the reported offences index, per

feel safer, does it really have that effect?

thousand residents.29 

Figure 6.  6. 

Perceived decline Q Why do you you say say the the area area has has got got wors worse? e? Crime/Anti-Social Behaviour 

62%

Environment/Cleanliness

38%

Transport

31%

Leisure/Shopping

10%

Housing

10%

Health/Social Services

6%

Schools/Education

2%

Job/Employment

2%

Base: All who say the area has got worse (246) Sutton Residents, 12 th Octo October ber – 19th November 2007

5

26. Illustrative figures obtained from Met Figures Website: http://www.met.police.uk/crimefigures/ 27. Ipsos MORI Residents Survey, Feb 2008, page 22. 28. Ibid. p.14. 29. See, Report for the Sutton Community & Police Forum, ’ Sutton’s Comparator Boroughs’, April 2009. This report accounts for the period 1 st March 2008 to 28th February 2009.

34

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear   Figure 7.

Given that residents’ perceptions of

areas with deprivation, such as St. Helier

decline being predominately in the area

and Roundshaw. According to research

of crime and antisocial behaviour are not

carried out on behalf of ‘Capital

evidenced in statistics, the Council’s

Ambition’, Sutton has the 7th highest

leadership should give an honest ‘warts

‘inequality score’ in London and 88th in

and all’ account of Sutton’s standing in

Britain as a whole.30 Consequently this is

this policy area.

reflected in the perception of crime and antisocial behaviour among residents.

Safety

is

not

universal:

Pockets

For example, the survey results in Figure

of

8 show that residents in the northern and

disadvantage

central parts of the borough are more Sutton is geographically a small London

likely to feel ‘unsafe’ after dark, and that

borough with steep social and economic

residents in more southern parts of the

differences. It is not surprising that this

borough will feel ‘safe’. There is a clear

has an impact on crime and antisocial

link between the socio-economic profile

behaviour. The socio-economic gap in

of areas within the borough and the th e

Sutton can be broadly, though not

perception of crime and antisocial

universally, illustrated by the significant

behaviour.31 The differentials in the fear

difference between the low-density

of crime between the Northern Wards and

affluent areas like Cheam and Belmont, in

other ward averages illustrated in Figure

comparison to high-density low-income

9 are stark, specifically with these

30. The State of Sutton: An Economic, Social and Environmental Profile of Sutton , pp. 7-8. 31. A detailed map of the London Borough of Sutton and its comparison with national deprivation can be seen at: http://www.go-london.gov.uk/LIS/LSOA/Sutton/LsoaIMDRankMap.htm

35

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 8.

F e e l in i n g s a f e a ft ft e r d a r k – b y a r e a Q

H o w s a f e d o y o u f e e l w a l k in in g o u t s id id e in in th th i s n e i g h b o u r h o o d a l o n e after dark? % U n s a fe

% S a fe

N e t s a fe fe

32%

B e d d in in g to to n a n d W a l lili n g t o n

59%

46%

Sutton

Carshalton

30%

Northern Wards

47%

N o r th th C h e a m a n d W o r c e s te te r P a r k

-3

43%

35%

Cheam and Belmont

59%

+24

59%

+29 -7

39%

43%

+27

47%

+4

‘personal attack’ offences – showing that

whilst still continuing to be an area of

residents living in the Northern Wards

deprivation, research shows that people

feel less safe than residents living

feel safer in the surrounding areas of

elsewhere.

Beddington and Wallington than they do in Sutton, North Cheam and Worcester

The Benhill Estate in Sutton and the Roundshaw Estate are in the 10% of the

Park, and the Northern Wards. This can be held to demonstrate progress.

32

most deprived areas in Britain.   In short: the better your area, the safer Roundshaw has been undergoing

you feel.

extensive regeneration for 10 years and

Figure 9.33 Fear of Crime: The Northern N orthern W Wards ards in comparison with the rest of the borough d e i r  o w s t n e id s e r  d e y e v r  u s f  o   %

80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

64%

57%

49% 36%

35%

74% 64% 46% 25% 11%

r  r  r  r  r  s s s s s e e e e e d d d d d r  n h r  h r  r  h h r  h t t t t t a o a a a a s O O O O O i W r  W W W W n a n n n n r  r  r  r  r  e p e e e e m h h h h h tr  o tr  tr  tr  tr  o C o o o o N N N N N offence  Antisocial lary Ctypes ar t heftof 'personal Stre et attack' Racist B urgDifferent robbery attacks behaviour 

32. ibid http://www.go-london.gov.uk/ 33. Ipsos MORI figures.

36

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear   Sutton has three ‘police stations’

that might include drug taking, squatting

servicing 185,500 people.34 These

and arson. The same can be said of litter.

comprise two stations, in Sutton and

The more it accumulates the greater the

Wallington, and one ‘police office’ in

inducement will be for people to leave

Worcester Park. This means one police

more litter there.36 Conversely, the more

‘station’ per 60,000 of the Sutton

litter present means there will be less of a

population. This also leaves large

disincentive not  to  to drop litter.

geographical areas of the borough without a public, visible police station of

If acts of vandalism are quickly remedied

SNT base.

and litter is tackled before it accumulates, the likelihood of an escalation in these problems is

Living In Fear Of Crime:

minimised. According to the theory, if the

The Causes

perceived quality of the area/

There are many factors which influence

community confidence is strengthened.

neighbourhood does not decline,

the residential perception of the threat of crime and antisocial behaviour in Sutton.

This theory has relevance for Sutton.

These call for closer examination. Signal

Ipsos MORI figures show that 62% of

crimes and signal disorders influence

surveyed residents point to crime and

residents’ perceptions of local areas.

antisocial behaviour with environmental and cleanliness coming second at 39%.37 

Fixing Broken Windows Throughout the 1980s and 1990s a theory emerged from academic circles in the United States. It is called The Broken Window Theory.35 The theory contends that by tackling small instances of crime, vandalism and antisocial behaviour, major crimes will fall as a consequence. The Broken Window Theory takes its name from the following example. If a

Graffiti like this in Sutton South is a

building has a few broken windows and

perfect example of a signal crime.

these windows are not repaired, there is an increased likelihood of vandals

As mentioned above the better the area

breaking more windows and perhaps

the safer you feel. If the desirability of an

even to break into the building. The

area is increased, through the reduction

building in a state of disrepair will

of environmental factors such as ‘signal

become a magnet of antisocial activities

disorders’ or ‘signal crimes’, fear of crime is reduced.

34. 2007 population estimate 35. George Kelling and Catherine C atherine Coles, Fixing Broken Windows: Restoring Order and Reducing Crime in Our Communities, Simon & Schuster; 1st Touchstone Ed edition (1 Jul 1998) 1998 ) 36. This example was first used in The Atlantic Monthly , March 1982 in an article entitled “Broken “ Broken Windows ” by  James Wilson and George Kelling. Kelling. 37. Ipsos MORI, page 14

37

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Broader use of the i-NSI community

are open to casual supervision at all

intelligence model could be utilised to

times. Designs and layouts cater for this

prevent problems escalating and creating

accordingly, with the knock-on effect of

an environment which is conducive for

giving potential offenders the message

antisocial behaviour.

that they are being observed.

Designing Out Crime ‘Defensible Space’ ‘Crime prevention through environmental

There is a need to establish clear

design’ (CPTED) is a multi-disciplinary

distinctions between public and private

approach with the aim of preventing and

space. This is so that there is no

deterring criminal behaviour through

confusion or ambiguity as to where

environmental design. CPTED strategies

people are allowed to go, at all times of

rely upon the ability to influence offender

the day. It shows where public space

decisions before criminal acts take place.

ends and where semi-public, communal

Sutton Council’s planning strategy

or private space begins. Offences are

includes CPTED strategies in order to

likely to occur when it is unclear as to the

tackle crime and antisocial behaviour.

status of a domain. Research shows that

The ‘Designing Out Crime’

areas which are physically isolated, with

supplementary planning document spells

unclear definitions between public and

out the key principles of CPTED and

private spaces have higher crime rates.

actual planning methods that can achieve ‘Access and Movement’

results.38 

Good designs and layouts play a key role in tackling crime and antisocial behaviour

‘Local Ownership’

by creating a better connected and more The quality of the local environment has

accessible environment without

a large influence on crime, antisocial

compromising security. Layouts with too

behaviour and fear. It is important that

many under-used connections and large

environments are attractive and

areas of indirect, poorly-lit and

sustainable places where people want to

segregated pedestrian routes providing

live. A greater sense of ‘local ownership’ and community identity will encourage

access to the rear of buildings, can create opportunities for crime. A good

residents to feel a greater pride in their

movement design provides convenient,

area/neighbourhood.

overlooked and well-used principle routes to get people to where they want

‘Natural Surveillance’

to go.

This principle is based on the notion that places are safer when they are overlooked

Sutton Council uses CPTED in its

and those doing the overlooking form a

development plan policies, pre-

deterrent to crime and antisocial

application and planning application

behaviour because they can witness it.

stages, planning decisions and

Therefore crime and antisocial behaviour

conditions. It also features in

can be deterred by ensuring that all parts of the street, footpaths and public spaces

applications to the Development Control Committee.

38. Designing Out Crime , Supplementary Planning Document, Environment and Leisure, April 2005

38

 

Crime, Antisocial Behaviour and Fear   The use of CPTED methods is a valuable

things that are happening. For example,

tool which the Council can use to tackle

the increasingly local ethos of SNT

crime and antisocial behaviour before it

policing with a return to community

happens.

intelligence in order to tackle crime, aid detection and also foster prevention.

Prevention is better than cure. Because Sutton is a ‘collection of villages’ this means that the policing priorities can

Conclusion

considerably differ from neighbourhood to neighbourhood. The SNT model is

As we have discussed, crime and

working to address that. But awareness

antisocial behaviour and the associated

needs to be raised in the community of

fears consistently top the priorities for

this service and its local ethos. The

residents. This is not unique to Sutton.

management of the SNTs is within the

Yet this should not mean that the

remit of the Head of SSPS. This is a good

Council’s political leadership, through its

thing because the Head of SPSS reports to

very strong influence on policing policies

the elected accountable figure in the

via the SSPS, should not strive to make

Council’s Executive in this service area,

Sutton the safest borough in Greater

currently entitled the Executive Member

London .

for Community Safety. This is a local approach to policing and provides a clear

Political complacency often assuaged by

accountability structure.

convenient and occasionally misleading statistics, coupled with fatuous

In celebrating this innovation we must be

pronouncements that Sutton is the

cautious. We must not politicise the

“second safest London borough” does

police, but in the same token local

little to allay the fears and concerns of

policing at a strategic policy level should

residents. As the accountable face of

not be so disconnected with local

local government, politicians should

priorities ‘on the ground’. The forums set

embrace and reflect the very real fears

up to provide a conduit for local priorities

that dog the lives of residents. As has

in policing are simply not working. They are talking shops. This must change, even if it means a wholesale rethink of

been stated in this report, constant reassurances from political actors in the Council do little, or indeed anything, to

the structures, forums and committees.

change the imbedded anxiety of residents.

The mechanics of community safety are there. The tools to tackle crime and

Sutton’s community must have

antisocial behaviour are there too.

confidence and the Council must do all it

Regrettably the clear political leadership

can to set the context and shape the

in Sutton Council, adequately and

environment in which that can be

accurately reflecting residents’ priorities,

achieved. It is not all doom and gloom,

is lacking.

and this is not the purpose of this report. This report has sought to outline the challenges and to highlight the good

This has to change.

39

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

40

 

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing  

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Decent Homes: Raising The Bar In Public Housing

41

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  administration, the SHP project has

Introduction

had not been a success to date. •

The quality of housing, in both private

Sutton’s housing stock is below acceptable standards and because of

and public sectors, varies starkly

consistent underinvestment over two

depending, among other things, on your

decades, this neglect has now

location in the borough. It is widely

deprived Sutton of the opportunity to

recognised that the quality of the built environment also varies in the borough

receive a funding envelope of

with some areas epitomising the ‘Surrey

Government 5 before 2011/12, thus

£112.5million from Central

suburban realm’ and other areas having

condemning SHP tenants to more

the physical and, consequently, social

years of uncertainty in substandard

1

features of inner London.  

accommodation.6 Sutton Council’s political leadership has nowhere to

As a social landlord, albeit via an Arm’s

hide on this issue.

Length Management Organisation

•

(ALMO) 2  called the ‘Sutton Housing

The quality of the SHP housing stock needs to improve and that there is a

Partnership’ (SHP),3 Sutton does not have

moral and practical requirement to do

a good track record. In March 2008,

so.

following a comprehensive assessment and inspection by the Audit Commission,4 

•

Sutton’s tenants - who must be treated more as customers - deserve a

SHP scored a 1 Star rating describing it as

better service from their landlord for

‘fair’. Poor ratings in the quality of

the rent that they pay. More must be

housing stock has culminated in a failure

done to achieve this, despite SHP

to meet the ‘Decent Homes Standard’,

having enshrined a ‘customer focus’ in

poor customer satisfaction, inconsistent

its mission statement and its core

customer focus, and poor responsive

objectives.

repairs. A lack of strategic approaches

•

from the ALMO contributed to this poor

If SHP fails to meet Government criteria for funding, the Council should

rating.

look for alternative options in social housing provision.

On the issue of housing, we contend that: •

The Council has failed in this core area of service delivery.

•

Despite being a flagship policy of the ruling Liberal Democrat

1. The Locality , Corporate Assessment, London Borough of Sutton, Audit Commission, Nov 2008 2. For more info on ALMOs, see the Department for Communities and Local Government website: http:// www.communities.gov.uk/archived/publications/housing/armslengthmanagementorg  3. http://www.suttonhousingpartnership.org.uk  http://www.suttonhousingpartnership.org.uk  4. For a copy of the Audit Commission’s Report, see: http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/reports/BVIR.asp? CategoryID=&ProdID=CADD65A1-D0F4-492e-B702-3018AF2CCB2F   CategoryID=&ProdID=CADD65A1-D0F4-492e-B702-3018AF2CCB2F 5. Letter to Sutton Council’s Chief Executive, Mr Paul Martin, from Mr Ken Swan, Team Le ader, Decent Homes Housing Finance, DCLG, dated 4 June 2008. 6. Letter from Sir Bob Kerslake, the Chief Executive of the Homes & Communities Agency, dated 17 July 2009. This letter informed Sutton Council that because of its failure to meet the Audit Commission’s 2 Star rating in March M arch 2008, it will not receive any funding allocations from Central Government even if it passes its inspection with 2 Stars in late 2009. This is because the only ALMOs which have already achieved 2 Stars are eligible.

42

 

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing  

Public Housing – Management At Arms Length  Length  What is an ALMO when it’s at home? ALMOs are not-for-profit companies owned by local authorities with the purposes of managing and improving public housing stock.7 They operate under the terms of a management agreement with the local council. The first ALMO was set up in 2002. Government funding was provided on the condition that local authorities separated

Sutton Housing Partnership is responsible for the

their management and strategic

day-to-day management of services for the

functions. The options of retaining

Borough’s 7,000 tenants and 1,400 leaseholders.

control of the management of housing or transferring the housing stock to a

1,370 leasehold properties and 86

Registered Social Landlord (RSL), usually

‘Section 16’ freeholder houses.8

a Housing Association, was still available. Stock transfer or the establishment of an

SHP is managed by an unpaid board of

ALMO required a ballot of all tenants and

directors. At least a third of an ALMO

leaseholders affected.

board is normally made up of tenants. The composition of the board is shown below Figure 1).

Sutton’s ALMO was established on 1st April 2006. SHP manages the Council’s

Typically a third, or more, of board

6,670 rented properties, along with

members are tenants and residents. The job description of the Board of SHP is

Figure 1

to: 1. Scrutinise and monitor the performance of SHP. 2. Report on the Management Agreement between the Council and SHP. 3. Approve the budgets. 4. Agree policies and make financial decisions. 5. Ensure that SHP is run lawfully lawfully and ethically.9 

7. One ALMO, ‘Wolverhampton Homes’, controversially looks after commercial property as well. 8. For these properties a service charge is payable. 9. For more info, see: http://www.suttonhousingpartnership.org.uk/The%20Board/the_board.html http://www.suttonhousingpartnership.org.uk/The%20Board/the_board.html  

43

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Sutton Housing Partnership Figure 2 Inspection Results of 69 ALMOs (March 2009)

g n it Not inspected a r  n o is 1 Star 'Fair' & 0 Star 'Poor' s i m 2 Star 'Excellent' m o C ti 3 Star 'Excellent' d u A

11 8 30 20 0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Number of ALMOs

According to the National Federation of

places it in the bottom 11% of all

ALMOs (NFA) 10  £3.7billion has been committed to ALMOs since April 2002,

established ALMOs (see above, Figure 2).

with a further £2.4billion committed for

It’s not all bad: Prospects for

the period 2008-2011.11 If an ALMO can

improvement

obtain at least a 2 Star rating, following an Audit Commission inspection, further

The Audit Commission report was keen

funding can be acquired. The Audit

to stress that there are “promising”

Commission report placed the ALMO in

prospects for improvement for the future.

the worst performing 25% of ‘comparable

The report illustrates the prospects for

organisations’ nationwide. One year on,

improvement 12  in the format shown

its 1 Star ‘Fair’ rating in March 2008

below in Figure 3. 3.  

Figure 3

10. National Federation of ALMOs, see: www.almos.org.uk www.almos.org.uk   11. Key facts about ALMOS , published 03 March 2009. 12. Audit Commission SHP report, (Feb 2008). p.9

44

 

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing   The Audit Commission’s diagnosis for

Beating the barriers to improvement,

improvement highlights the following:

where is SHP failing?

•

•

There are noticeable service

Through SHP, Sutton’s public housing

improvements which customers would

provision has been criticised on the

recognise.

following grounds:

The implementation of most service improvement recommendations.

•

•

The good relationship between SHP, as

delivery of its service and the

an ALMO, and the Council which it

dissemination of information to

goes as far as to describe as “strong “ strong

customers.

and effective ”. ”. •

•

The development of a ‘performance’

Poor customer satisfaction, with some distinctly low areas.

culture. •

Inconsistent customer focus in the

•

Gaps in service standards, and ineffective monitoring.

Improvements in leadership and the skills of board members, managers

•

Poor performance measurement.

and staff, helping to shape highly

•

Weak service in customer complaints,

motivated and enthusiastic staff.13 

responsive repairs, keeping appointments, and the ‘turning around’ of void properties.

The Audit Commission is right to highlight the development of a

•

‘performance’ culture to improve the

Inconsistency in the quality of adaptation work and voids repair.

service SHP provides.

•

The lack of plain English versions of leases offered to leaseholders, and

It is also right to point out the benefits of

maintenance services failing to be on

a motivated and enthusiastic staff.

par with other residents.

Happier staff will inevitably perform

•

Limited outcomes in delivering

better and tenants will benefit from an

efficiencies and ensuring value for

improved service.

money.14 

Recent news from the Homes & Communities Agency will undoubtedly impact on staff morale. We need to give due attention to the positive aspects of the Audit Commission’s inspection report and learn from the criticisms and ‘barriers to improvement’. The Council should be ruthless in removing the barriers to improvement highlighted in the report.

13. Ibid, p.8 14. Ibid.

45

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Case Study One: SHP Property in June Close, Carshalton In March 2008, two members of the Housing, Planning and Transport Policy Group carried out a fact-finding excursion to an SHP managed property in 15

 June Close, Carshalton.  The results of the visit brought up several examples of SHP’s poor management of the property. The inspection also drew pointed criticism of SHP from the tenant family. The family in question, comprised of two

Figure 5.

parents and two young children, has

Russian Roulette’ boiler

"It's like Russian Roulette with our

asked to remain anonymous.

heating. We had to get it fixed four times since the beginning of this year. In winter we have to sleep downstairs because the house gets so cold. There is an ice-cold draughty from the neglected windows and it's horrible when it snows. What do we pay our rent and Council Tax for? We love the

Figure 4.

area and we really don't want to move, Wallpaper peeling off damp walls.

but the conditions are appalling."

It was clear from the outset that the property was suffering from underinvestment. The walls were cold and the property was draughty. The single-glazed windows were clearly incapable of retaining heat inside the house and persistent mould had

Figure 6.

developed as a result, see Figure 4 taken

Pointing out electrical danger  

in a young girl’s bedroom. The mother of the house, referred to as Mrs X, said that

As shown in Figure 6. Mrs X also drew

even with continual efforts to remove the

visitors’ attention to the positioning of a

mould it would return due to the poor

plug socket over a gas hob, in blatant

condition of the outdated single glazed

infraction of British Standard 7671. This

windows.

regulation maintains that an electrical fitting must not be located above a

Inspection of the kitchen demonstrated

cooking appliance as it represents a clear

clear health and safety flaws. These

danger. Mrs X said that she had

included a boiler which requires regular

complained about the hazard that this

maintenance from SHP technicians, see

posed. SHP had not taken steps to

Figure 5. Mrs X told visitors from the

resolve the issue.

Policy Group: 15. Carshalton & Clockhouse Ward.

46

 

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing  

Case Study Two: Fire Safety In Chaucer House, Sutton Councillor Tony Shields,16 Deputy Leader of the Opposition, is a Home Office trained former fire officer with extensive experience on the ‘Sutton Red Watch’. rd

Following the Camberwell Fire on 3  July 2009, which cost six lives, Councillor Shields undertook a random fire safety inspection of Chaucer House, a high rise property managed by SHP.17 His

Figure 8.

inspection flagged up several significant fire risks including:

Dumped rubbish will fuel fire  

Fire protective glass was missing on two fire doors on the first floor of the building. Should a fire have occurred on the first floor, this deficiency could have caused ‘smoke-logging’ of the fire escape to all floors above, see Figure 9. Following Councillor Shields’ inspection, swift action was undertaken by SHP. Disturbingly, during a second visit by Councillor Shields a resident of Chaucer

Figure 7.

House, who has requested his name be

Fire doors that could not be closed.  

withheld, said that the protective fire glass in Figure 9 had been smashed

A lack of securing straps on the seventh, eighth and ninth floors on the •

‘dry-rising main outlets’. The maintenance and accessibility of the dryrising main is essential in allowing fire crews to get water to the ‘seat of a fire’. The seventh floor fire door, providing access to the protected escape route, was •

not self-closing. Self-closing doors are critical in suppressing the spread of fire

Figure 9.

throughout a building.

Fire glass smashed seven months ago.

On the sixth floor the fire door did not close properly, because it did not

during a rowdy Christmas party in

physically fit the doorframe, see Figure 7.

the building cleaning corridors and

‘Class A’ combustible materials (rubbish) had been allowed to accumulate

stairwells, but despite this near daily

in the sixth floor waste collection area,

taken for over seven months. It took a

presenting a significant fire risk, see

random inspection by an opposition

Figure 8.

councillor to initiate action.

•

December 2008. SHP staff are routinely in

•

presence in the tower block no action was

16. Tony Shields joined the London Fire Brigade in 1987. He served in the London Boroughs of Ealing, Richmondupon-Thames and Sutton, serving in the latter Borough for 10 years. Throughout his career Councillor Shields participated in many fire safety and ‘familiarisati ‘ familiarisation’ on’ visits to significant properties in Greater London. 17. Sutton North Ward.

47

 

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Involving Residents: Tenants Are Customers Too Case Study Conclusions

tenants about the options available to them in delivering the council housing

These two case studies illustrate serious

they deserve.

problems with SHP’s service in fire safety (a legal duty of care owed to residents) and the overall poor quality of SHP

As shown above a failure to involve residents/customers accounts for a core

managed properties for tenants. With

part of the failure of the service.

regard to fire safety, SHP and the Council should be keen to study the report of the

Good customer relations are key to the

Government’s fire safety adviser, Sir Keith

success of any ALMO.19 SHP must

Knight, on his investigation into the

improve in this area.

Camberwell fire and the dangers posed by tower blocks.18 

The Audit Commission’s report rated resident involvement as ‘significant’ in

The Council should press upon SHP the

2003 - three years before the

need for the very highest standards in

establishment of SHP. In the 2008 report,

safety precautions for tenants.

significant weaknesses were highlighted, although with some evidence that SHP

The state of Mrs X’s property in June

was reaching out to ‘traditionally hard to

Close, Clockhouse, illustrates quite how

reach communities’.20 SHP is described as

bad the neglect of our social housing has

having a weak ‘overall approach’ with

become. One of the key points which the

poor impact on tenants.

Policy Group visitors took from the visit was that the family were not in receipt of

Assessment appears to indicate that

a customer-focused service.

resident/customer involvement has decreased with the establishment of SHP.

Here is a key contradiction: SHP tenants

Things were better beforehand - we need

are customers, but SHP does not treat

to understand why.

them as customers. The Sutton Federation of Tenants and Tenants are Customers Too

Residents’ Associations (SFTRA) 21  and the Sutton Leaseholder Association (SLA) are

A lack of clear customer focus and

indispensable in assisting SHP to involve

resident involvement is one of the major

residents, but they must not become too

challenges that SHP faces. Now

reliant on these organisations.22

Government funding has been deferred, SHP needs to be honest and up front with 18. Sir Keith Knight QFSM CBE DL MIFireE, de facto f acto HM Chief Inspector of Fire Services and Chief Fire and Rescue Adviser, has been commissioned by the Rt Hon John Denham MP, Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, to investigate the fire in the London Borough of Southwark and to report findings to the DCLG. 19. Local Authority, ALMO and TMO Relationships – A Good Practice Guide , March 2009 20. Audit Commission SHP report, p.40. 21. http://www.sftra.org/  http://www.sftra.org/  22. Ibid. p.41

48  

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing   Despite the undoubted hard work of

It bears further analysis as to what was

staff,23 SHP needs a more structured long

done between 2003 and 2005, under the

-term strategy to increase the

old housing regime, and also between

involvement of customers/residents.

2005 and 2007 with the creation of the ALMO to account for the figures. The

Fostering customer involvement and the

next STATUS survey will take place this

ability to help shape the direction of

year – 2009.

service is key to increasing customer satisfaction. Sutton does not appear to be

There is low leaseholder satisfaction with

making significant improvements in this

participation opportunities at 39.1%. The

field.

satisfaction rates for residents in sheltered housing is markedly low at 18.7%.24

Every two years a ‘STATUS’ survey is carried out to survey the satisfaction of tenants in Sutton housing stock. All local

The bottom line is that residents are

authorities undertake this survey to

unsatisfied with their involvement in the

ascertain the views of tenants as to their

service despite the best efforts of SHP to

respective housing services. The surveys

facilitate this.

show a negligible increase in customer satisfaction for residents in public

ALMOs should promote tenant

housing services (see Figure 10 10..).

engagement in the service they provide. The requirement that ALMO Boards have

Under the old council housing system,

a one third tenant contingent is a good

the STATUS survey shows that

example of this, as is the fact that many

satisfaction in participation did improve

ALMOS have over 50% tenant

between 2003 and 2005 by 3.9% but with

representation, with a tenant as the

the establishment of SHP the increase in

Chairman.25 

customer satisfaction was marginal at 0.4%.

SHP should look closer at best practice in

Figure 10.

other ALMOs.

