LGA Governance


Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Westminster Room, 8th Floor, 18 Smith Square, London, SW1P 3HZ. View directions

Contact: Alexander Saul  0207 664 3232 / Email: alexander.saul@local.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

1.

Welcome, apologies and declarations of interest

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Cllr Linda Thomas and Cllr Jonathan Owen. Cllrs Robin Moss and Elaine Atkinson attending the meeting as substitutes. Cllr Thomas had recently been appointed Leader of Bolton Council. Board members noted their congratulations in her absence.

 

The Chair also noted that Cllrs Jonathan McShane and Lynn Travis would be standing down at the forthcoming local elections and they were thanked for their attendance at meetings and the value and input they had put into the Board.

 

There were no declarations of interest.

2.

The Independent Review of the Mental Health Act pdf icon PDF 192 KB

Minutes:

Mark Trewin, Bradford Council, and Andy Bell, Centre for Mental Health, attended the meeting to give Board members an overview of the independent review of the Mental Health Act.

 

They outlined the scope of the review and the structure of the review team, noting that an interim report was due to be delivered in May or June, and that the final report due to be published later in the year would detail how the Mental Health Act should be updated. The aim of the review was to identify the main issues with the current legislation and offer recommendations as to how it should be improved. An advisory group of around 40 people, including social workers, police officers, service users and more, would be asking what the Mental Health Act was for, how it should be run in the future, how rights and risks should be balanced, and how service providers could focus on prevention. The review team would also be looking to simplify Section 117.

 

In the discussion which followed, Members raised the following points:

 

·         Local authorities have a key role to play in mental health care but there was no-one representing local government on the advisory group. Members recommended that an LGA Board member and an officer should be consulted as part of the review.

 

·         Members voiced concerns about the increase in detention rather than treatment, and wondered if this was a possible impact of cuts to funding and reduced resources. The lack of funding was also raised as a general issue, and comments were made about the need to clarify and simplify the Section 117 process and Deprivation of Liberty Standards (DoLS).

 

·         Points were raised about prevention of mental health crises, and how services ensure they do all they can to prevent low level mental health issues from spiralling. Members noted that those in crisis may be able to attend a few free counselling sessions but would then be referred to another service which needed to be paid for. Those who would most benefit from such a service often cannot afford to pay.

 

·          Members wanted the review to recognise the role of prisons in the use of the Mental Health Act and the fact that the criminal justice system, police, fire and ambulance services were all important partners. In terms of prisons, members noted that existing mental health service provision in prisons is disjointed and that if someone needed to be detained in the community, it would happen within hours but it can take up to two weeks in prisons.

 

·         Young people’s use of social media was discussed and members felt it was vital to consider the effects it could have on mental health.

 

·         The transition between children’s and adults’