Custome r Participatio Participation n Satisfaction Satisfaction (ST (STA ATUS TUS Surv e ys) e Sutton Housing Partnership im 2007 g e R g Sutt on Counci Councill H o us using ing n i Sutton s Services 2005 u o H c il Sutt Sutton on Counci Councill H o us using ing b Services 2003 u P

62.90%

62.50%

58.60%

56. 00 00 % 5 7. 7. 00 00 % 5 8. 8. 00 00 % 59. 00 00 % 6 0. 0. 00 00 % 61. 00 00 % 62. 00 00 % 6 3. 3. 00 00 % 6 4. 4. 00 00% Perce ntage of re residents sidents satisfied 23. Also praised and acknowledged by the report, Ibid. 24. Ibid. 25. ALMO Governance – Empowering Tenants , NAF, 3rd March 2009

49  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  SHP wants to engage with tenants. This is

In 2003, Sutton Council’s housing service

what ALMOs are designed to do. On

was judged, by the Audit Commission, to

inspection it was acknowledged that SHP

have highly effective arrangements to

can demonstrate it places value on

deal with nuisance and antisocial tenants.

customer views. For example, a ‘mystery

The 2008 inspection of SHP found

shopper’ scheme identified problems in

strengths and weaknesses in tenancy

consistency with the reception service.

management arrangements to deal with

The service improved as a result. Light

problems. SHP does not have

bulb replacement services have also

‘introductory tenancies’ - a probationary

improved as a result of a tenants’

period to ensure responsible tenancy.

conference and the use of a repairs

SHP was also found to lack a 24-hour

investment group (RIG).26 

responsive service, lacking sufficient use of ‘hot-spot’ data to target its efforts

SHP has shown the ability to make

against bad tenants.28 This has lead to

changes, but it needs to tackle the

satisfaction levels falling.

apparent contradictions in the service it provides, enhancing the examples of good practice, internal and external to tackle problems. Safeguarding Good Tenants, Not Protecting Bad Ones Every social landlord in Britain has good tenants and bad tenants. One of the challenges for Sutton is to ensure that good tenants (who make up the vast

Good tenants should not have to suffer because of inadequate action against bad tenants.

majority) are valued and retained, and

SHP should better use its hot-spot data

that bad tenants are dealt with

to target resources to deal with these

effectively.

issues.

Compelling evidence of inequity in the

Antisocial behaviour and nuisance is a 24

systems dealing with bad tenants has

-hour problem, not a nine to five issue. A

been heard at meetings of the Housing,

24-hour responsive service should be in

27

Planning and Transport Policy Group.  

place to properly serve residents.

Accounts of good responsible tenants – some of them vulnerable - being driven

If customer focus is to be improved and

from their homes just to avoid the

enhanced at the centre of SHP’s

continued antisocial behaviour.

operations, then protecting responsible tenants should be key.

Responsible tenants should not have to move away from their homes because of bad neighbours.

Rewarding good tenants

26. Audit Commission SHP report, p. 41 27. For more detail on the Policy Group, see: http://www.changesutton.org.uk/  http://www.changesutton.org.uk/  28. Audit Commission SHP report, p. 43

50  

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing   the Tenant’s Compact needs to genuinely There should be more incentives for good

empower responsible tenants to ensure

tenants and responsible behaviour.

that they can enforce their rights.

SHP has not devised a full set of

Raising the profile of antisocial behaviour

incentives for rewarding ‘responsible’

towards reponsible tenants and ensuring

tenant behaviour, except keeping clear rent accounts. Some consultation has

that it is dealt with appropriately will build up confidence in tenants

been carried out with tenants and

themselves.

leaseholders on a reward scheme for properties left in good condition when

Tenants are paying to live in SHP

occupants move on. This will need

accommodation (with significant recent

development.

rises in rent 29); they should not have to put up with antisocial behaviour and

A detailed cost/benefit analysis of the

nuisance too. A clear avenue for redress

schemes to promote responsible

must be available and for it to be seen as

behaviour needs to be carried out.

a high priority for SHP.

The SHP’s Chief Executive has drawn up a

A recent example shows that tough

‘Tenants’ Compact’ setting out the rights

action can be taken against antisocial

and responsibilities of tenants in SHP

tenants. An antisocial tenant living in

properties. Confidence in SHP is being

Balaam House on the Collingwood Estate

built up by the establishment of a team

has had his flat boarded up by the police

concentrating on antisocial behaviour.

working with SHP.30 Disturbingly, the

The Audit Commission reports that the

head of SHP’s ‘community cohesion’

team has had strong performance so far

confirmed that this was only the second

(see Figure 11 for calls response figures).

time that the power to board up an

This is a step in the right direction. But

antisocial tenant’s accommodation had been used.

Figure 11.

Superintendent Chas Bailey, of Sutton

SHP Anti Antisocial social B ehaviour Team Response Performanc Performance e y ti 2006/07: Lower Priority Calls Response r  o ir  P 2006/07: Urgent Calls Response e s n o p s 2007: Lower Priority Calls Response (95% e target) R s ll a 2007: Urgent Calls Response C

82.20% 91.40% 97.20% 100% 0%

50%

100 %

150 %

Target Timescale Timescale s - within 48 hours hours 29. ‘Indecent: Damning Report on Council Housing’  Conservative  Conservative Press Release, Ref: PR 13-03-08 reports an increase of 5.5%. 30. Sutton & Epsom Advertiser, Friday 7 July 2009.

51  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Police, said: “We are determined to use all

because of its failure to achieve a 2 Star

powers at our disposal to crack down on

status in 2008.

antisocial behaviour, which will not be tolerated in Sutton.” Sutton Council

Sutton has consistently underinvested in

should be using all its influence to

its housing stock. The political leadership

support the police and ensure that

of the Council is directly culpable in SHP’s

antisocial behaviour is stamped out in

failure to meet the 2 Stars necessary to

our social housing.

unlock £112.5million of funding. SHP’s hard working staff are not to blame for

Conclusion Sutton is characterised by affluent neighbourhoods, situated a stone’s throw from pockets of deprivation; the contrast is stark. Some of the most vulnerable of Sutton’s residents live in social housing provided by SHP. For decades our social housing stock has been allowed to fall into an unacceptably poor state. This represents a clear failure to provide Sutton residents with a good service. This must change. The creation of the SHP ALMO, a flagship

[SHP has] lacked the  support and strategic direction dir ection that an effective political

the quality of Sutton’s social housing stock. They have lacked the support and strategic direction that an effective political administration would have given them. We support any measures which will achieve the required 2 Star rating from the Audit Commission. Capital funding in 2011/12 hinges on this. If SHP does not reach the Decent Homes Standard, Sutton will have to seriously consider other options for the management of our social housing, because tenants deserve better. It is to be welcomed that the Audit Commission has identified SHP’s efforts as possessing ‘promising ‘promising prospects for improvement ..’’ The issue of customer focus needs to be addressed. SHP and the Council should not forget that tenants are customers as

administration would have given them. policy of the Liberal Democrat administration, has been objectively  judged by inspectors as not being up to scratch, by failing to meet the ‘Decent Homes Standard’. On a national level, Sutton’s ALMO is in the bottom 25% of the worst performing comparable organisations. SHP and the Council have received a severe blow from the Homes & Communities Agency in the Ministerial decision to not provide any capital funding for investment in SHP properties

well. Historically, council housing issues have not featured prominently in Full Council motions or questions. This report posits the view that this is because social housing tenants do not feel emancipated or empowered in their relationship with the Council. Recent results from Sutton Council’s ‘Place ‘Place Survey ’ show that residents do not feel empowered in influencing Sutton Council decisions.31  We pay tribute to the work w ork of SFTRA in speaking up for tenants. Additionally, good tenants should feel

31. Place Survey 2008/09 , London Borough of Sutton, Ipsos MORI

52  

Decent Housing: Raising The Bar In Public Housing   empowered against bad tenants with the balance realigned to ensure that good behaviour is rewarded and encouraged, while bad behaviour is punished and consequently deterred. Tenants should feel empowered in their

Paul Scully and Parliamentary Candidate, Philippa Stroud campaigning with SFTRA to change the Housing Revenue Account subsidy which takes the equivalent of 19 weeks of residents’ rent each year to improve housing in other parts of the country.

dealings with the Council as their landlord and therefore to be able to bring it to account. Currently tenants are getting a raw deal from the Council, through SHP. In shaping housing policy for the future, the Council must be open minded and bold in pushing through the changes needed to truly raise the bar in provision of public housing and so ending a consistent failure in service delivery to remedy the contradictions.

53  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

54  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children 

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children

55  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Introduction Capitalising on Excellence

More should be done to capitalise on the excellence of the borough’s selective schools to raise the bar for all our secondary school pupils.

Sutton has much to celebrate when it comes to schools and education. As a Local Education Authority (LEA) we consistently top the league tables for excellence. The borough has 14 secondary schools, some of which maintain selection through academic

The borough has 43 primary schools 2 and according to figures from the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) the attainment levels vary significantly for the three core subjects (Maths, English and Science) at Key Stage 2 (KS2). 3

ability. Local people are justifiably proud of the achievements of our grammar schools and our comprehensive schools.

There has been a historic lack of formal support or encouragement from Sutton Council - as the LEA - to help prepare

Grammar schools in Sutton are among the best in the country for GCSE and ‘A’ level results.1 The success of Sutton’s

primary school pupils for the selective examinations for local grammar schools. This is in contrast to other LEAs with selective schools, which do more to

grammar schools does not necessarily reflect the success of Sutton’s borough

support pupils.

pupils in terms of educational achievement. This is because pupils resident in the borough make up the minority of grammar school places.

It is wrong that the political leadership of the Council has made little effort, if any, to encourage borough pupils to take advantage of the excellent resource

The contradiction here is apparent.

provided by our grammar schools.

Sutton has excellent schools, but they are not benefiting Sutton as much as they t hey could and should.

It is also telling that the political leadership of the Council consistently refuses to publicly signify support for our selective school system. This ambiguity

The self-evident success of Sutton’s grammar schools is a justifiable source of

needs to be cleared.4

pride, yet we need to examine whether there is a sufficient relationship between our excellent grammar schools and our non-selective schools. What frameworks

Sutton Council needs to work harder to give local children a fair opportunity to benefit from our grammar schools.

can we improve, or put in place, to to ensure that standards are raised across the board? How can grammar school excellence help to shape better comprehensive schools? 1. See 2008 League tables: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/education/a_level_gcse_results/  2. Education Establishments ; Children, Young People and Learning Services, (Version 03.08) 3. DCFS 2008 figures; ‘pupils achieving the expected level or above’ & ‘pupils achieving above the expected level’ on aggregate across the three core subjects, see: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/cgi-bin/performancetables/ group_08.pl?Mode=Z&Type=LA&Begin=s&No=319&Base=c&Phase=p&F=1&L=50&Year=08   group_08.pl?Mode=Z&Type=LA&Begin=s&No=319&Base=c&Phase=p&F=1&L=50&Year=08 4. Note: Both Liberal Democrat MPs voted to abolish all grammars (Education Bill, 15/03/06).

56  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  Looking After Vulnerable Children   It is the moral and legal duty of any local authority to look after vulnerable youngsters. A recent inspection by Ofsted shows that Sutton’s services for ‘looked after children’ are just about adequate. It has a mixture of major strengths alongside important weaknesses. For example the smooth transition of looked after children leaving care teams is

The National Autistic Society estimate that 1 in 100

signalled out as a strength. Yet there is

people in the UK have autism.

insufficient supported accommodation for these care leavers once they have left.

increases in the diagnosis of ASDs in pupils over five year periods.6 Sutton has

There are contradictions in the quality of

seen a growth of learning difficulties

the services. We need to get a grasp as to

and/or disabilities in pupils, especially in

why some areas have major strengths

the realm of the autistic spectrum where

and others important weaknesses.

the number of new diagnoses has doubled over the past five years. 7 8 

There is a strong moral and practical imperative in ensuring standards are

SEN provision is being increased but

universally high and that major strengths

recent controversies show that

in the service are across the board.

resident pupils still have to travel significant distances, within the

Sutton’s vulnerable children deserve

borough and without.

better. Complacency cannot be an option.

The contradiction here is that although provision is improving, it is not easily

Special Educational Needs – Fairer Local

accessible to everyone.

Provision   The number of children with Special Educational Needs (SEN) requires special attention. The number of ‘statements’ issued to pupils with SENs is increasing. Over the last ten years LEAs are reporting an increase in pupils with Autistic Spectrum Disorders (ASD).5 Some local LEAs have even reported 87%

5. The Rising Challenge: A Survey of Local Education Authorities on Educational Provision for pupils with Autistic Spectrum Disorders , All-Party Parliamentary Group on Autism. (Dec 2001) 2001 ) 6. Ibid. p.8. 7. 7. Joint  Joint Area Review , London Borough of Sutton Children’s Services Authority Area, (Ofsted, July 2008), at p.15. p. 15. 8. Learning Services Performance Committee , ‘SEN Budget Pressures’, Sutton Council, (11 September 2006).

57  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Primary Focus: Maximising Above Average Attainment Across The Board Figure 1 9 

2008: Aggregate KS2 scores across the three core subjects: English, Maths and Science F S C D (  Average and A bo  Average bove ve Score 15 s l o ) o s h r  e c Below Average Score 18 s u g y i r  f  a 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 im r  P Numbe r of p primary rimary schools achieving below, average a and nd abo ve average scores, based based 3 3 on pupil nu mbers

As observed in the introduction to this

average scores for KS2 core subjects. But

report, Sutton’s primary schools have varying levels of attainment with a

when examined overall, from figures provided by DCSF, Sutton’s results are

significant number of schools achieving

good (see below) with high amounts of

below average scores at KS2. Figure 1

pupils reaching Level 4 (the level

shows the KS2 aggregate scores from

expected for most 11 year olds).

2008 taken from a sample of 33 of Sutton’s primary schools showing there is

The DCSF set the target that by 2008

varied attainment in our primary schools.

the proportion of schools in which fewer

The majority of primary schools, at

than 65% of 11 year olds achieve level 4

approximately 55%, are achieving below

or above in each of English and mathematics, is reduced by 40%.11 

Figure 2 10  2008: KS2 National Curriculum Assessment 100.00% 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00%

90.40% 82.20%

82.20%

48.20% 34%

E ngl is h

 

37%

Ma them ati c s

Level 4 or above Level 5

S ci enc e

9. DCSF figures, Achievement and Attainment Table, 2008. 10. The Annual Attainment Report, Sutton Report, Sutton Advice & Inspection Service, (January 2009) 11. See DCSF: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/trends/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showIndicator&cid=5&iid=30  http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/trends/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.showIndicator&cid=5&iid=30 

58  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  Figure 3

 

12

2008:: KS2 Above 2008 Above and Below Be low Ave Average rage Level Lev el 4 A Att ttainm ainment ent Figures y r  a m i r  p h g u ls o o r  o o b h 3 c 3 s f  o le p m a S

25

23

21

20

20 12

15

13

10

10 5 0 English Above English Below Maths Above  Average  Average  Averag e  Average

Maths Below Science A bove Science Below  Average  Averag e  Average  Average

Englan Eng land d Av Aver erages ages ffor or Level 4 Attainment (Scie (Science nce 81% 81%,, Ma Maths ths 79% 79%,, Science 88%)

It is to be welcomed that Sutton’s

schools missing the average

attainment in the core subjects

attainment levels and DCSF targets by a

remains above the national average, as a

long way, for example Amy Johnson

whole.13 But there appear to be quite significant gulfs in the KS2 attainment of

Primary School in Wallington and Green Wrythe Primary School in Carshalton.  Carshalton. 

individual schools. Is there a correlation between schools It should be noted that most of the

failing to meet attainment targets and the

schools missing the average

number of pupils receiving support from

attainment levels for the core subjects

School Action, with SEN statements or

miss the mark by relatively small

support from School Action Plus? DCSF

margins. There are, however, a handful of

figures appear to show that this is not the

Figure 4

case with practically no correlation

 

14

School

Pupils with SEN

Pupils with

English Lev-

Maths Level

Science L4+

statements or

School Action

el 4+

4+

(England Ave.

School Action Plus

Support

(England

(England

88%)

Ave. 81%)

Ave. 79%)

support Foresters Primary

34.6%

0%

65%

81%

77%

Abbey Primary School

28.3%

21.7%

75%

87%

93%

Amy Johnson Primary

25.6%

30.2%

42%

53%

65%

24.1%

17.2%

81%

79%

91%

22.8%

12.3%

81%

77%

86%

School

School Muschamp Primary School and Language Opportunity Base Rushy Meadow Primary School 12. DCSF figures for 2008. 13. Report of the Executive Head of School Improvement, (Dr Peter Simpson) to the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee, 12 March 2009, p. 32. 14. Figures from the DCSF on their sample of 33 primary schools, 2008. 20 08.

59  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  between the two. The top five schools by

Because between 82% and 86% of

pupil population with SEN statements,

primary school pupils are residents of the

School Action and School Action Plus

borough, the educational

support show there is no clear statistical

attainment of primary school pupils is a

connection between the two. Some of

closer reflection of how Sutton’s

these schools, despite having higher than

children are doing as a whole, than those 16

average pupil populations with SENs, are achieving above average Level 4

of our secondary selective schools.

attainments at KS2.

To conclude this section it should be noted that residents’ satisfaction with

Sutton is a borough of contradictions in

Sutton’s primary schools does perform

the varying attainment of KS2 scores in

well against other London Boroughs,

our primary schools. We need to

according to figures provided Ipsos MORI

understand why there is such variation

(see Figure 5 below). However, it should

and how the quality of all schools’

be noted that these figures are taken

educational attainment can be raised.

from a relatively small sample of London

This is important because primary

Boroughs. The Council should take steps

schools are the foundation stone for our

to ascertain residents’ satisfaction from a

resident pupils’ education.

wider sample of other London LEAs.

Figure 5

 

15

Residents Survey: How satisfied are you with primary schools? d ie f  s it a s D  /is d e i f  s it a S e g a t n e c r  e P

100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0

Satisfied % Dissatisfied % Net %

London Boroughs (on data held)

15. Sutton Residents Survey , Final Report, Ipsos MORI, Feb 2008, p.59. 16. Approximate figures provided by the Executive Head for School Improvement in Sutton Council, Dr Peter Simpson.

60  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children 

Grammar Schools: Make Them Work For Sutton As outlined in the introduction, Sutton

at 2,510 (22.5% of non-selective school

has some of the best selective schools in

population and 15.3% of total school

the country having retained its grammar

population).

school system. But the success of the grammar schools, demonstrated in national league tables, does not

The figures show that Sutton’s grammar schools are popular with pupils from

necessarily reflect the educational

other boroughs. Further breakdown of

achievement of pupils residing in the

the figures (below and overleaf in Figures

borough.

6 and 7, obtained by the Education and Training Policy Group) show that in every

Figure 6 shows that Sutton residents

grammar school, pupils living in Sutton

make up a noticeable minority of the

form the minority of the school

grammar school population at 38.5%.

population. The demand for grammar

Sutton residents therefore account for

school places from extraterritorial pupils

2,018 of the 5,338 pupils in Sutton’s five

vastly outstrips the demand for places in

selective grammar schools. This works

our non-selective schools. Out of borough pupils are the minority in school

out at 12.3% of the total school population.

populations in non-selective schools with only one notable exception – St.

Sutton has an overall secondary

Philomena’s Catholic High School for

education population of 16,370. Of these

Girls.

pupils, 11,132 were at the borough’s nine non-selective schools.17 Pupils from

Figures show that pupils who reside in

outside the borough attending Sutton’s

the borough do not benefit from access

non-selective secondary schools number

to Sutton’s selective schools as much as

Figure 6

pupils from outside the borough.

 

18

How many pupils livi living ng in Sutton att attend end Sutton's grammar schools?

38.5 % - Grammar school pupils living in Sutton Sutton 61.5% - Grammar Grammar school sc hool pupils living outside Sutt Su tton on

17. Data taken from the May 2008 School Census. 18. Education and Training Policy Group, November 2008.

61  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 7 Grammar Gramm ar Schoo Schooll Sta tis tistics tics:: Res Reside ident nt and Ou Outt of B Borough orough Pupil Intake 1400

1281

1222

1200

994

1000 800

669

 

722 500

600 400

892

830 595686

515

325

611

315

281

Sutton Resident Pupils

Out Borough Resident Pupils

200 0 Wil ilson son's 's

Nonsu Nonsuc ch High High

Sutton utton Grammar 

Wallington Girls

Figure 8

Wallington Boys

Total School Population

This presents an apparent contradiction: Se lective lecti ve and N Non-Selective on-Selective Schoo Schooll Populations

611

281

St Philomena's

1196

623 573

Wallington Girls Sutton Grammar  Grammar 

1742 1580 344

Nonsuch High

682

500

Wilson's

325

669

62

Stanley Park

93 432

law that Sutton cannot give preference to

994

resident pupils for school places,

Carshalton Girls

79

Carshalton Boys

99

selective or non-selective, on the basis of their residence.

1203

As foundation schools, Sutton’s selective

771

schools are in charge of their own

1467 1341

126

0

administrative boundaries. This means by

864 771

Glenthorne

admissions criteria. The LEA has no say in

1229 1150

admissions but is charged with ensuring that they are compliant with the law.19 

1124 1025 500

1000

Total Out Borough Resident Pupils Sutton Resident Pupils

legal principle that maintained schools sole reason that they live within the LEA's

1222

722

 Judgement (1989) which established the may not give priority to children for the

1026

1273 1211

Overton Grange

Greenshaw

political leadership on grammar schools?   Sutton is bound by the Greenwich

162

The John Fisher 

Double Standards: Where is the local

1281

686 595 830 515

315

Cheam

reflect, or indeed benefit, local pupils as much as they can or should.

892

Wallington Boys

we have great schools which do not

1500

There have been recent controversies 2000

over admissions policy changes from two Sutton grammar schools. The issue arose after the schools carried out a

19. Note the development of the law following the Rotherham Judgement (1997) which established that the principle of admission authorities operating catchment areas as part of their oversubscription criteria in allocating school places was lawful providing that in so doing authorities are not in breach of the Greenwich judgement.

62  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  consultation on altering admissions

schools. It should also be noted that both

criteria, resulting in a cut in the number

local MPs ‘cut their political teeth’ as

of places ring-fenced for local applicants

Sutton councillors in the 1980s through

residing in the borough.20 These recent

to 2002. Early on in his political career,

events have exposed double standards

as a councillor, Paul Burstow supported a

on the issue of selective education from

council motion signalling opposition to 22

local leading politicians.

Sutton’s selective schools.   Despite utterances from the Council’s political leadership and local MPs that they oppose the strictures of the Greenwich Judgment and any efforts from local schools to change admissions policies, they have a consistent record of ideological opposition to the selective grammar school system.

Wallington County Grammar School is one of five schools in the Borough with a wholly selective

Considering Sutton’s educational

admissions policy.

achievements as an LEA are, in part, due

Despite the local Liberal Democrat

to the success of our grammar school

Member of Parliament for Sutton and

system, parents, pupils and residents

Cheam being reported as voicing his

deserve clarity and honesty on where the

concerns over the issue he voted - along

local political leadership stands on the

with sixty one Labour rebels and his Lib

issue. The ambiguity on the issue, having

Dem colleague in Carshalton and

been built up over a generation, needs to

Wallington - to abolish all existing

be cleared.

grammar schools.21 In addition to this, it should be noted that Mr Burstow was the newly elected Chief Whip for the Lib Dem parliamentary party at the time. In this position Mr Burstow was charged with ensuring his parliamentary colleagues voted in accordance with the party whip and that a high turnout of Lib Dem MPs were present in the division lobby to vote accordingly. His efforts secured an 88.9% turnout to vote with Labour rebels to abolish the nation’s remaining grammar

The rebuilding of Stanley Park High School aims to help increase standards for all children attending schools in the Borough.23 

20. Sutton Guardian , 9 April 2009 21. Education and Inspections Bill — New Clause "39" — Retention of selection by ability or aptitude after parent ballot — 24 May 2006 at 17:30 , at which Mr Burstow (Sutton & Cheam) and Tom Brake MP (Carshalton & Wallington) voted with 59 Labour MPs and 56 Lib Dem Commons colleagues to abolish selective grammar schools. In addition to this, it should be noted that Mr Burstow was the newly appointed Chief Whip for the Lib L ib Dem parliamentary party at the time. 22. Full Council, 19 October 1987. 23. Photo credit: Haverstock Associates

63  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Looked After Children: Where Are Our Vulnerabilities? Background: Council Child Care Functions

authority, to use the jargon, took

and the ‘Corporate Parent’  

them into care. The report reveals that, in far too many cases, not

Local authorities have statutory duties

enough care was then taken.” 25  

under the Children Acts 1989 and 2004 to make arrangements to ensure that in

In 1998 the Department of Health

discharging their functions, they have

launched the ‘Quality ‘Quality Protects’  

regard to the need to safeguard and

programme to support councils in

promote the welfare of children. This

transforming the management and

includes the provision of child social

delivery of children's social services. The

services.

programme led to the development of a number of key indicators of excessive

Following the election of the New Labour

movement between placements, and set

Government in 1997, changes have taken

outcome targets for all aspects of looked

place in local government social care

-after children's lives.26

functions with regard to ‘looked after children’, ie ‘children in care’. The

 programme The Quality Protects  programme

incoming administration took steps to

introduced the concept of the ‘Corporate

address a number of scandals during the

Parent’ . This is an enduring concept and

1990s involving child abuse in

one of deep significance to the provision

residential homes in England and Wales.

of child social care by a local council. As

A significant culmination of the concerns

the corporate parent of looked after

surrounding children in care was Sir

children, a local authority has a legal and

William Utting’s report published in

moral duty to provide the kind of loyal

November 1997. This report contributed to a policy of greater emphasis on adoption rather than resident care home solutions.24  The then Secretary of State for Health described the report as: “[A] woeful tale of failure at all levels to provide a secure and decent childhood for some some of the most vulnerable children. It covers the lives of children whose home circumstances were so bad that those in

The terrible cases of Victoria Climbie and Baby P have led to further reforms in the safeguarding of children.

24. Utting, Sir William. (1997). People Like Us: The Report on the Review R eview of Safeguards for Children Living Away from Home. London : Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. 25. The Rt Hon. Frank Dobson MP, House of Commons Debate, 19 November 1997 vol 301 cc327-38, at 3.33pm   26. Children, Schools and Families Committee, Third Report , House of Commons, (9 March 2009), ‘2. Care system in England’, para. 17-18

64  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  support that any good parent would

•

provide for their own children. According to the Government’s own definition: ‘the

Insufficient supported accommodation for care leavers.

•

Insufficient systematic engagement of

local authority must do at least what a

young people in service planning and

good parent would do.’ 27  

design. •

Insufficient access to information

Sutton Council is therefore a corporate parent with a moral and legal duty to

regarding young people or involvement in the creation of the role

‘looked after children’ in its care. This

of the Council as a corporate parent. 28 

means councillors are corporate parents with a duty to do the best for the children in care. The term is ill defined and does not sit comfortably. ‘Corporate’ has a bureaucratic connotation creating an impression of organisational frameworks and systems. ‘Parenting’ lends itself to a warmer and more familial outlook. Both words sit in notable contrast to each other.

“A local authority has a legal and moral duty to provide the kind of loyal support that any good parent would provide for their own children.”

The JAR gives a critical account of how the corporate parenting role is

The important responsibilities of the

insufficiently developed.29 It found that

corporate parent need to come into

there are ‘insufficient opportunities and

sharper focus. They need to be made far

mechanisms for councillors to meet their

more intuitive to the actual corporate

ambitions for looked after children and

parents involved and the wider public.

young people.’

This is particularly vital given the recent tragedies in cases such as Baby P in the

It also goes on to criticise the lack of

London Borough of Haringey.

involvement of councillors in children and young people services and that, despite

‘Insufficient’: How is Sutton doing?  

training being on offer, there appears to be a lack of awareness of the corporate

The ‘Joint Area Review’ (JAR) carried out

parent role. It states that ‘Councillors

by Ofsted concluded that Sutton’s

have no access to the systematic analysis

services for ‘looked after children’ are

of the views of looked after children in

‘adequate’ with specific issues in several

the borough and information they have

key areas. The inspection focuses on five

received about their educational

‘insufficiencies’, they are:

attainment contains inaccuracies .’ .’30 The

•

•

The role of the ‘corporate parent’ is

Council’s ‘Children ‘Children and Young People’s

insufficiently developed.

Plan 2009/10 ’ has set itself a ‘positive

Instability of short-term placements.

contribution priority’ to ‘enhance

27. See ‘Every Child Matters’  definition:  definition: -http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/deliveringservices/ -http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/deliveringservices/ multiagencyworking/glossary/?asset=glossary&id=22407   multiagencyworking/glossary/?asset=glossary&id=22407 28. Joint Area Review, p. 10-13 29. Ibid. p.11 30. Ibid.

65  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  member engagement with looked after

Insufficient information is provided to

children and care leavers.31

care leavers in relation to housing and managing their finances.33 

The Council is right to respond to the  JAR’s concerns over the development of

Young people emerging as care leavers

the corporate parent role and the need

must be given sufficient support to help

for better training. This is not solely a failure of the administration of the

them become independent as young adults. Improving the inadequate support

Council, it is also a failure of some  

for acquiring accommodation after

elected councillors to take sufficient

leaving care should be a priority for the

steps to inform themselves of the duties

Council’s endeavours in this area.

placed upon the Council as corporate parents.

Difficulties for young people leaving the system do not vanish overnight. Also, it is not right that bed and breakfast use is ‘considerable’ outside of the borough for care leavers, especially when the borough is the care leaver’s home. The transition from care to independence as a young adult should not be made more difficult by removing the care leaver from the neighbourhoods

Councillors need to understand and respond to

they are accustomed to.

their role role as corporate parents

The JAR does find that there are The JAR highlights insufficiencies in

‘pathways’ to smooth transition in leaving

supported accommodation for ‘care

care with regard to post-age16 learning

leavers’. It does, however, highlight some

provision. Access to training and

improvement (although below the

employment programmes is deemed to

national average) in the percentage of

be good.

care leavers living in suitable accommodation in the year 2007/08 but

This is to be welcomed but it needs to be

fails to provide statistical evidence for

coupled with the stability that comes with

this.32 The report is particularly sharp in

good support for fostering independence,

its criticism of the Council’s failure to

including the management of finances

provide sufficient supported

and preparation for accessing housing/

accommodation for care leavers and that

accommodation when leaving care.

those with ‘complex’ needs are given ‘considerable’ use of bed and breakfast

Education outcomes for looked after

accommodation outside the borough.

children are deemed to be ‘satisfactory’ overall. The eligible Year 11 pupils taking

31. Children and Young People’s Plan 2009-10, London Borough of Sutton, p.23 32. Joint 32.  Joint Area Review , p.13. This is a common theme in the JAR and it should be noted that the report does not provide detailed footnotes or references for many of its contentions and findings. The Council should consider being more robust in requiring its inspectors’ evaluations to be more clearly evidence based. How questioning is the Council of its inspectors? Is it too submissive to the tick-box inspection regime from Central Government and its agencies?

66

33. Ibid.

 

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  at least one GCSE course was in line with

Waking Up The Corporate Parent  

the national average for 2006/07 but considerably below in 2005/06. The

The Council’s training regime needs to be

numbers of looked after children

looked at and, if necessary, be subjected

achieving one or more A* grades in

to wholesale reform to ensure that

GCSEs and GCVQ courses are variable but

elected members of the Council and

for the last two years have been above the national average.

officers are aware of the legal duties placed upon them.

Key Stage 2 achievements in Level 4

With increased awareness, councillors will

Maths and English has declined over the

be able to take a closer look at the

last three years and no looked after

functions of the Council in children’s care

children achieved above Level 4 in 2007

services. Without increased awareness

for these courses.

and understanding of the corporate parenting role, the Council may not be

Looked after children deserve the best

living up to the legal and moral duties

the borough can offer them.

placed upon it, to ensure that it is doing

Educational achievement will be a key

what a ‘good parent’ would do for the

indicator of how the corporate parent is

children in its care.

doing in this area. Sutton is fortunate to have such a good school system and the

By no means is this a cure all for the

Council should look at ways to utilise this

problems facing Sutton’s looked after

excellence to benefit those in its care. For

children. The insufficiencies outlined by

example, what preparations are made for

the Ofsted Report demonstrate a failure

looked after children to take advantage of

in Sutton Council to do its very best for

Sutton’s selective school system, via the

looked after children, as in its role as a

’11 plus’ entry examination?

corporate parent. Increased awareness among councillors can only help to

The JAR sees an insufficiency in

complement the hard work of Sutton’s

engagement of looked after children and

dedicated staff to do the very best for

young people in ‘consultation, evaluation

some of the most vulnerable in our

and decision making processes for

society.

service planning and design’. Views are not collected or analysed in a way that will enable them to inform the development of the service. Looked after children are service users. As clients of the Council and the services it provides, their views matter. More should be done to collect their views and to reflect them wherever possible.

67  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Special Educational Needs So, what is a Special Educational Need?  

The purpose of the Code of Practice is to give practical guidance to LEAs for the

Section 312 of the Education Act [1996]

discharge of their legal duties under Part

gives the definition of a person with an

IV of the Education Act [1996]. It also

SEN as possessing a ‘significantly greater difficulty in learning than the majority of

provides guidance to governing bodies of maintained schools and to other

children of the same age ’ or having ‘a

agencies, including health and social

disability which prevents or hinders them

services. Its policies are intended to

from making use of educational facilities

enable young people with SENs to ‘reach

of a kind generally provided for children

their full potential, to be included fully in

of the same age in schools within the

their school communities and make a

area of the local education authority .’ .’

successful transition to adulthood.’36 

Sutton Council devised its SEN policy in

Pupils with SENs may require additional

2004 and has implemented it through the

services to help them reach their

‘Inclusion and SEN Action Plan (2004-

potential. Other pupils, albeit a small

2009)’. The driver behind this is to make its work in this area consistent with the

minority, will have SENs of a complexity or severity requiring the LEA to arrange

Special Education Needs Code of Practice

special provision for educational services

(2001) issued by the Department for

in order to cater for difficulties that

Education and Skills in 2001.34 

pupils face. As an LEA Sutton has a responsibility to provide services in

The Code of Practice provides the

accordance with the Code of Practice.

following principles:35  In order to meet these challenges, 1. A child with special educational needs should have their needs met.

Sutton’s SEN policy 2009-2011 enshrines the principles of:37 

2. The special educational needs of children would normally be met in mainstream schools or settings.

1. Inclusion - enabling children with learning difficulties and disabilities to participate fully in family, school and

3. The views of the child should should be

community life. We see this as the key

sought and taken into account.

to safeguarding and promoting the

4. Parents have a vital role to play in

wellbeing of children, to children

supporting their child’s education.

achieving their potential, and to

5. Children with a special educational educational need should be offered full access to a

families leading as “ordinary” lives as

broad, balanced and relevant

possible.

education, including an appropriate

2. Partnership - arrangements whereby

curriculum.

children with learning difficulties and disabilities and parent/carers work

34. Special Education Needs: Code of Practice , DfES/581/2001. 35. Ibid. p. 7. 36. Ibid. p. 6. 37. Special Education Needs Policy 2009-2011. 2009-2011 . Children, Young People and Learning Services, Sutton Council, March 2009.

68  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  alongside statutory and voluntary

(Special Educational Needs

organisations in planning and

Coordination) are provided with advice

reviewing services and holding them

or support from outside specialists, so

to account.

that alternative interventions

3. Integration  - meeting the needs of

additional or different strategies to

children holistically by working

those provided for the pupil through

effectively across organisational boundaries.

School Action can be put in place. The SENCO usually takes the lead although

4. Early intervention intervention and access to

day-to-day provision continues continues to be

services - responding quickly when a

the responsibility of the class or

child’s needs are first identified, and

subject teacher.38  

offering support and services to prevent problems arising in the first

If problems persist, despite the additional

place, rather than waiting for crises to

support provided by School Action Plus, a

occur.

Statement of SEN may come into play.

5. Planning for transitions - anticipating

This is the result of a multi-professional

important life changes and putting in

assessment of the pupil’s needs, in order

place appropriate support. All

to decide if the LEA needs to make

transitions for children with learning

further special educational provision. The

difficulties and disabilities are

LEA will then agree the provision and the

important, none more so than the

pupil will be issued with an SEN

transition to adult services for school

Statement. The Statement acts as a

leavers.   leavers.

legalistic contract between the LEA and the parents of the SEN pupil, determining

The need for additional or different

the provision required after examination

educational provision is provided in three

of the pupil’s detailed educational history

stages: 1) School Action, 2) School

and needs.39 

Action Plus, 3) a statement of SEN. School Action and School Action plus are defined

Each individual school has a day-to-day

in the SEN Code of Practice as follows:

responsibility for its SEN pupils. It determines and publishes its own school

School Action when a class or subject

SEN policy detailing how it intends to put

teacher identifies that a pupil has

the principles from the Code of Practice

special educational needs they

into everyday practice. In partnership

provide interventions that are

with the Council, a proportion of the

additional to or different from those

school’s budget is set specifically for

provided as part of the school’s usual

provision for pupils with SENs, with

differentiated curriculum offer and

additional funding requirements arising

strategies.

from SEN statements. National figures

School Action Plus when the class or

show that 69% of SEN expenditure goes

subject teacher and the SENCO

to SEN pupils with Statements.40 

38. SEN Code of Practice. p.206. 39. A helpful definition is contained in Dilemmas of Difference, Inclusion and Disability , (Routledge), Brahm Norwich, 2007. p.47. 40. Evidence supplied by the Audit Commission to the Education and Skills Committee, ‘Special Educational Needs’, House of Commons Library, Third Report of Session 2005-2006, Volume II, p. 359.

69  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  However, the report identifies the

So, how is Sutton doing?  

relatively high proportion of children and The JAR deems Sutton’s contribution of

young people with SEN statements and

local services to improving outcomes for

those educated outside the borough as

children and young people with learning

important weaknesses in this area.

41

difficulties and or disabilities as ‘good’.   The report identifies major strengths as: •

very good multi-agency work in the

The Challenges: High Numbers of SEN Statements and SEN Pupils Educated Outside The Borough

early identification, assessment and support for children and families with

1. Too Many Statements?

SENs. •

•

effective and well targeted support for

Sutton has a high amount of SEN pupils.

children and families provided by the

Figures obtained by the Education and

children with disabilities social care

Training Policy Group show that the LEA

team.

has issued 622 new SEN statements over

the good overall effectiveness of most

the last five financial years. 43 This is

schools and specialist provision, and

compared to the Royal Borough of

the effective support to schools

Kingston-upon-Thames which has

provided by a very strong advice and

issued 367 SEN statements over the

improvement service.42 

same period. It should be noted that Kingston’s population is approximately

These achievements are to be celebrated

150,000, compared to Sutton’s 180,000.

and the hard work of the Council’s staff to be fully acknowledged.

Curiously, the London Borough of Merton

Figure 9

issued exactly the same number of Statements as Sutton at 622 over five years. Notably, Merton has a similar size population to Sutton at approximately 190,000. According to 2005 figures, pupils with some degree of SEN account for 18% of the school population with 3% having Statements, 10% on School Action and 5% with School Action Plus,44 see Figure 9. Nationally, figures show that approximately 3% of school pupils overall have SEN statements.45 This varies greatly between LEAs, but Sutton is

41. Joint 41. Joint Area Review , p.13-14. 42. Ibid. 43. Figures from November 2008, obtained by the Education and Training Policy Group. 44. Norwich, p.47-48. 45. Ibid.

70  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  regarded as having a high number of

low-statementing LEAs, pupils with and

‘statemented’ pupils. Using school

without SENs performed slightly better on

census figures given to the Education and

average than the national averages for

Training Policy Group, the number of

performance in English and Maths at Key

pupils with SEN statements in Sutton

stages 1 and 3 over a three-year period.

stands at 1,070 46 this means approximately 7% of pupils in Sutton have an SEN statement. This is above the

Sutton should examine if reliance on SEN statementing is having a negative impact

national average even with the marked

on the educational achievement of

variation between LEAs within a range of

resident pupils.

1-5%.47  The same research, carried out by the We need to understand why Sutton has so

DfES, as the DSCF was then known,

many pupils with SEN statements and to

showed that LEAs which had reduced the

analyse their veracity.

number of SEN statements issued, also had a reduced demand for statements. 49 

Government research has shown that ‘low -statementing’ LEAs on average score 48

Sutton will need to examine if it is

higher on SEN effectiveness.  

perceived as a ‘soft touch’ on

Investigations in high and low

Statements; whether it is easier to

statementing areas demonstrate that in

obtain a Statement of SEN, and whether it

igure 10

is desirable to reduce the number of statements issued.

46. SEN Transport , Scrutiny Overview Committee, 20 November 2007, p.4. 47. Reducing Reliance on Statements: An Investigation into Local Lo cal Authority Practice and Outcomes , Anne Pinney, Audit Commission, (DfES Research Paper) 11 February 2004 48. Ibid. p.7. 49. Ibid. p.25

71  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  The Education and Skills Committee

obtaining Statements and potentially

posited the view that SEN statement

adversarial negotiations in the legal-

funding is often eaten up by the

style contractual environment.

bureaucracy that surrounds the statementing process itself.50 Research

2. SEN Transport

has indicated that in low-statementing areas LEAs are spending more on specialist support overall for pupils (with

Sutton Council’s Liberal Democrat administration prompted ferocious

and without Statements) and that they

controversy in late 2008 and early 2009

spend more on provision for pupils with

with its proposals to change SEN pupils’

Statements. Moreover, low-statementing

school transport arrangements. Changes

LEAs reported greater increases in overall

to transport arrangements were needed,

spending on SEN provision.51 

but the way in which the proposals were aired and consultations carried out

Analysis of these expenditure trends for

represents a deep failure for this Council.

low-statementing authorities counters the assumption that reduced

The background is that unsustainable

statementing is a cost cutting exercise.

pressures had accumulated on the

Sutton should also explore whether funds

Council’s General Fund in order to pay for the transport of SEN pupils to specialist

saved by reducing bureaucracy, through

schools outside the London Borough of

reduced statementing, could be invested

Sutton.

in greater support for pupils with SEN. Rapid increases in the diagnosis of pupils In summary, research indicates that there

with ASDs meant that in-borough

appear to be key benefits in reducing LEA

mainstream schools were unable to

reliance on Statements. They are

provide adequate support services.

identified as:

Between March 2003 and August 2007 the number of pupils requiring specialist

•

•

•

A more equitable distribution of SEN

placements outside the borough rose

resources, better reflecting the pattern

from 107 to 236 pupils, an increase of

of needs in individual schools.

120%. In accordance with its legal duties

Greater support for more pupils,

under section 509 (1) of the Education

including those receiving School

Act [1996] the LEA has to provide

Action and School Action Plus.

transport, if necessary, free of charge.

Less SEN-related bureaucracy and

These pressures reached breaking point

paperwork, freeing up SENCOs and

when the 2007/08 SEN transport budget

other support teams. This will also

reached £3,591,000 with £591,000

allow more time for classroom

overspent. In short, this was a runaway

observations, greater work with

budget. Things had to change.

colleagues working with pupils •

through reduced administration.

Costs had sky-rocketed because of a

Improved relations with parents and

number of factors: the number of

schools, reducing the struggle of

children transported; the number of

50. Education and Skills Committee , House of Commons, p.359. 51. Pinney, pp. 28-30. Note: This T his research is based on samples from 18 LEAs on differing approaches to reported

SEN expenditure.

72

 

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  routes and loading efficiency of pupils on

4. Anxiety among parents about the

and off vehicles; the length and the cost

health and wellbeing of children with

of each route. In some instances the

the introduction of Pick-up Points and

length of routes to and from specialist

the additional challenges this would

placements were many miles. Efficiency

create in a daily routine.

in the loading of pupils (literally the

5. Parental concern that they be late to

number of pupils per vehicle) and the sheer distances involved in the transport

work as a result of journey times to Pick-up Points, thus placing

of pupils to and from school showed no

employment at risk.  risk. 

sign of improving.52  The proposed policies attracted Sutton was right to examine the

considerable political controversy with

unsustainable costs of this budget.

pointed criticism from the Opposition and an Independent Councillor. The

The Council sent out a consultation pack

Council’s image was damaged in local

to the parents and carers of SEN pupils -

and region print and broadcast media,

545 packs were distributed. This effort

including London Tonight. Two petitions

garnered a response of 128. The vast

were lodged against the policy changes.

majority of responses were ‘overwhelmingly negative’ to the

The amount of money which would be

Council’s prime proposal of ‘Pick-up

saved by the changes also attracted

Points’.53 The Pick-up Points would

criticism. The reduction was projected at

replace the door-to-door service for SEN

£200,000 from a predicted total budget

pupils after certain assessment criteria

of £4,300,000, a saving of roughly 4.7%

had been met.

overall.

Negative parental feedback to the

Any savings in Council budgets are to be

consultation included:

welcomed, but given the controversy and distress of service users - both parents,

1. Parents’ preference for the existing

carers and SEN pupils alike - was a

door-to-door collection

saving of approximately 4.7% from the

arrangements.

overall budget really worth it?

2. Concern that if designated Pick-up Points were introduced parents would

A balance must be struck between cost

have difficulty getting other children

savings and efficiency, and the impact

to school.

that such savings will have on service-

3. Parents concerns that the stress fo forr

users.

the families will be increased with the introduction of Pick-Up Points and

As a result of the media furore, the th e hard

consequently that there would be an

work of many members of the Council

increased demand for respite care with

staff was damaged, not to mention the

additional cost burdens entailed.

corporate reputation of the Council as a whole.

52. Report from Sharman Lawson, Executive Head of Parent, Pupil and Student Services, Scrutiny Overview Committee, 20th November 2007, p.3. 53. Report of Executive Head of Parent, Pupil and Student Services, ‘Review of SEN Transport Policy’ , Scrutiny Overview Committee (25 November 2008), The Executive (1 December 2008), p.2.

73  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Feedback from parents shows that the

use pickup points is small the

Council did not communicate well with its

question must be asked how viable

stakeholders in this area. This is ironic

will that be.

considering that improved

“At the conclusion of the whole

communications in the provision of

process, it would appear that cost

services to SEN pupils and parents has

savings would be minimal. The worry

54

been a priority for the Council.  

and stress that parents have endured in addition to the stress already in

As a corollary to the above points,

their lives will not have achieved any

Opposition Spokesman for Education,

meaningful savings for the Council.

Councillor Peter Wallis summed up the

There is nothing wrong with looking

issue with the following points:

critically at budgets - perhaps there are savings to be made in other ways;

“This process started as a proposal to

looking at the way transport is

save £360,000. This figure has been

organised. This Liberal Democrat

reduced to approximately £200,000

Council must do more to save money

by taking children with Autistic

where it can, whilst providing the core

Spectrum Disorders out of the

services on which many vulnerable

equation when considering pickup points. It is possible that the number

members of our community rely, but it must do this with a human face and

of children who can use pickup points

with humane compassion for those

will be further reduced; in addition,

who need our help.”

55 

 

every child will have to have a risk assessment to ascertain whether the

Because Sutton’s schools cannot cope

use of a pickup point is appropriate;

with the rapid rise in demand for

as yet the cost of these risk

specialist places, SEN pupils have to

assessments is not known. If the

travel far and wide, outside the

number of children who are able to

borough, to access the support they need. Sutton must meet the needs of SEN

Figure 11 Developing Local Provision  Provision 

Expected Outcomes  Outcomes  new

Planned expansion of new bases at Green

provision within the borough for children

Wrythe Primary School, Glenthorne High

and young people with ASD.

School and Carew Manor School achieved

To

support

the

development

of

on time. Required support to Stanley Park High School for the development of their base. To review out of borough placements in

Ongoing analysis of data relating to

independent and non-maintained special

-borough placements and opportunities

schools and plan for those needs to be met

identified to invest to save. Review of these

within the borough.

placements at Year 5 and Years 9/10 with a

out

view to bringing pupils back into borough at next phase transfer. 54. Children’s Transport Scrutiny Task Group – Final Report , Chaired by Councillor Sheila Siggins, Learning Services Performance Committee, 5 July 2005, p.2 th

55. Full Council, Monday 15  December 2008.

74

 

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  pupils within the borough, thus reducing

The excellent educational apparatus is

the need for expensive transport costs.

here but it is not being put to work to the

Sutton’s SEN Action Plan (2009-11) has

benefit of young people who live here.

set itself ongoing targets including those

Pupils from outside the borough

shown in Figure 11.

outnumber resident pupils in every grammar school in Sutton. In contrast, in

The Council’s efforts to bring SEN provision into the borough, in order to

our non-selective secondary schools resident pupils outnumber out of

prevent long and costly travel for pupils

borough pupils in every school except

to special placements outside of Sutton,

one – St. Philomena’s.

is to be welcomed. It is easy to see why our grammar schools Cost savings are unlikely to be

are so popular because they are

immediate, and nor is it likely that all

excellent. We should be justifiably proud

specialist education needs can be

of our non-selective secondary schools

provided within the borough, but the goal

too.

of invest to save  is  is a prudent one. Investment soon will save money later.

For decades the political leadership of

It should also be noted that providing

Sutton Council has been undermining Sutton’s grammar schools, partially

specialist provision within our borough

through silence but also actively. This

boundaries has an economic imperative,

report has uncovered disturbing double

but there is a strong moral one too. With

standards from the local Liberal

specialist placements closer to home the

Democrat political establishment. The

lives of parents, carers and the pupils

Council’s Lib Dem administration has

themselves will hopefully be improved as

consistently refused to publicly signal

a natural consequence.

their support for grammar schools when challenged to do so by the Conservative

Conclusions Secondary Education Sutton has much to be proud of in its work surrounding children and young people, but just like virtually all other areas of policy and performance, it is a borough of contradictions. Our schools are excellent. As an LEA, Sutton is rampant on national league tables. But the jewel in the crown of our educational asset, the selective school system, is not representative of the achievements of resident pupils.

Opposition.

We prou should justifiably  proud d ofbe our non selective secondary  schools too. The borough’s two MPs - both formerly Sutton councillors - are not immune from criticism. Both have voted to abolish the United Kingdom’s remaining grammar schools despite posturing as defenders of ‘Sutton Schools For Sutton Children’ locally. In fact, one of them supported a Council motion opposing selective education in Sutton.

75  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Primary Education

legal and moral duties to look after vulnerable children. Over the last decade,

Similarly, the LEA has done nothing to

this has been a fast moving policy area

prepare resident pupils for the grammar

and Sutton has become a ‘corporate

school examination. With such an

parent’.

excellent resource on our doorstep, should the Council not be using its influence on primary schools to open the door of opportunity to local children?

Sutton must do what a  good parent parent would do.

We are also justly proud of our primary

Despite being a clunky, unappealing and

schools and because between 82-86% of

uncomfortable tone the duties are clear:

primary school pupils live in the borough,

Sutton must do what a good parent

they give a good indication of the

would do in promoting the welfare of

educational achievement of resident

children and young people in its social

pupils at primary level. However, there

care. This duty needs to have greater

are some significant variations in

understanding among councillors,

attainment that require further

officers and the general public. With

examination. Regardless of the favourable extrapolation of attainment in

heightened awareness even higher standards of care will follow.

averages supplied by the DSCF, why are over half of primary school pupils

A recent review by Ofsted has shown

achieving below average scores for Key

‘insufficient’ performance in several

Stage 2 core subjects?

areas. It also highlights major strengths. Sutton does some things very well and

Should the Council not be using its influence on  primary schools to open the door of opportunity to local childr children? en?

other things not so well. This presents a

Most of Sutton’s primary schools are

Special Educational Needs

contradiction. As this report has pointed out: children and young people in social care are service-users, they are clients of the Council. It should always hold this in mind when working to drive up the standards of its service.

achieving above average attainment levels for core subjects but some are

Our borough has above average numbers

missing targets by a long way. Here is an

of young people with SEN statements. We

apparent contradiction. We need to

need to know why. But what we need to

unravel it.

do now is to ensure that the highest standards of specialist provision are

Looked After Children Are Council Clients

given to young people who already find

Too

day-to-day life difficult. In doing so, we must also remember we owe a duty to

The test of a decent society is how it

the parents and carers of SEN children

treats its vulnerable members. Sutton has

and young people.

76  

Education and Young People: Opening The Door Of Opportunity To Local Children  The policy disaster surrounding SEN

reduced paperwork and an increase in

transport illustrates how the Council

time spent directly with SEN pupils.

failed carers and parents, as well as the

Sutton needs to be brutally honest with

direct service users themselves.

itself about how it deals with SEN

Disastrously, the political leadership of

statementing. The contradiction here

the Council and the organs through

could be that a cultural eagerness to

which it communicates could only see the savings and not the people it would

provide SEN statements is actually an obstacle to higher standards of provision

impact upon.

for SENs.

Firstly, why are we transporting out vulnerable young people with SENs far and wide for specialist provision? Inevitably there will be SEN pupils who need out-of-borough help, but we need to do our level best to find ways to provide it closer to home.

The benefits of improved SEN statementing will help the development of vulnera vulnerable ble children as well as being in the interests of prudence for the Local Authority.

Secondly, is Sutton unwittingly reliant on SEN statements? Research shows that there are clear benefits to reducing reliance on statements. Benefits include

77  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

78  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure

79  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Introduction

confused, lacking direction and a duplication of school-based youth activities.

Youth Provision: Effective, Not Expensive Cultural barriers are preventing effective When times are tough and budgets are

provision of youth services in Sutton, the

tight, youth provision - as a discretionary budget in local government - is normally the first thing to be cut. The T he Borough has a young population of approximately

most pervasive being a deeply ingrained risk aversion to trusting our voluntary sector organisations. A lack of leadership from the political administration in the

22,500 people aged 10-19, forming approximately 13% of Sutton residents.1 The Council currently spends £1.7million on youth services.2 Sutton residents appear to allocate significant importance to youth services. Research commissioned by the Council indicates that 48% of residents think ‘activities for teenagers’ is an issue requiring the most improvement.3 This is unsurprising given that the presence of young people on our streets can cause alarm and foster fear of antisocial behaviour. This fear can be warranted and unwarranted.4 The link between effective youth provision and reductions in antisocial behaviour is established. It is therefore disappointing that Sutton

Some youth provision in Sutton replicates schemes offered elsewhere.

Council’s efforts are largely ineffective. The recent closure of three youth groups and inadequate support for struggling community groups shows that effective community-based youth provision does not feature highly in the Liberal Democrat

Civic Offices has lead to an overly cautious outlook that only goes for quick hit short-term provision of youth services. As it stands youth services in Sutton seem to replicate PSHE lessons.5

administration’s list of priorities. The youth provision offered tends to be

1. Figures from Sutton and Merton Primary Care Trust, Joint Trust, Joint Strategic Needs Assessment Assessment 2008, Section 3: Community and Health Profile (Core Dataset). The male and female population are almost at parity. 2. For breakdowns of Sutton Council’s total gross spends, see: http://www.sutton.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3352&p=0  http://www.sutton.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=3352&p=0  3. Place Survey  2008-09 , Ipsos MORI. MORI.   4. Local research indicates that young people are particularly blighted by the fear of crime of people in the 20s and 30s age bracket, see: Fear of Crime , A Report of the Sustainable Communities Communities Scrutiny Committee, March 2009, p.17. 5. Personal Social and Health Education, see: http://www.qcda.gov.uk/7185.aspx. http://www.qcda.gov.uk/7185.aspx.

80  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure We contend that the short-term nature of

The differences in life expectancy are

Sutton’s youth services is programme-

stark. For example, there is a difference

focused, rather than person-focused. A

of nearly nine years for men and seven

key example of this is the controversial

and a half for women between the t he most

project, The Sutton Life Centre . This

and least deprived Wards in our

multimillion pound project has been

Borough.7 Again, the socioeconomic

fashioned as a cure-all for youth services in Sutton.

status of the area in which residents live seems to correlate with health status.

It is our view that youth provision must be effective and long-term rather than expensive and short-term. Most importantly, we should allow our voluntary youth workers sector, within the Borough and without, to shine. Ingrained Health Inequalities

The most important component to a good quality of life is health. Despite having some of the best health outcomes

The 18th Century Nonsuch Mansion came into public ownership in 1937.

in London, there are ingrained health inequalities varying from Ward to Ward in

Sutton is a Borough of Contradictions in

Sutton.6 The most noticeable difference

health needs with some areas facing far

can be seen in the socioeconomic divides

greater challenges than others. We need

in the Borough.

to understand why, so that we can push for measures to equalise health and

Poor and more densely populated areas

wellbeing outcomes across the London

appear to be more at risk from

Borough of Sutton.

cardiovascular and cancer related mortality with Wards like Sutton Central,

Heritage, Leisure and Sport

St. Helier, Wandle Valley and the Wrythe featuring the highest. Hospital

Our Borough has a rich heritage and, as

admissions for these Wards are on

outlined in the Planning section of The

average higher than Wards like Cheam,

State of Sutton , this contributes to the

Belmont and Beddington South.

localised character of our area. According to English Heritage, Sutton has six

These variations are also reflected in life

Scheduled Monuments, 174 Listed

expectancy, although life expectancy has

Buildings, and one Registered Park.

risen considerably since the period 1995-

Whitehall in Cheam, Nonsuch Mansion in

1997, across the board. Female life

Nonsuch Park and Little Holland House in

expectancy outstrips male in every Ward

Carshalton attract much of the Council’s

with Carshalton Central being the closest.

attention.

6. The State of Sutton: An Economic, Social and Environmental Profile of Sutton , Capital Ambition, December 2007, p.8.

7. Joint 7. Joint Needs Assessment 2008 , Executive Summary, p.5

81  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  The Council cannot be responsible for all

the schools to bring them to wider use?

of our local heritage. As we have seen,

The kind of confusion created by the

with the exception of Whitehall

Council’s political leadership over Cheam

(thankfully now refurbished after much

Leisure Centre does not inspire

lobbying) places like the Old Rectory (the

confidence in Sutton residents in its

Ecology Centre in Carshalton) and The

capacity to provide leisure facilities. The

Lodge are falling into a state of disrepair. These are community assets and we are

geographical distribution of leisure facilities is not equitable across the board

the caretakers for the next generation

with the western part of the Borough

who, in turn, will be the caretakers for

suffering in comparison to other areas.

their successors. Council policies need to reflect this and make full use of our voluntary community in the preservation and enhancement of our heritage. As we have outlined, there are health inequalities in our Borough that have made where we live a determining factor of our state of health. Sport and leisure are central ingredients for a decent quality of life and wellbeing. Figures from Sport England’s Active People Survey show that Sutton has a below average participation in sport compared to the rest of London and England.

An innovative project with David Lloyd Leisure has given girls at Nonsuch High School access to superb sporting facilities on site.

The Olympics are fast approaching and

Leisure in our Borough is not just

present Sutton, as a London Borough,

confined to sport. A core part of the

with a once in a lifetime opportunity to

Council’s leisure function is its library

utilise such a global event. As a local

service. The library in the Civic Offices in

authority Sutton needs to see how it can

St. Nicholas Way is considered by the

invest long-term in sporting facilities

Council to be the jewel in the crown of

within the Borough. Are we maximising

leisure provision. While the library in the

the potential of Sutton Arena as much as

centre of Sutton is a valuable resource re source

possible? Where is the political leadership

and used by many residents, we need to

on the issue?

ask whether other libraries across the Borough are losing out to the centre of

The Borough’s schools have some

Sutton. Visitor numbers to the Civic

excellent sporting facilities. These can be

Offices library are strong but in other

established without the involvement of

areas they are far smaller. The spectre of

the Council. For example, Nonsuch High

the Sutton Life Centre will place an as yet

School for Girls has a partnership with

unknown pressure on Council budgets.

the David Lloyd Sports and Leisure Club. 8

What impact will it have on our library

Other schools have excellent and

service? Can we do even more to expand

accessible facilities, why not work with

the accessibility of our library service?

8. See: http://www.davidlloyd.co.uk/ http://www.davidlloyd.co.uk/.. The club is situated on the school grounds.

82  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure

Youth Services: Cutting Antisocial Behaviour  Effective use of youth services can

reductions in crime. See Figure 1. 11 

provide a real alternative to crime and

‘Boredom’ is frequently cited by young

antisocial behaviour on Sutton’s streets,

people as a reason why they or their

without making young people feel

friends get into trouble. Research by the

‘invisible ’’..9 This benefits not just the young people in question; it has very real

Department of Education at Brunel University has shown that boredom

benefits for the local community too.

among young people is considered by

Statistics used by one of the leading

them to be a major driver for crime and

voluntary youth organisations in the

antisocial behaviour.12 The responses

United Kingdom, Clubs for Young People

show that the majority of both male and

(CYP), show that 52% of young people say

female young people agree with the

that being involved in their local club had

proposition that boredom causes crime,

changed their lives.10 

as shown in Figure 2.

Research also indicates that on housing

Boredom is not - and never should be -

estates where young people are at risk of

an excuse for crime and antisocial

falling into antisocial activities, an established club for young people which

behaviour. But as a Council we need to examine the root causes of these

provides somewhere to go, something to

behaviours before they happen and so

do and someone to talk to, can reduce

prior to the damage they can cause.

the presence of drugs and contribute to

Figure 1.

T he Effects of an Established Established Youth You th Club on Housing Estates   s 30%   n   o    i    t 25%   c   u    d 20%   e   r   e 15%   g   a    t 10%   n   e   c 5%   r   e    P 0%

Reduction in presenseof of cocaine cocaine Presence

Reduction in overall drug activity

Reduction in crime overall

9. Annual Report 2005/06: Supporting young people to change communities , Clubs for Young People (CYP),  (CYP),  p 6. 10. Source: CYP Research 2005. 11. Ibid. 12. What Works? An Exploration of the Value of Informal Education Work with Young People , A Report of Research Completed for the National Association of Clubs for Young People, by Dr Simon Bradford, Professor Valerie Hey

and Ms Fin Cullen, Department for Education, Brunel University, March 2004, p. 36.

83  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 2.

"Young people commit commit crime crime because “Y “Young oung people becauseof ofbordom" boredom.” 60%

Male

51% 50%

Female

42% 40%

33%

30%

25% 16% 15%

20% 8% 10%

10% 0% Strongly agree/agree

Strongly Strong

Don't know

Not stated

disagree/disagree

Preventing crime and antisocial behaviour

fears as older residents, for example dark

in young people is better than having to

alleys, but that apprehension is more

cure it. 

potent in relation to public transport. 13 

In Sutton we have no reason to expect

Disturbingly, evidence given to the SSPS

this to be any different. We have explored

and presented to a Council Committee

the concepts of ‘signal crime’ and ‘signal

shows that young people have said that

disorders’ in the Crime, Antisocial

people in an even younger age bracket

Behaviour and Fear  chapter  chapter earlier on in

(12 to 13 upwards) are a source of fear

this report. It is obvious that bored young

but that this is a “fact “fact of life ””..14 

people hanging around on street corners can intimidate some residents,

We believe that effective provision of

particularly older people, and can give the impression of signal disorder,

youth services can help to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour. 

therefore creating a fear of crime. We also note that young people can be Young people experience fear of crime as

the victims of antisocial behaviour and

well, particularly from those in the 20s to

fear that surrounds it. It is clear that the

30s age bracket who may binge drink and

effective provision of youth services has a

become aggressive in the streets. Surveys

role to play in reducing the fear of crime

carried out by the Safer Sutton

for young people as well. 

Partnership Service (SSPS) show that young people generally have the same

13. Fear of Crime , Sustainable Communities Report, p. 5-6. 14. Ibid, p.6.

84  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure

No Political Leadership: Leadership: Effective Effective Not Expensive Provision In the last three years, three youth

Cultivating these relationships should be

groups have been shut down. Centre 21

more than a ‘one-off’ experience. The

in Alcorn Close, Sutton and Club

method of providing the character

Constellation on London Road, North

building opportunities that foster respect

Cheam were axed by Sutton Council and The Point café in Cheam, run by

and responsibility in young people, who may otherwise lack appropriate role

volunteers from a local church was also

models, takes time.18 It is developmental,

closed. Centre 21 has now been

not instant.

demolished to make way for the expensive Sutton Life Centre. This project has attracted considerable controversy on the grounds of cost in the local and regional media. 15  The Council’s political leadership seems to have opted for expensive youth provision rather than effective options. The Life Centre is due to cost roughly £8.5million and has a new library, youth centre, with a climbing wall and a multi-use games area. The main attraction has been described as a multimedia indoor space to teach ‘citizenship’ to school

The one-off experience of the Sutton Life Centre is not an

children and teenagers complete with

alternative to mentoring and relationship-based youth provision.

virtual reality drug dealers and the dangers of internet paedophiles.16 This

The Life Centre presents a facility, a

new Centre will even include a movie-set

building, and not a mentor figure for

style street.

17

young people who want and need effective youth services.

But does this really meet the needs of youth provision? Effective youth provision

Will a young person who is buckling

is person-based, providing young people

under the pressures of exam stress find

with adult contact in order to build

the kind of advice and adult relationship-

relationships. Often these relationships

based support in a multimedia

are not formed at home and the role of

experience next to a climbing wall? We

an outside adult mentor is needed.

argue no. 

15. Evening Standard, 5 May 2009. 16. ITV London Tonight, 6 May 2009. http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/sutton-life-centre-approved/1994418.article   17. See: http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/sutton-life-centre-approved/1994418.article 18. What Works?  CYP  CYP Research Paper, p. 51.

85  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Spending the equivalent of 10% of the

Local government faces many budgetary

Council’s annual council tax intake will

burdens and it would be unrealistic to

not address the need for ongoing

suggest otherwise. However, even though

character building youth provision. 

the benefits of youth groups are not necessarily tangible or quantifiable to the

Prominent theorists in the field of youth

extent of appeasing the most stringent

provision put the argument that the establishment of “trust  “trust ” is the

accountant, they do not have to cost the earth.

cornerstone of the relationship between the youth worker and the young person.

Vast untapped resources of voluntary

Without sufficient levels of trust, which in

sector organisations have hitherto been

turn generate respect, relationships

wasted by the Council’s political

cannot be established.19 Simply creating

leadership. 

an institution and giving youth provision credentials will not address the needs of

There are national organisations which

Sutton’s young people.

the Council’s leadership seem reluctant to draw inspiration from or to learn from.

People create relationships, not buildings

For example, Clubs for Young People

with gimmicks. This is the key to effective youth provision.

(CYP) has 3,500 clubs and projects nationwide providing places to go and things to do for young people. CYP has

We argue that the Sutton Life Centre

30,000 volunteers who work to build

presents a short-term approach to youth

relationships with young people as

services. It makes the political leadership

positive role models.

of the Council look busy. That is not to say that its aims are not worthy, w orthy, or even

Organisations like CYP place an explicit

noble, but its effectiveness is in question.  

emphasis on the need for relationship building and powerful role models.

Other commentators have said that the

Sutton Council could learn a lot from

young person’s identification with their

their approach, which is not costly, but it

youth club contributed to the

seems to avoid doing so.

effectiveness of clubs.20 If we accept the view that youth groups, and the adult

In the introduction to this chapter we

workers contained therein, have a

outlined what we see as the ‘replication’

powerful and positive effect on certain

or ‘duplication’ of school-based lessons

young people and that the character

in PSHE as included on the national

building or transformative effects are

curriculum. PSHE includes lessons in

beneficial in reducing antisocial

personal wellbeing, concentrating on the

behaviour and a propensity to crime, it

personal development of pupils including

must therefore be counterproductive to

sex and relationships, as well as on drugs

cut three youth groups to make way for

education.

one, impersonal and expensive ‘one-off experience’ like the Sutton Life Centre. 19. For example London School of Economics professor Richard Sennett, Respect: The Formation of Character in an Age of Inequality , Allen Lane, 2003. 20. Bradford, Hey and Cullen in What Works?  

86  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure In 2008 Sutton Council launched its

Sutton  report  report we have explored the

‘URBIE’ mobile youth service. The URBIE

notion that Sutton Council’s

bus tours the Borough as a ‘detached

administration suffers from a conceited

youth service’ and by its own description

notion that it, and only it, is the solution to many of the problems our Borough

“the team aims to engage young

faces. Volunteers engaged in youth work

people in group discussion to encourage values and opinions around

know what the issues are and they know what they want to do about it. They have

topics such as alcohol and drug

the passion and the conviction. This is

education, sexual health education,

why they volunteered in the first place.

personal safety, community awareness

They do not want to wait for the

and personal and social

bureaucratic cogs of Sutton Council to

development.”” 21   development.

grind into activity.

So, what is the difference between the URBIE bus as a voluntary taxpayer-funded scheme and the compulsory PSHE lessons young people receive at school?  Answer: Not a lot. The URBIE bus is simply repeating the issues covered by PSHE in schools. Youth services, by their very nature, should not feel like school. The concept of a ‘detached youth team’ is a sound one. It means that

The Urban Bus Information Education Vehicle (URBIE) moves around

the youth work is proactive and

the borough aiming to reach children who would not or could not

looks for young people it can

get to a youth club.

provide services to. But we have to

Sutton is home to a local organisation

question whether the services it provides

called ‘Elevate’.22 This is a Christian

are effective in that they are repeating

community organisation run as a limited

what has already been said in the

company called Sutton Ramp Events

classroom.

Limited. Trained volunteers run events for up to 300 participants teaching young

The URBIE is an in-house service,

people how to skate and to ride, running

provided by the Council and therefore

competitions and fund raising sessions.

subject to the political priorities of the

The most notable competitions are held

ruling political party. We also have to

in the St. Helier Open Space. In their own

question whether the Council leadership

words they aim to work with other

are the best arbiters for the provision of

community organisations to build an

youth services. Elsewhere in this State of

21. See: http://www.suttonyouth.com/en/1/detachedyouthteam.html. http://www.suttonyouth.com/en/1/detachedyouthteam.html. 22. See: http://www.elevate-sutton.com/aboutus.html  http://www.elevate-sutton.com/aboutus.html 

87  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  indoor skate/ramp facility in Sutton so

“ [There] has been an explosion of

that young people can skate and ride in

bureaucracy, cost and irritation,

safety at all times.

endless upheavals and pointless reorganisations, the elbowing aside of colourful, human, informal relationships based on common sense and trust in favour of the grey mechanical, joyless mantras of the master planner with his calculations, projections and impact assessments.”

24

 

The kind of malaise that Mr Cameron describes in the speech above is not too far away from what can be described here in Sutton. There are strong cultural barriers to embracing the invaluable role that the voluntary sector undoubtedly has to play in the provision of youth services. The barriers can be described as health and safety based, a grand sense that inhouse solutions are the best, and a fear Elevate is just one example of Churches and Faith

factor rooted in the worry that greater

Groups penetrating deep and wide into the local

trust in the voluntary sector will not work

youth community.

and complaints may be received.

We pay tribute to the work of Elevate and

These barriers receive a buttress in the

the organisation’s chairman, Judith

form of a distinct lack of political will

Smith, for their volunteer work with

from the Liberal Democrats to remove

young people.23

them. They are blocking what could be an excellent cultural shift towards truly

It provides a great example of how the

effective youth provision, that can be

voluntary sector can flourish in providing

achieved with the Council acting as a

youth facilities.

facilitator to youth services, rather than

David Cameron has expressed his exasperation at the relationship between

its current, confused, directionless and ineffective approach. 

community groups and organs of the State which can suppress the work of such voluntary sector communities by saying:

23. In September 2008 Judith Smith won the London Week of Peace Volunteer Award for the work she does in the community. 24. The Rt Hon. David Cameron MP to the Campaign to Protect Rural England, 12 May 2008.

88  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure

Health Inequalities: A Barrier To Wellbeing Sutton is a Borough of Contradictions in

Care Trust in a map of Sutton and

terms of the geographical and

Merton.26

socioeconomic health inequalities that mark our Borough. Where residents live, according to official figures from the Primary Care Trust’s Joint Trust’s Joint Strategic Needs Assessment  (JSNA)  (JSNA) 25  with Merton, has a significant bearing on life expectancy, the risk of cardiovascular mortality and cancer related mortality. The Wrythe, St. Helier, Wandle Valley and Sutton Central appear to have greater health problems than other parts of the Borough like Belmont, Cheam, and

Obesity treatment takes up to 9% of the NHS budget. Figures show that the problem prob lem is especially acute in South West London.

Beddington South. As a key indicator, the likelihood of

The link between obesity and cardiovascular mortality is well

cardiovascular mortality, which is linked

established. Research from the Health

to exercise and lifestyle, differs

Survey for England 27 provided to the

considerably from area to area. Figure 3

London Health observatory shows that

shows the Ward by Ward difference in the

South West London (including Sutton) has

standardised mortality ratio (SMR) for

higher levels of its population classed as

cardiovascular mortality and Figure 4

‘obese’ than all of the other strategic

(overleaf) illustrates mortality likelihoods

health authority regions in London. It also

in the area covered by the NHS Primary

shows that the South West area is well

Figure 3.

above the England averages, as illustrated in Figure 5.28 According to the

25. The JSNA figures are provided by the London L ondon Health Observatory (LHO) 2008. 26. JSNA, p. 24. 27. The Health Survey for England is a Department D epartment of Health annual publication focusing on national health indicators such as cardio-vascular disease, physical activity, and eating habits. 28. Figures available at: http://www.lho.org.uk/viewResource.aspx?id=8942 http://www.lho.org.uk/viewResource.aspx?id=8942  

89  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 4.

figures, obesity in South West London

percentile for regional and England

spiked in the early part of this century.

averages, but above that of our neighbouring authority in Merton.29 

Sutton’s health profile states that obesity in adults is better than the England

Figures show that more obese people live

average but that obesity in children is

in our part of London than anywhere else.

worse. In fact, childhood obesity in

They also show that the likelihood of

Sutton is approaching the 25% worst

cardiovascular mortality is greater in the

Figure 5.

29. JNSA, p. 55.

90  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure less affluent parts of our Borough. When

lifestyles and exercise can reduce the

these two facts are put together it is

likelihood of residents in these areas to

accurate to say that Sutton is faced with

develop such health problems.

the challenge of tackling obesity and the health problems it poses. Tellingly, the

Sutton Council has schemes which

lifestyle of residents has been described

promote active lifestyles, but it needs to

as ‘average’.30

look seriously at what more it can do to tackle the geographical health

If one maintains, as we do, that health he alth is

inequalities in our Borough.

a core component in the quality of life of Sutton residents and that the health

The Mayor of London is currently putting

status of local people shows considerable

together a Health Inequalities Strategy for

variance from Ward to Ward, the Council

London.31 Sutton Council’s political

should look at ways to address these

leadership should look closely at what he

geographical inequalities. 

proposes and also take stock of the work in other London Borough Councils, like

According to the cardiovascular SMR

Ealing, which have produced their own

figures in Figure 4, only one Ward has the

localised strategies to tackle this issue. 32

‘least likely to die’ rating, namely Carshalton Central. Merton has seven Wards with that rating. Four Sutton Wards rate as ‘most likely to die’. Active

Sutton & Merton Primary Care Trust’s programme, Better Healthcare Closer To Home

33

 seeks to reshape health

care in the area, developing more community-based community-based care. This is due to inclu include de a £140 million refurbishment of St Helier Hospital.

30. The State of Sutton: An Economic, Social and Environmental Profile of Sutton , p.8. 31. See: http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/priorities/health/health-strategy.jsp. Former Mayor Ken Livingstone began consultation on a draft strategy to tackle health inequalities. Mayor Boris Johnson has said that he will use the consultation responses to draft a Health Inequalities Strategy which will be published later on this year. 32. Evolving a Healthier Community for All: Ealing's Health Inequalities Strategy (2005-2010)  (2005-201 0) , London Borough of Ealing, see: http://www.ealing.gov.uk/services/council/strategies_and_policies/health http://www.ealing.gov.uk/services/council/strategies_and_policies/health_inequalities_strategy/ _inequalities_strategy/   33. See http://www.betterhealthcare.org.uk/ http://www.betterhealthcare.org.uk/  

91  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Leisure: An Essential Part of Wellbeing  Sport: Low Participation

Sport England’s ‘Active People Survey’

High Potential

activities as ‘low’ at ranging between

rates our participation rates in exercise 13.3% and 19.4%.35 Sport England figures

Evidence shows that parts of our Borough

also show that there has been no change

face greater problems with cardiovascular

in participation rates over the last few

health issues than others. This is

years with Sutton remaining in the

unsurprising given the fact that Sutton

bottom 25% regionally and nationally.36 

has low participation rates in regular

Figure 6 illustrates the depressing picture

exercise activities, yet with the

of Sutton’s participation rates in the

forthcoming Olympics and the Mayor of

Greater London context.

London’s commitment to work with London’s authorities, a unique

The wide variation in levels of

opportunity has presented itself to

participation does not paint a favourable

remedy this issue. Sutton, like other

picture for Sutton and many other outer

Boroughs, has high potential to use sport

London Boroughs like Enfield, Havering,

to tackle the health inequalities that have

Bexley, Waltham Forest, Hounslow and

taken root.

Harrow. The Mayor of London and the

Figure 6.34

Commissioner for Sport, Kate Hoey, are

34. A Sporting Future for London , Mayor of London, Greater London Authority, April 2009, p.16. Image provided to the Mayor’s Office by Sport England. 35. Active People Survey 2, 2007-08 , Sport England, p.2.

36. Active People Survey – London, Headline Results , December 2006.

92  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure giving their attention to the problem of

Sutton residents are being charged for

participation across London with bold

the Olympics and the Council’s

steps to get more people active. In

administration should lobby the Mayor’s

particular, the Mayor of London’s

Office and the Olympics Minister for an

sporting strategy is firm in its

equitable share of the benefits.  

commitment to tackle inequality in sporting activities, which specifically highlights those in lower socioeconomic

The benefits are, of course, more than financial and we hope that Sutton Council

groups.37 

will grasp this great opportunity to address the health inequalities that scare

Mayor Johnson’s commitment to making

our Borough. 

sporting activities open to all is very welcome in the Sutton context, given our

The Mayor’s strategy also pledges

analysis of the pockets of health

support to ‘local initiatives and innovative

inequality that exist. 

approaches’. The build-up to the Olympics is set to generate considerable

Sutton Council’s leadership must commit

publicity as well as heightened public

to working with the Mayor of London to

awareness of sport and the issues that

use the opportunity of the forthcoming Olympics and its long-term impact on

surround it. Sport England has established an ‘innovation fund’ to

London’s sporting infrastructure to make

identify and pilot new ideas in what it

it work for Sutton. Higher quality facilities

calls ‘community sport’.40 The Mayor of

will attract and inspire higher quality

London has made £15.5million available

young athletes. We celebrate the efforts

over the next three years for small grass

of Councillor Eric Howell who has lobbied

roots initiatives to increase participation

the Council’s Executive Head of Leisure

in sport locally.

and Libraries for high quality facilities, specifically a hammer cage for Sutton

The submission of ideas to the Sport

Arena, which will upgrade the site,

England innovation fund closed on 10

attracting the country’s top athletes. We

August 2009. Sutton did not submit any

need to use the facilities we38have got and upgrade them if necessary.  

ideas for the latest round for the innovation fund.41 We argue that this shows a dearth of ambition from the

The previous Mayor has been unabashed

leadership of the Council in trying to

in his admission that his administration

obtain funding for fresh ideas in

only bid for the Olympics in order to

promoting community sport. 

plough billions of pounds in investment into London’s East End.39 We think that

We hope that the political leadership of

the Olympics should pass on benefit to

Sutton Council will not be so short-

all of London, not just the East End.  

sighted as to fail to work with the Mayor

37. Ibid, p. 22. 38. The Hammer Cage in question has been bid for and will cost £20,000. £2 0,000. 39. The Evening Standard , 24 May 2008. 40. See Sport England: http://www.sportengland.org/funding/innovation_fund.aspx http://www.sportengland.org/funding/innovation_fund.aspx   41. Note in 2004 Sutton Council did submit an application for funding to Sport England for a scheme with the same name for ‘Active Pathways Funding’ to help to promote community sports groups for the new Phoenix

Centre, on the Roundshaw Estate.

93  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  of London to access funds for grass roots

A replacement for Cheam Baths does not

increased participation in sports and

have to be a groundbreaking, cutting

physical activities. 

edge, or innovative leisure centre. It needs to be functional and to provide the

We have local sporting assets in our

facilities which local people want and

schools. Earlier we mentioned Nonsuch

need in terms of equitable distribution of

High School for Girls and their partnership with the David Lloyd Sports

leisure services.

and Leisure Centre situated on their

Heritage and Libraries

grounds. St. Philomena’s Catholic School for Girls is well furnished with its it s tennis

Protecting Our Heritage

courts and swimming facilities. Wilson’s School has large playing fields. All of these facilities represent strong locally based sporting assets.

Sutton is fortunate to have its historical assets and as our chapter on Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  outlined,  outlined, the Council’s political leadership could and should do

The Council should examine whether it can increase its partnership with schools to increase their participation in the grass roots promotion of sporting activities. 

more to protect our historic and important buildings. We have set out our support for the use of Conservation Areas to stand up against

The Mayor of London’s commitment to sport as a leisure activity, backed up by millions of pounds in investment, does not appear to have been replicated locally in Sutton. There has been an array of mixed messages from the Council on the future of Cheam Leisure Centre in Malden Road, North Cheam. Despite repeated promises that Cheam Baths’ future is safe, the Liberal Democrat administration will not remove it from a list of sites allocated for future development.42 The areas surrounding Cheam Baths do not have easy walking distance access to leisure facilities other than the Centre.

the menace of overdevelopment and urban sprawl. In turn we have also criticised the relative weakness of Special Policy Areas and have argued for a more extensive use of ‘Local Listing’ for individual noteworthy buildings. This will place a specific onus on the building’s owner to protect its valuable influence on the local streetscene. We argue that small protective steps like this all add up to provide a flexible and truly localised protection of our local heritage.  The Council tends to concentrate on

Cheam Baths is in a state of disrepair due to years of underfunding. The facilities at the Centre need updating but it does not have to be knocked down and built elsewhere, as the leadership of Sutton

Whitehall, Nonsuch Mansion and Little Holland House. These are core parts of our local heritage but other heritage assets are at risk. English Heritage has the following local buildings/structures

Council seem to favour, by keeping the site on the disposal list for development and moving the centre elsewhere. 

on its ‘at risk’ register; the Lych Gate at the entrance to the West Churchyard at St. Mary’s Church in Beddington, the

42. ‘Site ‘Site Development Policies, Preferred Options Document For Public Consultation’  Option  Option A3, Sutton Council, p.2.

94  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure Orangery Wall at Beddington Place, and

Libraries: In The Shadow of The Sutton

the Grotto at Carshalton Park. 43 

Life Centre?

Additionally, the Old Rectory/Ecology Centre is falling into a state of disrepair.

The library in the Civic Offices is a great resource for Sutton residents. Placed in

The Council needs to turn its attention

the centre of Sutton it boasts the highest

towards our Borough’s heritage sites which need a helping hand from the local

visitor numbers of all libraries in Sutton, with the most books, computer services

authority.

and study space for residents and visitors. Figure 7 shows the visitor and

Sutton’s historical buildings do not

book issue numbers for all Sutton

necessarily have to be the sole domain of

Council’s library services.

the Council. Community voluntary groups have a valuable role to play. For example,

The Central Library in Sutton has almost

The Grove in Carshalton is used by the

double the number of visitors to its

Council’s Education Department for their

nearest competitor in Wallington, in both

offices. Is this the best use for such a

visitor numbers and books issues. The

valuable asset, including the well kept,

Phoenix Centre on the Roundshaw Estate,

picturesque grounds that surround it? Would it not be better in the hands of a

Beddington, follows with third highest visitor numbers but the fourth smallest

community group, open to the public or

number of books issued. This is most

at least lived in?

likely because it is also a leisure centre.

The Council’s leadership should be more

It should be noted that the Ridge Road

creative with its use of such assets and

library in Stonecot is to be scrapped with

make them work for the community. 

its library function replaced by a smaller facility in the Sutton Life Centre. The

Figure 7.

trend appears to be towards fewer large libraries and for much smaller ones

Borough Library Usage Statistics (April 08 to March 09) 600000 500000    d   e 400000   u   s   s    I 300000   s    k   o   o 200000    B

100000 0

     )   n   t  o  n   e  a  m   a   l  t  o  n    P  a  r   k   o  a  d    i  r  c   l  e    h  a  w   g   t  o  n   o   b   i   l  e   t  t  o   n  g    u   s      i     S      M    l   l   e   R   e  r   C   h   d   i  n   n  C   r  s   h   n  d    W  a    R   o o   u u    B   e e   d d    i  d   g   g     i  d  d   l  e   t t  o   x  (    C  a   o  r  c   e e   s s   t t    R   i Issues    i      W    M   n   e   o Visitors    P   h

43. Heritage Counts 2008 , English Heritage, London Data Document, p.10.

95  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  attached to other centres like the Phoenix Centre and the Sutton Life Centre. What does the future hold for smaller libraries in places such as Carshalton, Cheam and Worcester Park after the Sutton Life Centre opens?  The Sutton Life Centre has been criticised for having a highly optimistic business plan at best, and an unrealistic one at worse. For example, based on the business plan’s figures, the visitor figures for the ‘Citizenship and Life Centre/Zone’ - on the Council’s projected 40,000 visitors per year figure - will generate an income of approximately £360,000.44  This section of the Sutton Life Centre has been described as its main income generator. Staffing costs are detailed at £394,000 for the first full year of operation45 leaving a shortfall of £34,000 on staffing costs alone. The Life Centre Business Plan needs to penetrate 59% of the market it has set itself in order to meet its financial and visitor targets. 46  The business case for the Sutton Life Centre has clear flaws. The Council leadership obviously has an inclination towards large scale and expensive projects at the potential expense of smaller scale more traditional services like community library services.  Given that the libraries budget for Sutton Council accounts for approximately 1.5% of overall spends and the Life Centre is costing £8.5million to build, even though it is uncertain whether it can turn a profit, it is difficult not to see a budgetary cloud moving over our Borough’s libraries. 

Conclusions   Conclusions Sutton is a Borough of Contradictions in its provision of youth services because although there is an untapped wealth of experience and commitment in the voluntary sector waiting to be utilised, cultural barriers within the Council are blocking its use. Instead the Council seems fixated on providing in-house replication of PSHEstyle guidance to teenagers and young people rather than the character-building contact with adults that is required. The benefits of such schemes are demonstrated in reductions in crime and antisocial behaviour. Other benefits are that young people have safe environments without the temptation of falling into antisocial behaviour, drugs and violence.

[The Council] seems  fixated on providing providing in-house replication of  PSHE-style guidance guidance to teenagers and young people rather than the characterbuilding contact with adults that is required. The fact is, boredom is a major cause of crime and antisocial behaviour in young people, and while that is never an excuse for breaking the law and seriously disrupting the lives of decent ordinary residents, it is a simple truth. The Council leadership is more excited about looking

44. Business Plan for the Sutton Life Centre, p.24. 45. Ibid. p.41. 46. It aims for 40,000 visitors from School Years 6 (age 10) and 8 (age 12) in a catchment area with population of roughly 67,723 pupils. This is a 59.06% penetration of the market, far exceeding the aspirations of organisations

like Starbucks and Tesco.

96  

Borough Wellbeing: Youth Provision Health and Leisure busy with expensive pet projects like the

health inequalities can be tackled

Sutton Life Centre. While undoubtedly

through a positive emphasis on exercise,

well-intentioned and the product of hard

sport and physical activity.

work from many council employees, it simply will not provide the long-term

Mayor Boris Johnson, in preparation for

forming of trusting relationships with

the 2012 Olympics, is giving ever greater

adults that characterises effective youth provision. A multimedia experience, a

support to grass roots community sports schemes. We welcome his commitment to

climbing wall and virtual reality drug-

addressing health inequalities and his

dealers will not teach real-life skills like

enthusiasm for sport-related solutions.

coping with family breakdown, exam

To underline this commitment Mayor

related stress or peer pressure to join

 Johnson has put his money where his

gangs.

mouth is by pledging £15.5million. His promise to work with local authorities,

Voluntary sector youth organisations know what needs to be done and how to do it and on shoestring budgets; all they need is for the Council to become a  supportive facilitator facilitator..

national bodies and the private sector in investing in small, community, park or estate-based projects is a step in the right direction. Sutton’s political leadership needs to bite the bullet and have the initiative to work with the Mayor and to engage with City Hall to bring these benefits to Sutton. After all, that is why Sutton residents pay the mayoral precept on their council tax.

However, strong role role models models in structured yet relaxed safe environments can, and this is where our voluntary sector comes in. Voluntary sector youth organisations know what needs to be done and how to do it and on shoestring budgets; all they need is for the Council to become a supportive facilitator.

The Council leadership is more excited about looking busy with expensive pet  projects  pro jects like the Life Centre. Ineffective youth provision, health

Regrettably, it will take £8.5million of

inequalities and uncertain leisure services

taxpayers’ money to be spent before the

embody some of our Borough’s

Liberal Democrat leadership of Sutton

numerous contradictions but they are

Council understands this, if ever they do.

areas bursting with potential. We hope

Health inequalities are a deep worry in

that this potential can be unlocked.

the Borough with life expectancies and the probability of dying from cardiovascular problems varying from Ward to Ward. The poorer areas of our Borough have worse health according to official statistics. We believe that these

97  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

98  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery

99  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Introduction Transport: The Road To Sustainable Transport Studies show that transport is a big issue for Sutton residents, with many saying that it should feature very highly as a priority for the Council. A significant number of people have even said that transport is a key indicator of how our area is getting worse . Sutton Council’s Liberal Democrat political leadership has a cultural predisposition towards ‘hard options’ in transport policy, especially in traffic calming and the behavioural change agenda to reduce car use. Such punitive measures include unpopular road humps, drastic cuts in residents’ visitors’ free parking hours, and the over enthusiastic use of double yellow lines. The heavy-handed ‘stick approach’ is in contrast to other measures known as ‘soft travel demand management’ or ‘soft options’, which we will refer to as the ‘carrot approach’ in the Sutton context. A cultural change favouring soft options is under way in Transport for London (TfL) following the election of Boris Johnson in May 2008. It seems that here in Sutton the Council’s political leadership is yet to follow this example. The contradiction here is that Sutton is out of kilter with the progressive policy shift in transport in Greater London. One notable exception to the above is the cross-party initiative between Sutton Council and TfL called Smarter Travel

Sutton.1 In September 2006, Sutton received £5million of funding from TfL for this project for a three year period. This ‘sustainable travel town’ partnership with TfL is designed to reduce car trips and to promote sustainable transport by encouraging , not forcing, behavioural change. Smarter Travel Sutton’s efforts have won it an award at the Municipal  Journal Awards 2009.2  Sutton’s political leadership have discovered an enthusiasm for ‘soft options’, only when attached to such a large amount of funding. Sutton needs a solid commitment to working with  residents  residents via soft options to reduce car use rather than against  them  them with hard options and, importantly, not  just when there is money on the table. The Council’s political leadership is enthusiastic in its bidding for TfL funding for projects and travel plans, but it does not seem to be capable of doing things for itself. We contend that this demonstrates a lack of vision. The contradiction we highlight here is that Sutton will opt for soft options but only when there is cash involved. Its commitment to soft options is merely skin deep. At heart, its ideology favours hard options and punitive measures to change behaviour. In terms of public transport the Borough is well serviced in parts, but less so in others. There is a geographical inequality in public transport accessibility. Sutton town centre enjoys the highest levels of accessibility, followed by Wallington and Rosehill. Carshalton and the remaining

1. See: www.smartertravelsutton.org www.smartertravelsutton.org  

2. MJ Awards 2009, 25 June 2009, see: http://www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=awards.copy&id=74004  http://www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm?method=awards.copy&id=74004 

100  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  district areas have to contend with low

Congestion is a big problem in Sutton.

accessibility. Areas like South Beddington

Key pinch points include London Road in

and Carshalton South and Clockhouse

Hackbridge, Central Road in Worcester

have relatively low public transport

Park, Sandy Lane in Cheam, Wallington

accessibility.3 

High Street and the crossroads at The Broadway in Cheam village. Government

The Borough, as a whole, does benefit from a good network of buses serving

figures show that traffic levels have increased over the last decade. In terms

key destinations. It is also served by ten

of traffic volumes, Sutton appears to be

railway stations with two just outside the

close to the previous Mayor’s London

Borough’s boundaries (St. Helier and

targets.4 But this has little or no relevance

Mitcham Junction). Sutton’s railway

to the average Sutton resident who relies

services provide links to prominent

on their car for daily travel. Recent

London stations like Victoria, Waterloo

statistics show that car use accounts for

and London Bridge.

58% of residents’ mode of travel.5

Sutton Council will need to look hard at

While it is encouraging that 42% of

why some areas are less well serviced

residents travelled by means other than a

than others for public transport. As a Borough, Sutton has good accessibility to

car the Council does need to be practical and honest in accepting that car use is

public transport but some areas have

the mode of travel for the majority of

unequal access to such services. In this

residents.

sense, as in others, Sutton is a Borough of Contradictions.

Traffic is a problem and easing congestion has an environmental imperative as well as a transport one. The most effective method of reducing congestion is reduced car use. But the Council must accept that it cannot simply browbeat and cajole residents out of their cars – it should look into easing traffic flow as well. The benefits of smoother moving traffic are clear: commuters benefit, emissions are reduced, and bus travel becomes more reliable, which in turn can encourage a modal shift.6

It took severe weather conditions in 2009 to restore Carshalton Ponds to a traffic-free reminder of a bygone era 3. See Public Transport Accessibility Level (PTAL) methodology devised by the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham. PTAL is used by the Greater London Authority and TfL and is regarded as the standard method to assess public transport accessibility. 4. As measured by million vehicle-kms, as the measurement used by the Department for Transport (DfT). Source: National Road Traffic Survey, see: www.dft-matrix.net. www.dft-matrix.net. 5. London Travel Demand Survey 2008.

6. This is the approach at the heart of Boris Johnson’s winning transport manifesto, entitled entitled Getting Londoners

Moving.

101

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Planning: Squandering Our Environmental

character. As a result our Borough risks

Inheritance

being transformed into an increasingly soulless urbanised dormitory town for

Planning is one of the most contentious

London.

policy areas in local government. Planning decisions and policies shape our

We must, therefore, fight the tide of

physical environment. Local character in our neighbourhoods is shaped by

overdevelopment.

physicality and, as a natural

The Housing, Planning and Transport

consequence, so are local people.

Policy Group has criticised the Council in its planning policy for lacking truly joined

Sutton is a collection of villages and at

-up thinking when it comes to the

the very outset of this chapter we

relationship between decent and

reaffirm a steadfast commitment to

appropriate planning, especially in terms

protecting our suburban environment.

of economic development of the

Our natural assets must not be

Borough.

squandered. But this question immediately poses itself: is Sutton

Sutton, unlike our Croydon and Kingston

Council’s political leadership actually achieving this?

neighbours, lacks a Unique Selling Point (USP). This has come about after a two decade long starvation of any vision for

We contend that they are not. The Liberal

Sutton from the Council’s political

Democrat administration has presided

leadership.

over two decades of overdevelopment and its impact on the Borough’s

It has missed the fundamentals. The

suburban environment is for all to see.

‘gateways’ to the Borough paint a terrible picture. Victoria House in North Cheam

Here is a core contradiction: the Council’s

on the junction of Cheam Common Road,

leadership purports, with typical

London Road and Malden Road and

grandiosity, to protect our suburban

Sutherland House in South Sutton on the

realm, stating their policies are designed to shape: “An attractive and distinctive

Brighton Road create an instant impression of urban decay and neglect.

suburban Borough, offering a high quality residential environment, well

When people use these major gateways to

designed buildings, ‘liveable’ streets and

our Borough, the first thing they see

public spaces…” 7  

must not be monuments to decline.

But the changing face of our Borough’s

In protecting our suburban realm, Sutton

physical environment indicates a lack of

Council has statutory powers as well as

political will to protect it. This

duties.8 In order of the level of protection

administration has spent two decades

afforded, the Borough has:

presiding over reckless, community-

14 Conservation Areas (CAs), 15 Areas of

damaging overdevelopment which is

Special Local Character (ASLCs), and three

allowing our villages to lose their

Special Policy Areas (SPA).

7. Core Planning Strategy: Proposed Submission , under the theme ‘Improving the Streetscene and Living

Environment , Sutton Council, November 2008. 8. The Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act [1990].

102  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  The Council needs to be more proactive

been serious instances where the Council

in delivering truly localised protection of

has opted to work against residents,

our villages through greater use of such

which has damaged its reputation.

protective planning measures.

Abuses of trust, like the Green Garden Waste Disaster, whereby the Council’s

Notwithstanding narrow financial

environmental chief chose to work

implications, it also needs to be more robust in defending our suburban

against  residents  residents rather than with  them,  them, proved catastrophic.

physical environment. The Council needs fire in its belly and a willingness to fight

As a matter of huge importance to the

its corner in Whitehall, standing up to

future of our Borough, the goodwill of the

developers and their bulldozers. This can

public to the environmental and waste

only be achieved through tougher

minimisation agenda cannot be

political leadership with a strategic,

 jeopardised through grave errors like the

rather than tactical, vision for Sutton and

Green Garden Waste Disaster. This is

all its villages and district centres.

particularly the case when a third of Sutton residents cite the environment as

The Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow

a reason why their area has got worse. 9 

Delivery

Additionally, Sutton residents demonstrate a high level of awareness on

Sutton Council’s political leadership

environmental issues. For example, the

makes much out of its green credentials,

majority of Sutton residents are worried

often evoking green initiatives from the

about the amount of household waste

past, from recycling through to climate

that is produced.10 

change. The environmental monikers of Sutton as a ‘Green Council’ is oft-cited by

Residents are right to be concerned

the political administration in self-praise,

because European Directives on reducing

frequently harking back to by-gone glory

reliance on landfill sites to dispose of

days. Its aims are broad and its rhetoric

waste are placing huge pressures on local

is grandiose, but now its delivery is

authorities up and down the United

narrow. The administration is running out of steam. We cite this as a contradiction.

Kingdom. Sutton is no different. As of April 2009, the cost of sending waste to landfill is £40 per tonne, which is

Minimising waste is a core part of the

estimated to have a per household cost

environmental agenda. The Council was

of £30.11 Over two thirds of Sutton’s

an early participant in the recycling

waste is sent to landfill and at a cost of

agenda and this is welcome, but it seems

£40 per tonne existing habits are simply

that residents took this opportunity to

unsustainable.

recycle in order to reduce household waste - and have continued to do so -

National performance indicators showing

despite  the  the political leadership of the

Sutton Council’s performance for waste

Council, not because of it. There have

management and recycling do not match

9. Ipsos MORI, Sutton Residents Survey , February 2008, p.28. 10. Ibid, p. 73. 11. BBC News, ‘Landfill tax costing homes £30’ , Wednesday 18 March 2009.

103  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  its green image. It ranks 213th out of 394

accept this responsibility through

local authorities across English councils

antisocial behaviours such as littering,

on its overall performance in waste

graffiti and fly-tipping, but the vast

12

collection and recycling rates.  

majority are responsible and want to see our natural environmental endowments

Again, we argue that Sutton is a Borough

protected and maximised. Conservatives,

of Contradictions in this area because the Liberal Democrat leadership celebrates

locally and nationally, understand this and want to make it even easier for

and self-congratulates their green

residents to do the right thing.

credentials but in reality the facts do not

Innovations in Conservative policy reflect

match the rhetoric.

this.

Sutton has many natural assets, including

We reaffirm our endorsement to the

a variety of green open spaces and some

principle of helping people to do the

of the highest tree populations in

right thing for the environment, not

London. Sutton has over 190,000 trees,

browbeating them and forcing them to do

which works out at over one tree per

what the Council’s political leadership

resident.13 The benefits of our trees are

wants.

manifold, be they in back gardens, lining roads and streets or in our parks and

Because we know Sutton’s residents want

open spaces, providing a green barrier to

to do the right thing, we would like to see

CO2 emissions and a cushion against

the Council trust local people more.

urbanisation. Over the past two calendar

Elsewhere in this report we have

years the Council has cut down more

discussed the implications of a ‘Post-

trees than it has planted. In the two-year

Bureaucratic Age’; the notion that local

period 2004-2006, the Council replanted

government is not always the wellspring

a mere 19.5% of the trees it had cut

of solutions to local issues and that often

14

down.  

the community, through bottom-up initiatives, are best placed to tackle

Tree replenishment numbers have

problems.

improved in the last calendar year but the Council must invest more in tree

We posit the view that the Council should

planting. Preserving our suburban

look closer at community-led

environment will be the next generation’s

environmental action by really trusting

environmental inheritance arising from

people and empowering communities to

the decisions that we take now.

act in real partnership  on  on recycling, waste minimisation and environmental

Another aspect of our Borough’s

protection.

environmental wealth is that of Sutton’s residents. The people of Sutton care about their environment and want to make a difference. A small minority fail to

12. Figures from the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), November 2008. 13. See: http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3967. http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3967.

14. Figures from a report presented to the Scrutiny Co-ordinating Committee regarding the number of trees, 2006.

104  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Transport In Sutton: Policy and Reality The Well Meaning Vision

derived from the above vision statement. It is right for the Council to aspire to

Sutton Council’s current vision on

greater use of public transport because

transport according to its Promoting

this will decrease the negative impacts of

sustainable Transport and Accessibility  

congestion in Sutton.

theme is thus: Transport is second only to crime and the “A well-connected suburban Borough,

need for more activities for teenagers as

with good access for all to local

an issue of importance to residents, with

employment, social and community

41% of surveyed residents wanting to see

facilities and open space by public

activity to tackle congestion on our roads

transport, walking or cycling, reducing

(Figure (Figur e 1). 1) . 17  But the Council needs to do

overall travel needs, car dependence,

more research on whether residents

traffic growth and congestion, local

actually see reducing congestion as

pollution and carbon dioxide

necessarily linked to reduced car use.

emissions and improving health and well-being.”

15

We know that car use is on the rise in Sutton and that our Borough roughly

The Reality: Understanding Car

corresponds with the previous Mayor of

Dependence To Tackle Congestion  

London’s target traffic volumes for Sutton (shown overleaf in Figure 2 as ‘Linear

‘Reducing car dependence’ is the

Trajectory’). 

strategic objective which the Council has

Figure 1.16 

15. Sutton Annual Monitoring Report  (AMR)  (AMR) Section 11: Transport, p.153. 16. Place Survey 2008/09 , London Borough of Sutton, Ipsos MORI, p.29.

17. Ibid, pp. 10, 28-29.

105  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 2.18 

Public Transport Accessibility

This is a question of basic accessibility to public transport services. Figure 3 shows that some parts of Sutton are clearly impoverished in public transport

Car use is the obvious choice for residents when public transport is not

accessibility compared to other district centres which are remarkably well

easily accessible. This opinion is not

serviced. Large parts of South

wasted on the current Mayor of London, L ondon,

Beddington, Carshalton Beeches and

Boris Johnson, who also serves as

Carshalton on the Hill, parts of Belmont

Chairman of the TfL Board.

and Cheam range between Levels 1a and 1b on range of accessibility. The rating for 1b is ‘extremely poor access to the location by public transport’ and 6a as ‘excellent access by public transport.’ There are additional pockets with inadequate public transport accessibility in places like Stonecot Hill, Benhilton and Worcester Park. The Borough’s Local Implementation Plan

Boris Johnson. Mayor of London 2008-present.

The Mayor understands that after eight years of a Labour Mayoralty, Outer London Boroughs like Sutton were almost always at the back of the queue for transport investment and increased services and so for a chunk of the population there is no ready alternative to the car for many short journeys.

(LIP) does give attention to the issue of accessibility and ‘inclusion’ to transport networks. Target data is yet to be released. Concerns have been raised about the flexibility of the LIP on the grounds of its bureaucratic process. Members of the Housing, Planning and Transport Policy Group have highlighted that it is inflexible and of limited use in dealing with transport issues as they arise because of the long lead-time.

18. DfT figures, National Road Traffic Survey.

106  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  Figure 3.19 

Changes in transport are often too quick

If Sutton Council is to reduce car

for the Council. Accessibility objectives

dependency it needs to have a vision for

from the Mayor’s Transport Strategy,

improving the Borough’s public transport

contained in the LIP, can often be very

network, in particular pushing for greater

slow to put into practice at ground level.

equality of access across Sutton.

The Council should consider how it can respond quicker and adapt faster.

Fresh thinking rather than lip-service is required to reduce congestion. As well as

Interestingly, the Liberal Democrats’

a saleable vision which residents can sign

manifesto for the May 2006 local

up to, the council needs to stop

elections is silent on reducing car use

posturing and feigning action and use the

and on public transport accessibility. It

local government structures in London to

fails to outline any aspiration to reduce

achieve a better result for residents.

car use in connection with emissions, apart from a very lightweight reference to

Too often the Liberal Democrats – at all

the ‘principle ‘principle of car-free areas in the

levels – have played politics with

20

borough ’. ’. This is notable considering

transport issues and this has hindered

the perennial self-aggrandisement

improvements in the accessibility of

associated with the green credentials of

services for residents.

the Council’s political leadership.21 

19.. AMR submission, p.193.

20. Liberal Democrat Manifesto, May 2006, p.8 21. This theme will be explored further in this chapter under: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery .

107  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Case Study One: Sunday

Case Study Two:

Bus Service, Route 463

Sutton To Croydon N213

The Clockhouse area sits at the southern

Night Bus

extremity of the Borough near Coulsdon. As demonstrated in Figure 3, it has poor access to public transport facilities and features with a 1b ‘poor accessibility’ rating. This dearth of public transport was made worse by the absence of a decent Sunday bus service.

The cancellation of the Sutton to Croydon N213 night bus caused considerable controversy among residents,23  particularly young people, who used the service. Local Liberal Democrats, including the Member of Parliament for Carshalton and Wallington, proceeded to turn it into a campaign, equipped with a Facebook campaign, placards proclaiming ‘It’s ‘It’s Time To Listen Boris!’ and a protest in Wallington.

During a session of ‘Questions from Members of the Public’ to Executive Councillors, Councillor Tim Crowley24  asked the Liberal Democrat Executive Member for Transport “What “What direct contacts have you had with the Mayor, may I ask, over this issue?” (Pictured left to right) Carshalton South & Clockhouse

Councillor Colin Hall’s answer was as

councillors, John Kennedy, Tim Crowley and Moira Butt

follows: “None…I have not spoken to the

Rather than playing politics with the issue, Conservative councillors in the Carshalton South and Clockhouse Ward, worked with Steve O’Connell AM22  together with local residents’ groups to see a new service was established. The Sunday service starts at 6.28am and ends at 11.25pm, running every half hour to provide Clockhouse residents at The Mount bus stop with a vital transport link which they previously lacked.

Mayor.” 25 A period of nearly three weeks had lapsed since the cancellation of the N213 service. During that period neither the Liberal Democrat MP for the area or his colleague on the Council responsible for transport had taken the initiative to contact the Mayor of London. In the end, it took a 22 year old student to speak to Boris Johnson directly. Mayor Johnson gave his instant support to reinstate the service.26

22. Councillor Steve O’Connell is Croydon and Sutton’s Conservative London Assembly Member. 23. Sutton Guardian, 9 July 2009. 24. Formerly Opposition Spokesman for Transport, currently Finance and Value for Money Spokesman. 25. Meeting of the Full Council, Monday 20 July 2009. Appendix A to Council Minutes, Questions from Members of

the Public. 26. Sutton Guardian, Friday 24 July 2009.

108  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Case Study Conclusions Our two case studies illustrate the differing approaches in improving accessibility to public transport in Sutton. One approach favours direct and effective action to eliminate the starvation of transport links to a part of the Borough which, by the standards of both the GLA and TfL, receives a poor service. The other shows grandiose and cynical manipulation of the issue and basic failure to even directly contact the Mayor of London to address the issue, instead opting for political opportunism. These differing approaches to addressing accessibility inequalities stand in stark contrast to each other and represent yet another aspect of our Borough of Contradictions.

The Road To Sustainable

That is not to say that road humps do not have their place in the traffic calming armoury for local authorities. However Sutton Council’s political leadership appears to be so enthusiastically wed to the use of this hard option, and to such a large extent, that it has earned the ire of many residents and motorists alike. Sutton has implemented a range of accident reduction measures including road safety campaigns and long-term programmes for area specific traffic calming in high accident locations, for example the STEPS Zone programme.27 In terms of road performance the Council’s highways department has achieved an average 36.8% reduction in the number of people (including pedestrians, children, cyclists and motorcyclists) being killed or seriously injured on our roads in comparison to 1994-1998 averages. A breakdown of Sutton’s road safety performance 2007-8 can be seen below

Transport: Carrot Rather

in Figure 4.

Than Stick

It is extremely welcome to see reductions

The Sleeping Policeman: Valuable Tool or Inverted Pothole? The introduction to this report outlined Sutton Council’s skin deep commitment to the use of soft options, favouring hard options to achieve reduced car reliance/ usage. The Council has a history of using punitive road humps, aka the sleeping policeman , as a traffic calming measure on the Borough’s roads and a less than enviable track record of being in touch with residents as to their use, location and effectiveness.

in the rates of mortality and serious injury on our roads. Although injuries to pedestrians do not appear to have dropped as much as other areas. We need to commission research into effectiveness of roads humps in these percentage reductions.28  If the primary reason for installing road humps is reducing speed in order to prevent road accidents resulting in the death or serious injury of road users and pedestrians, and no clear correlation can be established between the use of humps and road safety, the Council will need to seriously re-evaluate their use.

27. Strategic Traffic and Environmental Problems Study (STEPS) 28. An April 2004 London Assembly report entitled ‘London ‘ London gets the hump’ from the Transport Committee,

chaired by Liberal Democrat Assembly Member Lynne Featherstone, was pointed in its defence of road humps.

109  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 4.29 

We believe that road humps have their

This can damage buildings, with old

place – especially when asked for by

constructions suffering in particular.

residents - but that humps are not the

Another perverse consequence of

universal be all and end all for traffic

extensive road hump use is that it may

calming. Punitive measures like road

encourage motorists to purchase larger

humps should not be used lightly.

more powerful vehicles, thus creating

Road humps have considerable

greater emissions, because the impact of the humps is reduced with such motor

drawbacks as well as some identifiable

vehicles. It may even be the case that

merits. They can damage vehicles.

road humps discourage motorists from

Smaller and more environmentally

using more eco-friendly cars and that

friendly vehicles suffer the most. Humps

humps adversely affect attempts to

can also cause noise disruption in

reduce vehicle emissions. For a

residential areas. The Housing, Planning

purportedly green political leadership in

and Transport Policy Group has heard

Sutton Council this seems counter-

accounts of how commercial vehicles,

intuitive, especially with the cost of road

particularly lorries carrying heavy goods

humps varying from £1,200 to £2,000

like scaffolding, hit the humps at

each - if not much more. 30 

considerable speed resulting in noise pollution to intolerable extents. Many

Research carried out by the London

commercial vehicles of this type travel

Ambulance Service (LAS) has attributed

early in the day - thus disturbing

the presence of road humps in Greater

residents’ sleep. Some residents have

London to costing 500 lives because the

even reported walls vibrating and

humps slow down emergency service

windows rattling as a result of heavy

vehicles.31 The DfT accepted the findings

commercial vehicles going over road

of this research in its response to LAS,

humps.

stating that before road humps are introduced “full “full consideration should be given to the wider implications of

29. Source: Sutton Council and TfL 2008, see AMR 2007-2008. 30. Figures provided by the Campaign for Better Transport, www.bettertransport.org.uk  www.bettertransport.org.uk 

31. Road-hump delays 'kill hundreds of ambulance patients' each year' , The Independent, 20 September 2003.

110  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  introducing traffic-calming measures on

In light of the ongoing debate

our roads. This is particularly important

surrounding road humps, an incoming

with regards to response times for the

political administration in Sutton Council

emergency services.” 32  The Metropolitan

should seriously look at the effectiveness

Police echoed the concerns of the

of its established policy of reliance on

33

Ambulance Service.  The conclusions of

humps in the Borough’s transport

the London Ambulance Service were criticised by the then Liberal Democrat

infrastructure.

chairman of the Transport Committee on

The path to sustainable transport options

the London Assembly, who described the

is not based on a cultural dependence on

research as contributing to the “fever “fever

punitive methods of traffic calming and

pitch ” regarding road humps.

34

the behavioural change that intends to reduce car dependence. Instead the Council should look closer at softer ‘carrot’ methods to tackle transport problems. This is where ‘nudging’ comes in.

Nudging The Sleeping Policeman? A recent theory has taken the political world – Left Wing, Right Wing or Centrist - by storm. ‘Nudge Theory’  was  was devised by the economist and behavioural science theorist Dr Richard Thaler and the academic lawyer Professor Cass Sunstein.36 In short, the theory maintains that it is better and more productive to attempt to foster positive change by giving the choice of good/desirable Councillor Paul Scully illustrating the absurdity of a road hump sited in a Beddington cul-de-sac 125 feet in length, leading to an allotment. A case of

behaviour (nudging the subject in the preferred direction) rather than by punitive sanctions against the bad/

catching speeding wheelbarrows?

undesirable behaviour.

Conservative controlled Barnet Council

Application of the theory would see local

has pursued a no-nonsense attitude to

authorities promoting preferred travel

hard measures like road humps, with

options while still leaving the individual

much public support.35 

the choice to take the undesirable route. Smarter Travel Sutton, for example, promoted the use of different modal

32. Ibid. 33. BBC News, Wednesday 3 December 2003, see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3288795.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3288795.stm   34. London gets the hump , chairman’s foreword. 35. BBC News, Thursday 19 June 2003, see: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3003788.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3003788.stm  

36. Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness , Yale University Press, May 2008.

111  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  options in transport to meet its targets for car travel reduction. This kind of approach has been endorsed by David Cameron,37 as well as finding support among Sutton Council’s senior officers with the Strategic Director of Environment and Leisure, Daniel Ratchford,38 signalling his support for the nudge school of thought in a prominent local government publication. Mr Ratchford described the Council’s approach as: “The difference in Sutton is that we believe in encouraging people to take responsibility and, where appropriate, change their behaviour, rather than looking for the council to cure all social ills. “We don’t do things for people, we do things with people. people. ” 39  

‘Nudge Theory’ creators, Dr Richard Thaler and Professor Cass Sunstein propose a system of ‘libertarian paternalism’, with ‘choice architects’

The goals and the approach of nudge theorists are desirable in that they avoid the heavy-handed application of punitive

seeking to influence choice whilst making it easy for people who want to exercise their freedom to go their own way.

measures in favour of softer ones,

Picking up on the point about Sutton

imbued with an emphasis on working

doing things ‘with’ people, we shall

with  not  not against  residents.  residents.

examine two case studies which show the

The application of this approach is more

Council’s political leadership very much doing things ‘to’ people .

welcome than Sutton’s previous cultural inclination towards hard travel options, often implemented without much regard to residents’ wishes. Transport has been an area in which the political leadership of the Council has condoned hard options which seemingly contradict the policy ethos of nudge theory as described by Mr Ratchford. 37. Nudge theory back in fashion with the Tories , The Guardian, 24 March 2009. 38. Mr Ratchford is a keen proponent propo nent of cycle use, and travels between council offices on a fold-up Brompton

bike, see: Sutton Council Press Release, Sutton staff lead the smarter travel revolution, 17 August 2009. 39. We’re all in this together , Municipal Journal, 12 August 2009, see: http://www.localgov.co.uk/index.cfm? method=news.detail&id=81195&layout=2   method=news.detail&id=81195&layout=2

112

 

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

War Against Residents - Case Studies Case Study One: 75 Reduction In CPZ Visitor Hours Summer 2008 saw drastic cuts to residents’ free parking hours within the

One resident described the Council’s consultation on the reduction of free

Belmont and South Sutton Controlled

hours as “almost “almost impossible to find ” and

Parking Zones (CPZs). Residents were

that “the “the public had no reasonable way to

originally allocated 200 free parking

communicate their displeasure ” to the

hours for their visitors. This was cut to

Council.41 The Liberal Democrat Executive

100 hours, and then – most

Member for Transport defended the cuts

controversially of all – reduced by a

by saying that Sutton provided more free

further 50% to only 50 free hours in June

hours, comparatively, than other

2008. This represented a 75% reduction

Boroughs and to emphasise that the

in the space of eighteen months.40 

Council had abided by statutory consultation. In reality the consultation efforts were poor, consisting of a public notice on an obscure part of the sutton.gov.uk website and a notice in one of the Borough’s lesser read newspapers. It took place over the busy Christmas and New Year period and garnered 22 responses – a tiny fraction of affected residents. This case study shows a poor commitment to proper consultation with

CPZs: Parking control or cash cow?

residents. The Council did not work ‘with’ residents in reducing CPZ residents’ visitors’ parking hours – it simply did it

CPZ residents were then entitled to

‘to’ residents and without their consent.

purchase limited blocks of hours back from Sutton Council. The consultation

This kind of approach was endorsed by

efforts of the Council were subject to

the Council’s political leadership in the

heavy criticism with the vast majority of

open forum of Sutton’s highest decision

residents totally oblivious to the changes

making body, the Full Council, in full view

until the efforts of Opposition

of the public and without remorse. It

Conservative Councillors raised

marks a stark contradiction to the ethos

awareness of the punishing reduction in

of nudge theory and a true commitment

free hours.

to softer transport demand measures.

40. Rip-off Sutton Council As Free Parking Hours Are Slashed , Conservative Group Press Release, 30 May 2008.

  41. Meeting of the Full Council, 21 July 2008, Appendix A to the Minutes, Questions from Members of the Public.

113  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Case Study Two: From Carbon Footprint To Carbon Jackboot Summer 2008 was home to another key k ey

of the Scrutiny Overview Committee

example of how Sutton’s Liberal

suggested that this was an insufficient

Democrats’ transport policy actively favours hard punitive options. Proposals

sample of public opinion on which to implement such a scheme. Secondly, a

were devised to charge motorists in the

consultation was being carried out with

Sutton and Belmont Controlled Parking

Carshalton residents on the

Zone (CPZ) according to their Vehicle

establishment of a CPZ in their area.

Excise Duty Band (VED). The proposals

Tellingly, the consultation made no

were modelled on an identical scheme in

mention of the possibility of VED based

the Liberal Democrat-run London

permit charging, despite running

Borough of Richmond-upon-Thames

concurrently with each other.

which linked parking permit charges to engine size. Bizarrely, this scheme did not take mileage 42

into account. Consequently, an unused vehicle with a high VED rating would end up paying 200% more for parking permits, while a middle-ranking VED car which may accumulate enormous amounts of mileage would pay less, despite creating greater emissions and adding to road congestion. Only 3.5% of Sutton’s cars would have been charged extra; an unfair

Studies from Richmond Council

burden on residents who left their cars parked during the day rather than driving them around emitting fumes.

itself indicated that the number of higher polluting vehicles actually

This case study provides further evidence

increased following the implementation

that the political leadership of Sutton

of their VED-linked parking permit

Council is an enthusiastic adherent to

scheme.43 Naturally, Sutton wished to

hard transport options.

follow! The experience from Richmond shows Consultation was a source of controversy

that punitive charging methods, designed

again. Firstly, a 10% response had been

to reduced car use through the residents’

achieved from the Council’s consultation

pocket, can even have the adverse effect.

with 62% of respondents favouring the

Punitive methods to change travel

proposed scheme. Conservative members

behaviour do not necessarily achieve results.

42. From Carbon Footprint To Carbon Jackboot , Conservative Group Press Release, 18 June 2008.

43. See: Environment and Sustainability Overview and Scrutiny Committee , London Borough of Richmond-uponThames, Monday 9 June 2008.  2008.  

114  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Committing To The

currently is. As stated earlier in this report, 58% of people travel by car, this is

Carrot

in contrast to 2% who cycle. The full modal list of transport habits in Sutton are shown below in Figure 5.

This report has expressed its firm support for softer transport options that the Council is here to serve residents

Cycling finds itself second only to motorcycles and vans/lorries as the

rather than to browbeat and cajole

smallest minority as a mode of travel in

residents into compliance with its aims

Sutton. This is a surprising figure given

and objectives. Working with residents is

the green pro-cycling ethos of Sutton’s

at the centre of our philosophy. While it

political administration. The Council has

may pay lip service to this agenda, the

broad and laudable aims on making

current political administration has

Sutton a truly cycle friendly Borough but

demonstrated it has a different view in

is narrow in its delivery.

wherever possible because we believe

practice. Paying LIP Service to cycling? If Sutton is to deliver sustainable transport locally, it needs to make modes of transport other than cars easier and

The LIP submission in 2007 is right to say that we have high potential 45 for

more attractive. We have outlined the

becoming a cycling Borough with all the

problems in transport accessibility for

health, congestion easing and emission

some parts of our Borough. Now we need

reducing benefits that it will bring. But

to devise ways to make cycling far more

the aspirations have so far been narrow

attractive as a travel option than it

in delivery.

Figure 5.44 

Sutton's Trans T ransport port Modal Share 11%

19% National Rail Undergrond/DLR 3%

Bus/Tram Van/Lorry

10%

47%

1%

Cycle

1%

Walk

2% 6%

Motorcycle

Car Driver Car Passenger 

44. Cycling Action Plan, Chapter Eleven, LIP, 2007, p.327. 45. Ibid, p.325.

115

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 6.46  To get more people using

Sutton Residents' Reasons for Cycling Cycling

pedal-power, cycling needs 16%

 

0%

to be easy. As it stands it is 13%

10%

Getting to and from work/school

not.

Shopping

The Mayor of London has

Leisure Fitness

 just announced that free cycling training will be provided through London

Racing/sports 61%

Councils for Londoners who want to start cycling.47 Mr  Johnson has authorised the

The benefits for Sutton and the individual

scheme, to continue the net

in a greater take-up in cycling are clear.

decrease in cyclists killed or seriously

Figure 6 shows why the 2% of Sutton’s

injured. This is a prime example of how

travelling population cycle, and their

the Mayoralty is leading on soft options

motivations for doing so. By a large

to promote alternatives to car use. Sutton

majority, leisure is the primary factor

Council could take a leaf out of his book.

followed by transport to and from school or a place of work.

Sutton has admirable aspirations for improving cycling in the Borough as

We need to understand why so many

outlined in the LIP. But why does it have

people do not cycle more often and then

to wait for TfL and go through the

apply a nudge theory perspective on how

bureaucratic process, locking itself into a

to remove these barriers and to promote

three-year programme? Why does the

this modal shift in travel habit.

Council simply not get on with the job? The Council is endlessly bidding for

Sutton’s cycling infrastructure is not that

funds through projects and travel plans,

good. The inadequate state of cycle paths

and is always slavish to the source. 48 

give the cyclist an impression of danger. Also it can form a practical barrier to

The Council leadership does not seem

those who do want to cycle and are

able to think independently, creatively

motivated to do so. The perception of it

and proactively in delivering a cycle

being a hassle and an uphill struggle will

friendly environment.

put many would-be regular cyclists off. It needs to stop playing lip service to Sutton High Street is a good example of

cycling and to start being proactive. The

an inadequate cycle path network.

benefits are too great for Sutton Council

Pedestrians often stray onto the cycle

to be dragging its feet; it needs to

paths and cyclists off them, because they

employ their use to pedal power instead.

are poorly designed and not well defined. 46. Ibid. p.326 47. BBC London News, 18 August 2009.

48. The notion that Sutton Council does not fight its corner robustly enough in other places will be explored further on in this report.

116  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Planning: Sutton, A Collection of Villages  Defending Our Suburban Realm

Figure 7.

The London Borough of Sutton is an artificial construct formed in 1965. It was created by the London Government Act [1963], formed from the three separate local boroughs, formerly part of the old county of Surrey. Sutton is a collection of suburban villages; each distinct with its own character, history and heritage. If you ask a resident where they live they are more than likely to say which part of the Borough, not the Borough itself. There is a genuine feel and fear that the villages and district centres are being eroded and irreparably changed through poor planning policy coupled with the menace of overdevelopment.

Creeping Urban Sprawl Sutton is at very real risk of urban sprawl and its impact is now noticeable in areas like Sutton South and Sutton West.

Our villages and districts include: Beddington, Belmont, Carshalton, Cheam, Hackbridge, North Cheam, Sutton, St. Helier, Wallington and Worcester Park. 49

Planning policy SO16  states that it is a strategic objective of the Council to ‘safeguard the distinctive suburban character of the Borough by maintaining a diverse mix of residential areas, including Conservation Areas and Areas of Special Local Character, within local neighbourhoods’. That sounds very attractive and what the Borough needs in order to defend its areas of distinct local character. Sadly, the reality is different.

Figures show that Sutton is joint fourth highest of all the London Boroughs 50 for the development of brownfield51 sites, which includes back garden land.52 Local neighbourhoods and Sutton’s villages are suffering as a result. There is a steady and alarming trend of back gardens being developed for high density flats and apartments. This will change the local character of our area for decades to come. Urban is described as being: ‘predominantly dense development e.g. terraced houses; mix of uses. Some arterial routes ..’’ 53 

49. AMR 2007-08 p.131. 50. Figures obtained by the Conservative Parliamentary Resources Unit. Since 1997 there has been a steady upward trend in the development of residential land in the South East. In 2005 30% of new dwellings were built on land that was previously residential, up some 14% from 1997. The figure in Sutton is 41%. 41 %.

51. A brownfield site is any land, previously been used for any purpose p urpose and no longer in use for that purpose. 52. Also see Figures show Sutton in real risk of urban sprawl , Conservative Group Press Release, 28 June 2007. 53. AMR 2007-08, p.138.

117

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 8.54 

Figure 8, a map of the urban and

with ‘suburban’ characterisation, albeit

suburban characterisation in Sutton,

with the distinction of being designated

shows that there is a large concentration

either southern or northern suburban.

of ‘urban’ characterised areas in the

Sutton South, for example, is

centre of Sutton in the lighter shade of

characterised as southern suburban, in

blue. The map clearly shows that there is

Figure 8, being

some creep into South Sutton and West Sutton as well as along Brighton Road

‘predominantly detached and semi-

and Carshalton Road. While it may be

detached, with significant landscaping

logical for the highest concentration of

and grass verges .’ .’

dwellings to be located in easily accessible and well serviced locations,

It is worth noting that areas shown as

urban creep must not be permitted.

high density – again, in Sutton South’s

Urban creep also features around

case, well above the London and South

Wallington ‘High Street’ and the arterial

West London averages – can also carry

routes connected to it.

the label suburban. It is undeniable that density has a devastating influence on

Figure 9 shows that twelve Council Wards

the character of a local area.

in Sutton are above the London average for population density. This broadly

If suburban Wards carry such high

chimes with some of the categorisations

population densities (in comparison with

in Figure 8 for the types of area in the

London regional averages) we need to

Borough. Interestingly, some of the most

carry out an honest appraisal of what is

densely populated Wards include areas

happening to our suburban realm.

54. Ibid.

118  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  Figure 9.55 

We need a policy principle, which is

the Liberal Democrat MPs for the Borough

clearly enunciated, saying that high

has introduced a bill to parliament

population density is undesirable and

entitled the ‘Protection ‘Protection of Garden Land

that effective planning should seek to

(Development Control) Bill’, his party

reduce it.

colleagues on the Council’s Development Control Committee have frequently ceded

Figure 8 shows a cluster effect of

many back gardens to developers. developers.  

urbanisation around some of our villages, for example Carshalton and Cheam. It

The fact is that garden land is a target for

should be the case that planning policy

developers because they are designated

reflects the priorities of our villages as

as brownfield sites. These sites are easily

centres of local identity in Sutton rather

built upon and generally fall under the

than encroaching onto them so that they

requirement to provide social housing.

become just another part of the

We have illustrated how Sutton has been

increasing urban sprawl.

unveiled as one of the highest developers of brownfield sites in Greater London.

As stated earlier, one of the key contributors to increasing density in an

This overdevelopment must stop.

area is ‘garden grabbing’. This is occurring at an alarming rate in Sutton.

The Conservative Party’s housing policy

This is an area of duplicity in Liberal

green paper Strong Foundations: Building

Democrat policy. Despite supporting a

Homes and Communities 57 has unveiled a

Council Motion in October 2006 56 

commitment to the protection of back

signalling steadfast opposition to the

gardens through enhanced powers at

obliteration of Sutton’s back gardens for

local government level and the removal of

the purposes of overdevelopment, the

garden land from brownfield site

Council’s leadership has done very little

designation.

to protect them. It is even more bizarre that while one of 55. Ibid.

We strongly support this commitment.

56. Meeting of the Full Council on 30 October 2006.  p. 20. See http://www.conservatives.com/~/media/ 57. Strong Foundations: Building Homes and Communities  p. Files/Green%20Papers/Housing-Green-Paper.ashx?dl=true   Files/Green%20Papers/Housing-Green-Paper.ashx?dl=true

119  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  This will be achieved by making Local Development Frameworks more flexible by being principle-based rather than rules-based. This will represent a critical control shift between Councils and Central Government allowing local authorities to fight overdevelopment on their own terms and to take active steps to prevent garden grabbing.58 Sutton Council needs to ensure that any developments in our villages are in keeping with their local character and that gardens are truly protected from the developer. Rigorous policies and protections need to be set in place to achieve this.

The Twin Pillars For Better Planning: A Vision For Community-Led Planning Culture “ The The Lib Dems are not just empty. They are a void within a vacuum surrounded by a vast inanition.” Boris Johnson - Mayor of London  London  It is our firm contention, as outlined in the introduction to this chapter, that the political leadership of Sutton Council lacks any strategic vision for our Borough. It suffers from myopia when it comes to crafting a unique selling point for the London Borough of Sutton. Croydon and Kingston, however, have carved their respective niches as major shopping centres whilst Sutton does not appear to have been so forward in shaping any identity for itself. As a consequence of this, Sutton is simply not as well known as its neighbours. The sad

Shadow Housing Minister Grant Shapps is

result is that Sutton has unfulfilled

committed to action on garden-grabbing.

potential.

Protection in policy alone is not enough, it requires strong political leadership to accompany policy and, if necessary, to enforce it. Actions speak louder than words. Sutton needs a party that has real influence locally, regionally and nationally. The clear need for strong political leadership on planning needs to be married to what we shall call the ‘Twin ‘Twin Pillars for Better Planning ’: ’: firstly, a clear vision for our Borough and, secondly, a greater emphasis on communityapproved development.

It is our second firm contention that our planning system does not work with  local  local residents by placing their  wishes  wishes and priorities at the centre of our planning policy and processes. In a similar way to transport measures, planning is something that is done to   residents. We believe in community-led planning and that the Council has a duty to residents to provide a planning culture which is fair and transparent for them. We believe in people-centred planning.

58. The ethos of a control shift between Councils and Government is enshrined in Control Shift – Returning Power to Local Communities , Conservative Party Policy Green Paper, 17 February 2009.

120  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  Figure 10.59  Planning Application decisions by type    l   a    t   o    T    (   s   n    i    t   o   a   c    i    l    )   p   2   p   0   a   7    1   g   n    i   n   n   a    l   p    f   o    %

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

92%

8%

Officer Delegated Decisions (1559)

Development Control (143)

The Conservative Party nationally has

Consequently, it is no wonder that there

embraced a control shift in the

is considerable cynicism about local

relationship between local authorities and government in order to correct 13 years

politics, especially when the local candidate one has voted for ends up

of centralisation and top-down targets

having little ability or power to shape the

60

from New Labour Governments.  Under

community, in terms of planning, and

Labour the role of local councillors in the

therefore that which they were elected to

planning process has become gradually

do. This is no different in Sutton.

more and more neutered and ineffective. The Government’s top-down ‘targets’ Councillors sitting on development

culture on planning application

control committees have found that their

completion rates has meant that local

roles are now quasi-judicial at the

authorities like Sutton have had to adopt

expense of their democratic role as local

systems that place power in the hands of

representatives. Strong Foundations has said the following about the changes

council planning officers through ‘delegated powers’ and that these powers

under Labour:

have to be exercised within very tight timeframes. In Sutton, the vast majority

‘This has led to absurd situations

of planning decisions are delegated to

where councillors who have been

council officers, see Figure 10.

overwhelmingly elected, perhaps on a pledge to help shape the look and feel

This creates a democratic deficit in

of their local community, are

Sutton’s planning apparatus adding to

subsequently excluded from all

our Borough of Contradictions. With such

consideration of that issue within their

a vast majority of applications being

council because their position is

delegated to officers - admittedly

regarded as prejudiced and their

through necessity caused by Government

 judgement fettered. fettered.’’61 

59. 2007 08 figures 60. Control Shift – Returning Power to Local Communities . 61. Strong Foundations: Building Homes and Communities  p.  p. 17  17 

121  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  – local councillors are unable to respond

Financial handcuffs should not be the

to the democratic demands of their

sole determinant on whether to grant

constituents surrounding planning

planning permission or not.

applications. DCC members, within the bounds of When Sutton councillors refuse

reasonableness, must not find their

applications they often run the risk of expensive appeals from developers

discretion fettered on the grounds of the potential cost of planning appeals. The

armed with expensive legal advice.

public purse must be protected but by

Appeals are decided by Planning

the same token the Council must be

Inspectors who are experts in the field of

robust in fighting for the local character

planning law. They tend not to be experts

of our streets and neighbourhoods in the

of the locality that they are judging. As a

face of the developer’s bulldozer.

result, a significant number of planning refusals are successful on appeal. In

These results are, of course, in

Sutton, on average half of all refusals

accordance with planning law, but as

made at the Development Control

Strong Foundations  observes,  observes, the system

Committee (DCC) by elected councillors

is inherently adversarial62 and the only

that go to appeal, are overturned by the Planning Inspectorate, see Figure 11.

party which finds itself without a sufficiently robust voice is that of local

Members of the Housing, Planning and

residents. Planning and development is

Transport Policy Group have reported

something that happens to local

that members of the Development

residents because they feel as though

Control Committee have been advised by

they do not have a sufficient voice in

the Council’s planning officers not to

proceedings. Despite being legally sound,

refuse an application because of the cost

the fact that over half of all refusal

of an appeal.

decisions by elected councillors are overturned, seems to represent a

igure 11.

contradiction of local democracy.63 

SuttonSutton Development Control Refusals Development ControlCommittee Refusals 2007-08 60 60% %

55 55% % 45% 45%

50 50% % 40 40% % 30 30% % 20 20% % 10 10% % 0% Committee Refusals Overturned on  Appeal  App eal ((11 11))

Committee Refusals Upheld on  Appeal  App eal ((9) 9)

62. Strong Foundations: Building Homes and Communities  p.  p. 25  25 

63. This appears to be above the national average of a third of appeals being allowed. The Killian Pretty Review: Planning applications - A faster and more responsive system: Final Report , 24 November 2008, Department for Communities and Local Government research paper.

122

 

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  Members of the Policy Group have

account at the start of the planning

expressed their exasperation at what is

process, by making pre-application

perceived to be a lack of willingness to

consultations between developers and

fight Sutton’s corner against the top-

local residents mandatory for major

down regime from Central Government.

applications. It has also promised to guarantee that councillors will be free to

We attribute this malaise to the political leadership of the Council which is too

campaign and to represent their constituents on planning issues.64 

often silent on planning because of its lack of ambition and vision. We also contend this is slavish adherence to Whitehall, solely in pursuit of obtaining

Using Planning Tools To Protect Our Borough 

Government financial incentives to boost the Council’s income stream. We contend

Defending The Suburban Realm

that the Borough misses out as a result. We need this compliance deficiency to

The introduction to this report draws

end and for the First Pillar For Better

attention to the armoury of protective

Planning , that of vision, to be firmly

tools which local authorities have at their

rooted in Council policy.

disposal, including Conservation Areas (CAs) Areas of Special Local Character

There is too often a blame game here in

(ASLC) and Special Policy Areas (SPA).

Sutton whereby the Council is keen to

These tools form ramparts against

blame Central Government and the

harmful development.

Greater London Authority for its own failures. The political leadership of Sutton

Conservation Areas carry the most

has no drive for using its own initiative

weight. They provide protection against

and tends to think towards their own

unsympathetic proposals for

tactical and thus political advantage

development. They are characterised not

rather than for the strategic benefit of the

by individual buildings alone, but by a

Borough. We do not believe in such self-

mixture of factors that make up the local

serving political face-saving.

scene from the road network to paving materials, thoroughfares, mixture of uses

The Second Pillar for Better Planning is to

contemporary and historical, trees, street

bring the community closer to the

furniture and much more.65 They are

planning process. In order to do this the

areas of historical or architectural merit

Council must break with its addiction to a

which warrant special protection. The

top-down approach.

first CA was created in 1967 and there t here are currently over 8000 across the

Conservative national policy has

country.

demonstrated a steadfast commitment to the ethos behind our Twin Pillars for

As a local authority Sutton has the power

Better Planning  model.  model. Core pledges

to create CAs. Once created the Council

include ensuring that the views of local residents are genuinely taken into

has the duty to ensure that the protection and enhancement of the area is achieved

64. Strong Foundations: Building Homes and Communities  p.  p. 6  6  http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1063   65. See English Heritage: http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/server/show/nav.1063

123  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 12.

and to publish proposals and plans to that effect.66 Statutory duties also require

Figure 13 shows that there is established use of CAs to protect our suburban

approval from the Secretary of State with

environment from the menace of

regard to any proposed development.67

overdevelopment. This is welcomed, but

Sutton has 14 CAs, see Figure 12.

such a high level of protection does not

Conservation Area

Area (ha)

8.5ha

Character Appraisal Completed 2006

Management Plan Adopted 2008

Sutton Garden Suburb

Further Information

Wallington Green

3.5ha

Completed 2007

Adopted 2007

Carshalton Village

43ha

Completed 2007

2009

Designated 1968 Boundary review 1993

Cheam Village

29ha

Started 2008

2009

Designated 1970 Boundary review 1994

Wrythe Green

5ha

2009

2010

Designated 1968 Boundary review 1994

Carew Manor, Beddington

15ha

2010

2010

Designated 1977 Surveyed 1996

Landseer Road, Sutton

9ha

2010

2010

Designed 1992

Grove Avenue, Sutton

1.4ha

2010

2010

Designated 1992

Park Hill, Carshalton

2ha

2011

2011

Designated 1992

Carshalton Park

14ha

2011

2011

Designated 1993

Beddington Park

58ha

2011

2011

Designated 1993

Beddington Village

10ha

2012

2012

Designated 1994 Surveyed 1996

Church Lane, Beddington

1.5ha

2012

2012

Holy Trinity,

1.4ha

2012

2012

Designated 1994 Surveyed 1996 Designated 1994

Designated 1989  Article 4 Direction approved 1992 Designed 1971

Wallington

Surveyed 1994

Figure 13.

66. Section 71 (7), Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act [1990]. 67. Ibid, Section 70 (4).

124

 

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  extend far beyond them. Figure 8 gives a

that carry significance to the local scene

more up-to-date depiction of the CAs

and/or have local historical importance.

and ASLCs across the Borough than

Sutton currently has 35 locally listed

Figure 12 with some of the newer ASLCs

buildings in the Borough with the mock

being included, for example Anne

Tudor design buildings in The Broadway,

Boleyn’s Walk, in Cheam and Pine Walk in

Cheam, as an example of recently added

Carshalton Beeches.

structures.

SPAs have been created in South Sutton,

This scheme is a cost-effective and

South Cheam and Carshalton Beeches but

flexible way of identifying buildings or

are not based on historical importance.

structures of merit and importance to the

Instead they reflect the quality of

local community with a Council

development and the townscape value.

protection status. This places the onus on

They are not recognised by law in the

the owner to maintain its character. It is

same way that CAs are. The lack of legal

less bureaucratic than other alternatives.

status for SPAs means that they do not

The Council should look to make better

provide the best possible protection

use of the Local List in protecting our

against development.

suburban environment and the buildings within it that make it special.

Sutton has 174 statutory listed buildings and structures at Grades I, II or II* with

Unfortunately, as a local authority we

their status administered by English

cannot change a 60 year body of

Heritage.68 For example, Wallington Town

planning law, built up from case law and

Hall was granted listed building status as

statute, but the Council’s political

a building of historical and architectural

leadership has very real power to change

interest. Sutton currently has three listed

the culture surrounding local planning.

buildings/structures which English

Thus far it has chosen not to do so.

Heritage has placed on its ‘at risk’ register: the lych-gate at the entrance to the West Churchyard extension at St. Mary’s Church, Beddington, the Orangery Wall at Beddington Place, and the Grotto at Carshalton Park. Urgent attention should be given to these architectural and historical assets in the Borough and the Council should strain every sinew to work with English Heritage to see them protected. Sutton operates a ‘Local Listing’ scheme for buildings of local importance. Although they do not provide statutory protection they are a flexible and easier way to allocate importance to buildings

We believe it should.

68. Under the 1990 Act.

125  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

The Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery Green Council?

“An attractive and distinctive suburban Borough, offering a high quality

In a similar way to Sutton’s planning

residential environment, well designed

policy, the Council has worthy aspirations and its vision statements explicitly state

buildings, ‘liveable’ streets and public spaces and, in which all development

an intention to shape an environmentally

contributes towards safe, cohesive and

friendly Borough. The Council’s vision, as

sustainable communities” .70 

included in its Core Planning Strategy section ‘Achieving Environmental

It would be churlish to suggest that

Sustainability’ and ‘Improving the

Sutton Council has not benefited from a

Streetscene and Living Environment’

green reputation in the past. As the green

reads:

agenda founds its roots in British politics in the late 1980s, Sutton found itself in

‘“An environmentally sustainable

the new wave of local authorities

suburban Borough, building on Sutton’s

promoting the recycling agenda which, as

reputation as a greener, cleaner

we have pointed out, local residents have

Borough [sic] and working towards the

embraced. In fact it first introduced

Council’s long-term goal of ‘One Planet

kerbside collection of paper to

Living’ by addressing the causes and

households in 1992.

potential impacts of climate change, promoting built energy efficiency and

However, when you strip the marketing

renewables, cutting pollution, reducing

and rhetoric away, in terms of real action

waste, managing flood risk and

the Council’s efforts can be described as

protecting habitats and species

somewhat ordinary – a gaping difference - And -

diversity”

between the grandiosity and the reality or, of course, a Borough of Contradictions.

Figure 14.69 

Recycling Services Survey: How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the quality of recycling services that are provided locally? 59%

Fairly Satisfied 18%

Very Satisfied 11%

Neither 

8%

Fairly Dissatisfied 2%

Very Dissatisfied

3%

No Opinion 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

69. Residents’ Survey, p.73 7-. AMR 2007-08, p.117.

126

 

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  Figure 15.71 

Rubbish produced each year  Q Thinking Thinking now about about household household waste waste or rubbish, rubbish, overall, overall, how concerned would you say you are about the amount of household waste produced each year in Sutton Don’t know Very concerned Not at all concerned 7% 9% 17%

27% 40%

Not very concerned

Fairly concerned

Base: 813 Sutton Residents, 12th Octobe Octoberr – 19th November 2007

1

given the immense pressures facing local

Recycling: The Facts

government arising from the landfill Recent studies show that the majority of

taxes that we have to contend with.

Sutton residents are satisfied with the It may be surprising for readers to recycling facilities offered to them in the Borough (see Figure 14). Statistics also

discover that recycling rates, according to

show that residents have strong views

the latest figures available, have dropped.

about waste and its management with

And, as pointed out in our environmental

widespread concern expressed regarding

introduction, it may come as a further

household waste levels (Figure 15).

surprise to discover that Sutton ranks at

However, on the latter statistic it is worth

213th out of 394 waste authorities in the

noting that over a third of residents are

country, according to performance

not  concerned  concerned by the levels of household

assessment criteria set by Defra. Figure

waste. It is important that we understand

16 shows that recycling fell from 2005 to

why they are not concerned, especially

2007 (latest figures) in paper, cardboard,

72

Figure 16.  

Current recycling habits Q Which of of the followi following, ng, if any, any, do you curren currently tly regular regularly ly recycle? Paper 

85% (90) 72% (80) 72% (69) 66% (71) 51% (62) 40% (30) 38% (58) 28% (37) 15% (13) (11) 9%

Cardboard Plastics Glass Steel & Aluminium Cans Textiles Doorstep collection of green garden waste Food waste Electrical items Car batteries/oil Other  None Don’t know

2005%

0%

9% 1%

(*) (5) (1)

71. Ibid. 72. Ibid, p.74

127  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 17. Sutton's Waste Out-Turns for 2007/08 80.00% 69% 69% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00%

22.61%

20.00%

9.86%

10.00% 0.00% Wast Wa ste e Recycl cycle ed

Comp Compo osti sting

Wast Waste e sen sent to landfill

glass, steel and aluminium cans and car

Sutton is behind London Boroughs like

batteries.

Bexley, Bromley, Harrow, Hillingdon and even Richmond-upon-Thames for its

We have entitled this section of the

recycling performance in nationwide

chapter ‘Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery’

league tables. It should look at what they

and this is eminently true when we look

are doing right. If this requires shedding

at the Council’s Environmental Services

its political green pride, then so be it.

Committee’s 50% recycling target for household waste set over a decade ago. 73 

Minimising waste – especially when facing

The 2008 overall recycling achievement is

£40 per tonne landfill taxes – should be a

less than a third, see figure 17.

better measure of delivery rather than broad rhetoric.75

 Just under a third of Sutton’s waste is recycled with 69% of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) 74  going to landfill (64.79% of which is household waste landfilled). Our recycling figures are less than impressive in comparison to the grand rhetoric of the Liberal Democrat administration. With 69% of the Borough’s waste going to landfill we need to examine whether the leadership of this Council is really that green. 73. 7 October 1998 74. MSW is a waste type which predominantly includes household rubbish as well as some local commercial waste. This may account for the difference between the 64.79% and 69% figures for waste sent to landfill.

75. It is to be welcomed that the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, has said that an incoming Conservative Government will look to place a floor on landfill tax for a decade from 2010 onwards in order to give much needed stability to the system. See: Today Programme , Wednesday 9 July 2008.

128  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Saving The Planet Doesn’t Have To Cost The Earth are wide opportunities for this kind of

Working With Residents

approach in recycling and green measures too.

This chapter has highlighted the importance of working with residents to achieve our aims for the Borough in the

Research shows that people would

areas of planning and transport. This vital

separate their rubbish for recycling if

change of attitude is needed just as much

offered financial incentives. Studies show

in pursuing a greener and cleaner vision v ision

that lower income families, in particular,

for Sutton. We have identified the fact

would be encouraged to do this if it was

that Sutton’s residents have an awareness

accompanied by a financial reward.

of waste issues and want to recycle but

Figure 18 shows the percentages of

that the political leadership of the

surveyed residents who were receptive

Council does not seem to be keeping its

and less receptive to this carrot

end of the bargain with fairly

approach.

unimpressive recycling figures and Nationally, the Conservatives are looking

sizeable (and costly) landfill tonnage.

at incentives for improving recycling and The importance of trusting and

waste minimisation. Evidence from

empowering residents to do the right

American schemes, like RecycleBank,76

thing with carrots rather than sticks has

shows that people will recycle more if

been explored earlier in this chapter. We

paid to do so.77 It has been credited with

have signalled our support for the

recycling increases of up to 200% which

concept of nudging people in the right

have turned some of the poorest

direction rather than shoving them. There

communities from the worst recyclers to

Figure 18.

Financial incentive Q To what what extent would a financi financial al incenti incentive ve for separat separating ing those items for collection from your kerbside, encourage you to do so? Don’t know  A great deal

2%

Not at all 22%

26%

18% Not very much

31%

Base: 813 Sutton Residents, 12th Octo October ber – 19th November 2007

 A fair amount

7

76. See: https://www.recyclebank.com/ https://www.recyclebank.com/   77. BBC News, Tories unveil recycling pay plans, Wednesday 9 July 2008

129  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  the best.78 Conservatives in local government are leading the way on this approach with the Shadow Chancellor working with the LGA and the Mayor of London, Boris Johnson as well as Conservative Councils up and down the country. The Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead became the first United Kingdom local authority to embrace such an incentive-based scheme.79 

Bioregional, a social enterprise based in Hackbridge, works with private companies like B&Q to reduce their impact on the Environment through Corporate

The Ipsos MORI survey results in Figure

Social Responsibility policies and initiatives..

18, when broken down, show that low income households were particularly

But what does this kind of abstract and

receptive to the idea of financial rewards

otherworldly narrative mean to local

for separating waste. Two in five

residents?

households said that it would give them a great deal of encouragement (37% of

Worthy aims must be married to common

surveyed residents compared to 26% overall). Additionally, households with

sense when promoting environmental sustainability – as it stands the political

children were 9% more receptive to the

leadership is divorced from the realities

financial incentives scheme.

of day-to-day life.

Evidence shows that rewarding people

Grand principles and idealistic ecological

helps to increase recycling. This can in

mantras have their place, but we favour

turn reduce waste being sent to landfill

investment in more common sense, down

which will save the Council money.

-to-earth and pragmatic measures like incentive schemes, to deliver a truly

Sutton Council’s message on waste

sustainable Borough for Sutton. An

minimisation and environmental issues

honest examination of the cost-

can often be rather abstract and not immediately intuitive to Sutton residents.

effectiveness of Sutton Council’s recent initiatives needs to be carried out.

Take the concept of ‘One Planet Living’80  as an example. One Planet Living is a

Action speaks louder than words.

‘global initiative’ based on ten principles for environmental sustainability including

Community-Led Environmental Action  

zero carbon emissions, the notion that car use is contributing to global warming

One of the threads of The State of Sutton:

and climate change, and an anti-

A Borough of Contradictions  is  is that the

industrial farming agenda. The core

Council is often conceited enough to

contention of ‘One Planet Sutton’ is that

think it is the source of all answers answ ers to the

we need three Planet Earths to sustain

problems and challenges facing our

Sutton’s current needs.

Borough. Earlier in this chapter, and in

78. The Guardian, Nudge, nudge, win, win , George Osborne MP, Monday 14 July 2008. 2008 .

79. Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, see: http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/web/ news_32408_pilot_waste_incentive_scheme.htm   news_32408_pilot_waste_incentive_scheme.htm http://www.oneplanetliving.org and  and http://www.oneplanetsutton.org http://www.oneplanetsutton.org.. 80. See: http://www.oneplanetliving.org

130  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  others, we have talked about ‘post-

sleeves and continued to take

bureaucratic’ solutions to issues.

responsibility despite, not because of, the

Tackling threats to our environment, such

Council.

as pollution and the need to minimise waste, is clearly an area which can benefit

In March 2007, the Liberal Democrat

from a more enabling Sutton Council

administration scrapped the ‘Adopt-a-

rather than a commanding  one.  one. Often,

Bank’ scheme which invited local

local people know what needs to be done

community groups to adopt recycling

and do not need to wait for the Council to

centres. Adopt-a-Bank had run

tell them how to do it. They just need a

successfully for 18 years with industrious

helping hand.

groups like the Girl Guides, church

Take the Belmont and South Cheam

groups, Friends of Libraries, Scouts, a

Residents’ Association,81 for example.

local wild animal hospital etc taking

During the height of the Green Garden

community ownership of recycling

Waste controversy, whereby the Liberal

centres to ensure their smooth running,

Democrats decided to axe the free

keeping them clear and functional and reporting any problems to the Council. The groups would receive nominal sums of money for the tonnage of recycled material and cost Sutton Council £18,000 per annum. Schemes like this help local people to take ownership of activities to improve our environment and to minimise our waste. The Council is not the solution to everything; we need to look outside the boundaries of the Civic Offices and to

Based on a successful system in the States, Windsor and Maidenhead offer RecycleBank reward points based on the amount residents recycle and divert

As in other areas in local government, a degree of control shifting would be welcome in policy surrounding the

from landfill. These points can then be used in shops such as Marks & Spencers or donated to charity. Working with the private sector and

trust our community.

char- 

ities can help kick-start such initiatives.

environment.

collection service, the Association

In order to achieve these aims public

clubbed together to purchase their own

goodwill is necessary. Policy failures like

device to deal with green waste; a wood

the Green Garden Waste Disaster

chipper. The Council had abdicated its responsibility in providing the service to make environmentally friendly behaviour easier rather than harder, so the Residents’ Association rolled up its

81. See: http://www.bscra.com http://www.bscra.com  

 jeopardise residents’ goodwill in this area.

131  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Case Study: Green Garden Waste Disaster, Risking Residents’ Goodwill In 1999 the Council introduced a garden

were smaller than the older free bags.

waste collection service to approximately

After much pressure the new chargeable

61,500 households. Each household was provided with two reusable sacks, with

service was scrapped. The Council’s corporate reputation was damaged by

additional sacks purchasable for £1 each.

this policy disaster and the relationship

The sacks were emptied and returned on

between the residents and the local

a fortnightly basis with no restriction on

authority severely compromised. The

the number of sacks put out.

man behind the changes, the Executive Councillor for the Environment, faced a

In June 2008, to much controversy, this

motion of no confidence in the council

old service was scrapped and a new

chamber as well as widespread

chargeable service introduced. Residents

condemnation in the local media.

were charged £35 per bag. The inability of the Council’s The doomed policy was described by the local press as a ‘fiasco’. The controversial

administration to see the writing on the wall for this policy, before it was too late,

cuts caused an epidemic of fly-tipping

demonstrates a lack of foresight and a

82

across the Borough  and huge tailbacks

reckless willingness to risk public

at the Re-use and Recycling Centre on

goodwill on the line for a short-term

the Kimpton Industrial Estate as residents

budget saving. In the end it cost the

sought to avoid the new £35 charge.83 

taxpayer approximately £750,000 to put

Figure 19 illustrates some of the bad

the scheme right simply so that the

publicity. It turned out that the new bags

administration could save political face.

Figure 19.

82. Sutton Guardian, 3 July 2008.

132

83. Sutton Guardian, 12 June 2008.

 

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Protecting Our Borough’s

Figure 20.85 

Green Lungs Our Natural Inheritance Our Borough has a wealth of natural assets in the form of our large green open spaces, including 616 hectares of Metropolitan Green Belt, 530 hectares of Metropolitan Open Land (MOL), two Metropolitan Parks covering 125 hectares, three District Parks forming 80 hectares, thirty-six local parks totalling 217 hectares and 203 small areas of small public open space providing a total of 94 hectares. Sutton also boasts several parks with Green Flag Status, including Grove Park, the Ecology Centre grounds, Margaret’s Pool in Carshalton, Oaks Park and Cheam Park.84 

favourably with other areas in Greater 86

London for tree density per hectare.  The majority of our tree population is located in private back gardens and as we have concluded in our planning section of this chapter, we must protect these valuable assets. Figure 22 shows per capita CO 2

The tallest London

emissions. Compared to the UK and

Plane in Britain,

London, Sutton has below average

situated in Festival Walk, Carshalton is one example of an

emissions of CO2. Therefore it is not difficult to make a link between the two.

impressive selection of mature trees in the Borough.

If we are to maintain or improve the above emissions rating we need to protect the green lungs of our Borough. Over the last few years the amount of

Trees are known to form a natural barrier

trees cut down by this authority far

against CO2 emissions and other airborne

exceeds those that are replanted to take

pollutants. Figure 20 shows that 17% of

their place. In the period 2004-2006 the

our Borough’s trees reside in our parks

Council replanted only 19.5% of the trees

and open spaces. We contend that the

felled and during 2007-2008 it replaced

wealth of tree laden open green space in

59.5% of removed trees. To date in 2008-

our Borough forms a green lung against

2009 the number of trees cut down

CO2 emissions and the pollution risks of

stands at 328. The current tree replanting

being an outer London Borough. Figure

policy stands at 80 new trees per year.

21 shows us that Sutton compares 84. The Green Flag Award is the national standard for parks and green spaces in England and Wales, see: http://www.greenflagaward.org.uk   http://www.greenflagaward.org.uk

85. Connecting Londoners with Trees and Woodland: A Tree and Woodland Framework for London , Mayor of London’s Office, March 2005, p.3. http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3967   86. Sutton Council figures, see: http://www.sutton.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=3967

133  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Figure 21.

We argue that this is grossly inadequate.

our Borough’s green lungs, we are merely their custodians for the next generation.

For a Council that purports to be green, to wish to tackle emissions and even has

The Council leadership’s passivity to the

a tree for its logo, Sutton’s massacre of

development of back gardens and its

its green lungs needs wholesale re-

clearly evidenced disregard for our

evaluation. The stark divergence of our

Borough’s trees is a clear abdication of

town hall leadership’s rhetoric and the

the environmental responsibility that any

reality of their actions represents a

Council leadership owes to successive

shocking contradiction.

generations of Sutton residents.

We believe that our trees are priceless

No Conservative administration would

assets for the Borough. We do not own

shirk its responsibility in this area.

Figure 22.87 

87. Source: 2006 figures from AEA Energy & Environment on behalf of Defra, September 2008.

134  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery 

Conclusions  Conclusions   This chapter has sought to give an account of Sutton’s performance - good and bad - in the policy areas covering transport, planning and our environment. All three are matters of huge importance to the wellbeing of our Borough, its infrastructure and our residents. It will be apparent to readers that we are advocates of the nudge approach to public administration. This approach favours carrots and not sticks. It is a philosophical, as well as a pragmatic approach to working with residents to achieve beneficial changes that will yield

to hard methods of changing travel behaviour. Its inconsistent and financially imbued commitment to soft options in bidding for TfL funding is betrayed by its use of hard options locally. We see this as an ideological predilection. We argue for greater attention to the parts of the Borough that are not well serviced in terms of public transport and that this needs a higher priority status. The Liberal Democrat leadership is right to have a firm desire to reduce congestion but as we have pointed out, it is better done through enticement, nudging and making alternatives easier. The benefits of reduced congestion, both in transport and environmental terms, are too great to risk through political rigidity.

results for the individual as well as the community. The internal cultural notion that large bureaucracies like Sutton Council are the sole source of beneficial change is one we take issue with.

The political leadership of the Council needs to abandon its appar apparent ent addiction to har hard d

Mike Freer, Leader of Conservative-run Barnet Council which was the first Local Loc al Authority to

methods of changing travel behaviour.

receive funding specifically to put the ideas of “Nudge” into public policy.

We celebrate the attitude of the Strategic Equally as objectionable is the idea that

Director for Environment and Leisure and

our local representatives somehow have

other senior council officers in their

the right to boss residents about, cajole

approach to the application of nudge

them, tax them, and browbeat them into int o

theory in council services. We hope that

compliance on various agendas. This idea

the political leadership of the Council will

will be explored further in our Council

truly take note and abandon their

Culture  chapter.  chapter.

conflicting approach. This approach has been characterised in this chapter as a

In the context of transport we argue that the political leadership of the Council

“War Against Residents” in transport policy. In citing this aggressive policy

needs to abandon its apparent addiction

approach we have looked at the drastic

135  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  reductions in CPZ visitor hours and the

transparent. Part of the reason there is a

doomed proposal of using the punitive

democratic deficit in local planning is

Richmond-style scheme of VED bands for

because of the top-down target culture

the price of parking permits.

from Central Government, but this must not formulate a list of extensive excuses

The need for cultural political shifts is

for the political administration.

also in our approach to the planning system. Rhetoric promises one thing and

This fruitless blame game needs to end.

reality demonstrates another. We cannot change planning law because we have no

We need to start using the tools we have

legislative power. But we can change our

got, to defend our suburban realm and, if

attitude to planning and development.

necessary, to get tough and fight our

The Council leadership seems reluctant,

corner on planning issues with

or perhaps even unable, to achieve this. The contradiction is powerful and it is painful. They have very real power here. So why will they not use it?

Sutton is trading on past  glories. Sutton Council’s Council’s  performance recycling does noton match its grandiose rhetoric. developers and governmental agencies. Frankly, the leadership of the Council owes residents more loyalty than is currently being showed. As we have said, the local authority has

Every elected member will recognise the sentiment

benefited from a reputation as a green

expressed by residents in Coleridge Avenue,

council. But Sutton is trading on past

Carshalton when the fourth planning application was submitted to knock down an attractive house to make way for a number of smaller houses.

glories. Sutton Council’s performance on recycling does not match its grandiose rhetoric. Its broad aims are undermined

Overdevelopment and poorly thought-out

by narrow delivery. We benefit from a

development is damaging our community

motivated and informed populace who

and our neighbourhoods. High

have embraced the recycling agenda with

population density is not desirable and

enthusiasm.

the impact of creeping urban sprawl is clear for all to see. This is why we we

Yet again, we need to become a facilitator

advocate our ‘Twin Pillars’ approach of

for environmental action. The amount of

shaping a robust vision for Sutton and

waste we send to landfill is unsustainable

changing our planning culture to be

and will prove to be cripplingly costly.

community focused. Planning should not be something that is done to  residents;  residents;

The Conservative Party approach of providing financial incentives for

instead it needs to be fair and

recycling has been proven to be attractive

136  

Transport, Planning and the Environment: Broad Aims, Narrow Delivery  to residents, particularly those in lower income households.

We advocate ad vocate our ‘T ‘Twin win  Pillars’ appr approach oach of  shaping a robust robust vision  for Sutton and changing our planning culture to be community focused. Environmental messages need to be accessible to residents and realistic. Common sense is the best way to get residents attuned to the aims of an environmentally sustainable Borough. It is also a way of ensuring goodwill. The Council’s leadership has imperilled this goodwill on a number of occasions and does so recklessly. We also see evidence that the Liberal Democrat administration is failing to protect the environmental assets of the Borough in some important areas, and consequently it is damaging the natural inheritance for future generations in Sutton. Its inadequate policies on trees, in particular, demonstrate a lack of vision and will to maintain and even enhance these natural assets. We contend that this gross abdication of responsibility must end and that the duty of protecting the characters of our Borough is solemn and requires greater commitment in delivery, rather than just rhetoric. In transport, planning and the environment, the London Borough of Sutton can no longer afford to be a Borough of such stark contradictions.

137  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

138  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions

139  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Introduction A Detached Council Leadership Throughout this report it has been our contention that Sutton is a Borough of Contradictions, by this we mean that there are many things to celebrate in Sutton and many things to be concerned about. Most of all we think that this is true of the Council itself. We believe that the Council’s political leadership is becoming increasingly detached from the day-to-day realities of life in Sutton. The connection between elected representatives and residents needs drastic improvement. Britain is in the grip of the worst recession for 70 years; Sutton residents are worried about their jobs, savings, mortgages and rent, yet council tax has never been so high. Figures show that Sutton’s unemployment figures have doubled over the last year and that it features as one of the hardest hit London Boroughs. Because the political leadership is so distant from the people of Sutton, it is not reflecting the needs of the community through its tax-levying powers. Records show that council tax under the Liberal Democrats has never stopped rising. We contend that this is symptomatic of a political addiction to tax increases. The contradiction here is painfully obvious: Sutton residents are feeling the pinch in this recession and the Council will not use its most direct power to make the financial burden easier on local households.

As a corollary to this, another contradiction unveils itself. The Council’s leadership will blame anyone and everyone apart from itself for its above average levels of council tax. Be it the Government, the Greater London Authority or the Council’s status as a ‘floor authority’, the political leadership never accepts responsibility. Sadly, there is no evidence that Sutton’s political leaders give council staff the support they need, in order to fight the Borough’s corner in its relationship with other Governmental bodies. Consistently, the Liberal Democrat Council Leader and his Executive fall back on the now fatigued boast of the Audit Commission’s Four Star ‘Improving Strongly’ status.1 We argue that star ratings from remote quangos do not chime with residents. Instead customer satisfaction from local people is the real indicator of this Council’s effectiveness. Such awards mean nothing to residents who have to contend with some of the highest council tax rates in London. The Liberal Democrat administration also has to go a very long way before it can truly call its efforts in consultation with residents in any way credible. Numerous budget consultations have shown that the administration does not take the necessary effort to ascertain the views of residents when setting a financial budget. Despite it being the most important decision of the political year, the administration does not do as much as it can to ascertain residents’ priorities. In not taking consultation with residents seriously, the Council’s administration is failing in its duty.

1. The Audit Commission is a quango designed to improve effectiveness in local public services, auditing over 11,000 public bodies bod ies with budgets totalling £200billion. See Audit Commission website: http://cpa.audit-commission.gov.uk/STCCScorecard.aspx?taxid=105155  http://cpa.audit-commission.gov.uk/STCCScorecard.aspx?taxid=105155 

140  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions Trusting People: Post-Bureaucratic Local Politics

 Just as local authorities are better placed than Central Government and regional quangos to make the decisions that will

A theme has run through several of the

affect their areas the most, so are local

chapters in this report, namely the notion

people and local communities. Sutton

that as an organ of the State, Sutton

Council needs to learn that it is not

Council is quite untrusting and even

always the best vessel for change and

imperious in its relationship with external

improvements in our Borough, and that

stakeholders, like the voluntary sector,

sometimes it may need to switch to a

and the Council’s customers, the resident

facilitator role.

taxpayers. Several chapters have indicated support As we have explored in the issue of Youth

for the Nudge Theory of Richard Thaler

Provision, a number of barriers prevent

and Cass Sunstein. The application of

the Council from allowing those ‘in the

nudge approaches will symbolise a

know’ from getting on with the job of

wholesale departure from the Council

improving our Borough. We argue that

leadership’s current practices. Sutton is

the most troublesome barrier to have

currently run by ‘command politicians’

been erected is the unhealthy sense of

who ‘do things to residents’. We think

risk aversion. It is this absence of trust

that the Council should ‘help residents to

that creates malaise in our local public

do the right thing’ and to work with them

life. It is as though the Liberal Democrat

wherever possible. In fact, we should be

leadership of Sutton Council has taken a

more sensitive to the “us” and “them”

centralist leaf out of the Labour

lexicon which frequently creeps into the

Government’s book and views any

Council/resident relationship, often with

innovation, which is not sanctioned and

malign consequences.

grown in-house, with suspicion, and to be greeted with very lukewarm support.

The Council could learn a lot from Thaler and Sunstein’s thesis and it is edifying to

With the real prospect of localism just

see that senior staff have an

around the corner, Sutton would benefit from the tripartite approach favoured by

understanding and appreciation of the exciting potential to Sutton’s local

prominent thinkers in the Conservative

governance which nudging presents.

Party which aims to see a control shift to individuals, local communities and

Value For Money

neighbourhoods, and the local authority as the locally accountable democratic

We also contend that the Council does

institution of local government. As such,

not represent true value for money and

Sutton can also learn more from

that, despite the hard work of many

Westminster Council’s neighbourhood

council officers, Sutton’s political leaders

approach in order to strengthen the role

show little inclination to remedy this. In

of backbench councillors in local areas.

the instances when it does accumulate reserves, makes savings and/or achieves budget underspends, savings are not

passed on to the taxpayer. Instead, the

141  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  administration always opts to spend money, even when it has come from

Disconnected: Council

windfalls.

Tax Consultation and

The political leadership of the Council

Council Leadership  Leadership 

pays lip service to value for money and making efficiency savings but it does not

‘Local government barely has a pulse ’. ’. The Plan: Twelve Months To Renew

want to use the most effective tool there

Britain 2 

is to achieve these ends - the market.

Douglas Carswell MP, Daniel Hannan MEP

‘innovation’ in driving down costs and

Fundamentally, Sutton is an in-house provider of services and the political

Consultation? What consultation?

leadership is hostile to testing the market through the use of ‘Competitive

Public participation in local democracy is

Compulsory Tendering’ (CCT) for

weak locally and nationally. Engagement

contracts and services. Quite simply,

between local authorities and the

there is no desire to change in order to

residents they serve is also in an

achieve real cost savings. One symptom

enfeebled state. In the May 2006 local

of this is the Council’s leviathan ‘partnership’ arrangements which do not

elections in Sutton, the Borough-wide average turnout was 43%. This is

always seek out value for money.

disturbing as it means roughly six out of ten residents do not vote.

Finally, we have said that Liberal Democrat political leaders do not give the

Recent studies show that only three in

backing to council officers to play ‘hard

ten residents (31%) feel that they can

ball’ with other agencies, including the

influence Council decisions.3 This places

Council’s partners and Central

Sutton in the bottom four London

Government. The leadership seems too

Councils for influencing decisions.4 As

eager to please other organisations

shown in Figure One, when asked to to

despite being elected on a manifesto that

describe Sutton Council, only 11% of

makes them directly accountable to local people. We argue that this represents a

residents said that Sutton ‘allows ‘allows residents to participate in making

contradiction, perhaps the very worst of

decisions .’ .’ A meagre 13% of residents

all, because it illustrates the ultimate

said that the Council listens to the views

betrayal of local people, especially those

of residents.5

who voted for the Liberal Democrats. It is indicative of how residents perceive The Liberal Democrat leadership of the

their Council when so few say that they

Council cannot make the big changes

would describe it as a listening and

nationally and is unwilling to do so

participatory organisation. A less

locally, with local residents losing out as

detached leadership with greater

a result.

connectivity with residents would be expected to yield a better result. Sutton

2. Carswell and Hannan published 2008. 3. Place Survey 2008-09 , Ipsos MORI, p.16. 4. Ibid 5. Residents’ Survey , Ipsos MORI, February 2008, p.34.

142  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions Figure 1. Residents' phrases to describe Sutton Council Coun cil 19%

20% 18% 16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0%

13%

11%

"Sutton allows residents to participate in making decisions"

9%

"Sutton listens to "Sutton responds "Sutton consults residents' residen ts' views" views" to complaints residents about properly" issues which affect them"

also finds itself slightly below the outer

characterise the Borough. Studies show

London average for ‘civic participation’

that residents from these areas,

6

with 14% of residents involved.  

particularly the Northern Wards, are the least likely to say that they are well

In terms of participatory local democracy,

informed by the Council. Those who

this makes for depressing reading. Why

perceive that their area has got worse

do over two-thirds of Sutton feel that

over the past two years are also more

they cannot  influence  influence the decisions of

likely to say that Sutton Council does not

their locality? And why did only four out

tell them very much at all about what it

of ten residents vote in the local

does.8 

elections?  A prime example of how the leadership The connection and vibrancy of local democracy needs to be re-established in

of Sutton Council has demonstrated poor commitment to consultation with

Sutton. Six out of ten residents chose not

residents, is its effort in consulting

to vote in the last elections with the

residents on the Council’s budget, and

residents of St. Helier (35.28% turnout),

levels of council tax.

The Wrythe (36.56%), Sutton Central (36.62%) and Wandle Valley (32.74%)

In preparation for the 2008-09 council

appearing to be the least motivated.7 

budget, Sutton Council conducted a six

These Council Wards represent some of

week budget consultation with the full

the socioeconomic divides which

force of its communications department.

6. Ibid, p.13. 7. All of these Wards returned Liberal Democrat councillors, with one subsequently resigning his membership to sit as an Independent. 8. Residents’ Survey, Survey, p. 40. This link between the socioeconomic status of Council Wards is also linked to value for

8. Residents Survey , p. 40. This link between the socioeconomic status of Council Wards is also linked to value for money surveys, with those living in the Northern Wards more likely to disagree that the Council gives value for money.

143  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Its efforts managed just 22 responses.

council tax, that they did not receive

This accounts for approximately 1500th of

value for money for the level of council

the Borough’s population.9 The questions

tax, and that in a time of financial

were deliberately innocuous and leading,

hardship the Council should help

with one question asking: ‘Do you agree

residents by freezing or cutting the

that we should take more action early to

amount of council tax. 

avoid problems in the future? ’ future? ’ Easing The Burden On Residents To illustrate how poor this attempt at consultation was, a handful of

David Cameron has said that he will force

Conservative councillors and activists

high tax local authorities to hold a

took to Sutton High Street and in the

referendum on council tax if they

space of only ten minutes exceeded the

propose above inflation increases.12 He

number of responses it took the Council

has argued that local people should have

six weeks to accumulate.10 One year on,

the right to a greater say over local

in February 2009, at the close of another

taxation and that the Government’s

consultation effort by the Council, this

‘capping’ mechanism 13 is crude and too

time at the hands of a new

centralised.14 Capping, despite being

communications department with

necessary at the time of its introduction

increased budgets, 72 responses were

during the Thatcher years to deal with

received. This represents approximately

extreme left wing councils, has run its

0.04% of Sutton’s population.11 

course.

Both instances demonstrate how low

As shown in figure 2 (overleaf), Sutton’s

consultation on council tax levels is on

level of council tax has relentlessly risen

the Liberal Democrat leadership’s list of

above the rate of inflation since 1995. 15 

priorities. 

Excessive increases in local taxation from the Liberal Democrats have been without

Such minute responses were attributed to

mercy.

the fact residents were satisfied with their Council and that the budgets put to them were “benign  “benign ”. ”. We do not accept this.  

We argue that it does not have to be this way. 

The alternative budget consultation carried out by the Conservative Party

Nationally, the Conservative Party is

showed that, on average, 80%+ of

embracing a localist policy of

residents thought they pay too much

empowering residents to determine the

9. On February 2008 population figures for Sutton of 181,044 18 1,044 residents – with approximately 65-70% at voting age. 10. Conservative Press Release, Lib Dems Consult, Consider and Ignore on Council Budget , 4 February 2008. 11.Voluntary Conservative efforts on council tax consultation, on the other hand, turned in approaching 2000 responses thanks to the efforts of councillors, activists and the Borough’s two Conservative parliamentary candidates. 12. Cameron to give residents council tax veto , The Daily Telegraph, 13 November 2007. 13. Since 2003 the Labour Government has used its powers to stop local authorities increasing tax above a centrally set level, called ‘capping’.

14. Control Shift: Returning Power To Local Communities , Conservative Party Policy Green Paper, 17 February 2009. http://www.freezethetax.org.uk   15. For more information see: http://www.freezethetax.org.uk

144  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions Figure 2. Sutton's Council Tax Increases Increases 1993 to Date

350 300 s 250

Council Tax Increase (1993=100)

e s 200 a e r  c 150 n I £ 100

RPI Inflation (1993=100)

50 0

balance between council tax levels and

pockets in a time of recession can be

the services delivered by the Council. The

described as “benign”. 

policy green paper Control Shift states that a Conservative Government will

We repudiate the spin that low reply rates

introduce a system that will trigger a

for council budget consultations indicate

local referendum if a local authority

a contented population. The reason why

proposes a tax increase above the

Sutton Council’s consultation responses

nationwide threshold. This proposal

are so pitiful is because the political

places the taxpayer at the heart of the

leadership lacks the drive, ambition and

local tax rate-setting process, providing

political will to ask residents what they the y

a clear mandate between the local

really think about council tax, value for

taxpayer and his Council.

money and the services provided. 

This proposal has great potential for

The benefits of a Conservative

Sutton. For too long, Sutton’s taxpayers

Government are clear for Sutton. The

have been left out of the loop on the rate

pledge to help local authorities freeze

of local taxation by the political

their council tax if they can keep

leadership in the Civic Offices. 

increases below 2.5%, presents enormous potential for a clear break from a high tax

In this time of economic hardship Sutton

past. Continuous Council tax increases in

Council has the power to do more, and

Sutton include a 12% increase in 2003.

must do more to ease what has become a

The Conservatives have found the savings

major strain on household budgets –

to fund this policy from reduced

council tax.

Government advertising and consultancy budgets.

We assert that no council budget which

We assert that no council budget which takes more money from residents’

145  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  The Liberal Democrat leadership in

possesses is a creature of statute. Laws

Sutton is addicted to increasing council

made in Parliament confer powers, or

tax; a Conservative Government would

‘competences’ to local councils. This

give the Council the opportunity to go

hinders a local council’s ability to take

‘cold turkey’. The resistance of Sutton’s

action in many cases, because the legal

Council Leader to the prospect of

system can strike down a council’s

Conservative plans for tax freezes is well

undertaking because it is ‘ultra vires’, the

documented.16 

legal term for ‘outside its remit’ or ‘beyond its powers’.

It is worth pointing out that this council tax policy is voluntary for local

As Control Shift puts it: “[I]f “[I]f a local

authorities. There is no Labour-style

council – in response to local people –

centralised coercion with punishing

wants to take action to address a specific

penalties for non-compliance. This

local problem, it may not be able to do

indicates an application of nudge

so, simply because it has no specific

approaches at the highest strategic level

statutory power to take the action in

of Conservative Party thinking. Councils

question. ” question.  ” 17  Councils simply cannot take

will be encouraged  to  to reduce local levels

the action which residents may

of taxation rather than forced into doing

overwhelmingly require of it because of

so. Provided the political leadership in a

legal rigidity. While accepting that the

local authority has the political will to

rule of law is the cornerstone of a

reduce taxation, a Conservative

functioning 21st Century democracy, and

Government would be poised and ready

that ad hoc law is the hallmark of

to help.

tyranny, we must make the case that the current legal relationship between the

The benefits from this scenario are clear

Government and local government is

– a Conservative Council, working with a

deeply flawed.

Conservative Government can freeze Sutton’s council tax for the first time in

We have made the case in the planning

its history. 

section of the Transport, Planning and

That is not to say that the task will be

The Environment chapter to this report that numerous hindrances in our law,

easy, but the present dearth of ambition

common law and statute, have given rise

to ease the burden on residents from the

to an exceptionally neutered role for local

current political leadership is hanging

councillors in many areas of local

many residents out to dry.

governance, often in areas that have strong demand from residents for more

Freeing Up Councils: Putting Residents’

operative competence. But it is not solely

Interests First  

legislative flaws that create handcuffs h andcuffs to competences in local government, it is

Sutton Council, like all other local

the policy orientation and the political

authorities, suffers the yoke of ‘statutory

outlook of the Government and – perhaps

duty’ and restricted competence. This means that the power our Council

 just as importantly – local councils themselves.

16. Evening Standard, 1 October 2008.

146  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions It is too often the case that the political

The Liberal Democrat leadership have

leadership of local councils – Sutton

bought into the culture of compliance

being one – is too scared of its own

and reject any assertion that their Four

shadow when it comes to taking action

Stars are not reflective of real service

for local residents. The administration

delivery or efficiency. Instead, they seem

revel in their Four Star status, take

to unwittingly echo the feeble

immense comfort from it and then think

rationalisation employed by Labour

that the job of local government is done.

Ministers for the target driven quango

The Conservative Party has made clear its

compliance culture. They work in reverse

intention to remove the shackles from

by suggesting that their Four Stars are

local councils and this will include giving

proof enough that services have

them a ‘general power of competence’ –

improved, but that they just need better

the ability to get the job of delivering for

communication to tell people.19 

residents done, without the constant fear of ultra vires accusations. This means

The doting attention given to the Audit

that as long as it is lawful a local council

Commission by the leadership of Sutton

18

can do it.  

Council is ironic given the Liberal Democrat Deputy Leader and Treasury

If a remote and unaccountable quango to

spokesman Dr Vince Cable’s now well

top all quangos is happy (the Audit

documented disdain for the organisation.

Commission), then the Liberal Democrat

Dr Cable has called for the organisation

Leader of Sutton Council is happy. He,

to be disbanded and that making councils

and his colleagues, are content. They

“compete for stars from an unelected

have done their job in their minds. 

quango ” was “disrespectful  “disrespectful ” and “utterly “utterly perverse.”” 20 We could not agree more perverse.

This is not the hallmark of good local

with Dr Cable in this regard, but what of

governance. It is a symptom of the

his party colleagues on Sutton Council? 21 

detached and otherworldly culture of the Council’s leadership, undeniably well

When it comes to using initiative and

meaning but ineffective. 

doing things independently, Conservative

The Conservative outlook is not focused

Councils like Westminster City Council, Surrey County Council and Kent County

on slavish compliance to the Audit

Council have strengthened their

Commission’s latest whim. It is about

individual ward councillors through

removing the handcuffs, both imposed

devolved budgets. Kent, for example,

and self-imposed, on local government

gives each councillor £10,000 to whom

to deliver what councillors are elected to

any local voluntary community group can

do.

apply for funding.22

18. Ibid, p.15. 19. Bundred’s blind belief , John Seddon, The Guardian, Thursday 7 July 2009. 20. Cable slams star rating assessments , Local Government Chronicle, 2 July 2009. 21. This would not be the first time that the local Liberal Democrat leadership would find themselves in hot water with their senior frontbench. The Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay, Liberal Democrat Treasury Lords spokesman asked question [HL4580] in the House of Lords on Tuesday 15 July 2008, in which he slammed councils who

asked question [HL4580] in the House of Lords on Tuesday 15 July 2008, in which he slammed councils who invested in Icelandic Banks prior to the collapse of Heritable Bank, the United Kingdom subsidiary of Landsbanki 22. Member Community Grant Scheme, see guidance: http://www.kent.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/D29F3679-BBF84127-A758-3DEE49250D9A/22482/GRANTSnotesandapplicationform09version3.pdf . .

147

 

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions  Sutton Council’s leadership talks the talk

controversial pet project is due to cost

when it comes to localism through the

£8.5million. This is the kind of money

use of Local Committees (a step in the

that voluntary sector groups in Sutton,

right direction) but could give them

who make the very most of shoestring

stronger devolved budgets to deliver for

budgets, can only dream of.

their neighbourhoods.  Similarly in our chapter on adult social Conservative Councils have put their

services, Transforming The Hidden

money where their mouth is. They are

Service That Can Affect Everyone , we

backing up their localist credentials with

argue that the Council’s leadership must

cash. 

look at what more it can do to help the voluntary sector in assisting in the

We see this as a refreshing approach in

delivery of the transformation agenda in

tackling the Borough of Contradictions. 

the area. This agenda, like youth provision, has long-term life-changing

Voluntary Sector

significance for so many Sutton residents.

In several chapters of this report we have

Voluntary endeavour, in our view, has a

argued for what is called the post-

role to play in environmental community-

bureaucratic approach; breaking with the

led action, as outlined in Transport,

fundamental conceit that local

Planning and The Environment .

government institutions are the universal

Community recycling schemes have

key to tackling the issues that matter to

worked in the past but no longer seem

residents. This conceit is both spoken

interesting to the Council leadership.

and unspoken. We have briefly mentioned the scheme in In Youth Provision, Health and Leisure  we  we

Kent, called the Member Community

have voiced our exasperation at the lack

Grant scheme. The Council’s only

of trust in voluntary youth organisations

stipulation is that applications must show

to use their expertise in working with

community benefit potential and to hold

young people. The benefits of this are clear, but cultural barriers are obstructing

a bank account. It has benefited groups in the county to the tune of £3million to

this fruitful avenue. The consequence of

date through its no-strings-attached

this is that the in-house provision of

approach. Examples of projects which

youth services simply is not effective. A

have benefited include the establishment

mixture of centralising conceit, meshed

of a youth club, outdoor education

together with risk aversion and spliced

projects for disaffected youths, and a

with a quick hit short-term ethos has

voluntary carers’ group. Individual

hampered the effectiveness of a service

councillors retain the strong link to the

which has exceptional potential for long-

community that they are supporting.

term, life-changing youth services for the Borough’s young people.

Our voluntary sector forms the beating

This risk aversion is also very costly. Take

heart of public life in Sutton. It is a credit to the entire Borough. The many groups,

the Sutton Life Centre for example. This

behind the scenes and rarely in the

148  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions limelight, have tremendous amounts to

differ from Sutton by sharing the rewards

give in terms of time, enthusiasm, and

of good management by easing the tax

experience. 

burden.

We could do so much more to become a

The administration in Hammersmith and

facilitating Council rather than a distant,

Fulham has used smarter working to save

even untrusting, acquaintance. 

nearly half a million pounds. They have gained £4million in savings from their

More Than Just Words: Value for Money

award-winning service called Customer Access Strategy, while simultaneously

Spending in Sutton has expanded

improving it. Despite a multiplicity of

continuously over the 23 year period that

budgetary pressures being imposed on

the Liberal Democrats have been in

local government, the administration in

control. Stark differences between

Hammersmith and Fulham has reduced

different London Councils who are

actual spending by £7million. The

distinct in their attitude to public finances

Council’s debt has been lowered by

and local governance, can be illustrated

£20million, freeing up more money to

by Conservative-controlled Hammersmith

spend on services.

and Fulham. When setting the council budget for 2009 No one leads the way in lowering council

-10, the Liberal Democrats had the power

spending and delivering value for money

to freeze and even cut council tax

quite like Hammersmith and Fulham. The

because they had accumulated reserves

Conservatives have taken a high-tax local

of £11million.24 Conservatives argued,

authority, riddled with debt, to go on to

given the increasingly gloomy financial

cut council tax by 3% two years in a row

climate in a worsening recession, that

while delivering improved services to

this was the right thing to do. 

residents. This is reflected in a doubling of the resident satisfaction rate. They are

The kind of relentless and imaginative

delivering value for money by spending

push for value for money in

£4million over two years to pay for round - the-clock beat policing in town centres

Hammersmith and Fulham has delivered real financial benefits to residents living

and investing more in schools and adult

in that Borough. Despite differences in

social care services. Unlike Sutton they

the level of Government grants between

are unafraid to embrace market forces

Sutton and Hammersmith and Fulham

and to commit to market testing council

their example shows us that reductions

services. The commitment to competitive

can be achieved.

compulsory tendering by Hammersmith and Fulham’s leadership to the tune of

In Sutton, value for money should be

£90million (equal to half of their overall

more than just words. It should be a

budget), is predicted to yield £5million

reality for residents. 

worth of efficiency savings.23 .They also

23. The New Good Council Guide Part One , Councillor Stephen Greenhalgh, Centre for Policy Studies, September 2008, p. 11. 24. The £11,140,000 fund, marked as "Amount " Amount of General Fund Balance generally available for new expenditure," in the Sutton Council Statement of Accounts 2007/08, page 11.

149  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

Conclusion   Conclusion Sutton Council’s political leadership suffers from the terminal political malady of believing its own spin. They believe that they listen to residents. They believe that they are a value for money administration. They believe that tax increases that have relentlessly risen above RPI are acceptable. And, disturbingly, they believe that consulting 0.04% of the Borough’s population is an adequate sample of public opinion to set a level of council tax which impacts on 100% of the Sutton residents.

It is an ideological framework which sees the public purse as a legitimate plaything; an inexhaustible source of experimental income, with the latest fad being the Sutton Life Centre. The constant drive which the Council leadership shows towards attracting attention via the dreaded buzzword of ‘innovation’ 25 means that the taxpayer, more often than not, has to pick up the bill. The ideology favours the ‘tried and tested’ in the areas of traditional council service provision, as well as expensive but ‘safe’ partnership projects. These projects are the polar opposite to the market-based practices which we have

This brings us to the unhappy conclusion that Sutton Counci Council’ l’ss leadership is inherently ideologically wed to  practices which are innately high cost. Har H ard d  pressed  pr essed taxpayers are

highlighted in Hammersmith and Fulham as an example of how a council really can cut costs and make value for money more than a myth, but a reality. This brings us to the unhappy conclusion that Sutton Council’s leadership is inherently ideologically wed to practices which are innately high cost. Hard pressed taxpayers are footing the bill. It does not have to be this way though. There is an alternative and it will come

 footing the bill. It would be churlish and unfair to say that the Council’s leadership are not wellmeaning, but we argue that their cultural approach to local government represents a disconnect with the people of the Borough. The rot that has caused this gulf between the people on the street and the ruling Liberal Democrat politicians in the Civic Offices is attributable to ideology rather than individuals. A distinct version of Liberal Democrat politics has evolved in the climate of our

about through fresh thinking and an honest appraisal of our Borough in terms of where the Council’s efforts have brought about beneficial change and where it has not. Adult social services is a core example of how the Council has done the right thing by embracing the transformation agenda. But in other areas, for example, education, the Council administration’s efforts in supporting our grammar schools in delivering superlative results lacks even the slightest trace element of political support. Moreover, we have provided

support. Moreover, we have provided

Borough.

25. We put the view that ‘innovative’ in the Liberal Democrat ideological lexicon in the Sutton context represents ‘expensive’.

150  

Council Culture: The Council of Contradictions evidence to the contrary in our chapter Opening the Door of Opportunity to Local Children .

There is an alternative and it will come about through fresh-thinking and an honest appraisal of our Borough. Sutton is riddled with contradictions, some worse than others, but with some requiring urgent attention – in particular, the deplorable state of our council housing stock and the passivity of the Council in the face of the ever present threat to our suburban realm from developers. The final contradiction is that Sutton is a nice place to live but it could and should be so much better. This will be achieved by learning from the mistakes of the past and those of the present and changing Sutton from being a Borough of Contradictions to a Borough of Fulfilled Potential.

151  

State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions 

152  

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions The London Borough of Sutton is spending £437 million of taxpayers’ money in 2009-10. Like the proverbial iceberg, many of the services are not always visible. Many services affect everyone, others affect the most vulnerable in our society. Either way, they matter, contributing to the quality of life of every resident in Sutton.

The State of Sutton: A Borough of Contradictions is one part of a once in a generation opportunity to conduct a thorough investigation of the relationship between Sutton Council, other service providers and residents. The authors have listened to experts, politicians and residents. This is the only way to achieve the balance between a range of priorities while ensuring no-one is left behind. All but one preconceived idea were kept out of the investigation; one of the few rules that we are not prepared to be diverted from is that we must always achieve the very best value for money, making the most of every penny of tax and council income spent in the Borough. As the Borough changes, we want residents to help manage that process ensuring that they continue to live in a place that represents their views and aspirations and one that reflects their concerns. This report is the first step in renewing the connection between politicians and residents. It is the first move in starting the debate about the changes needed in Sutton.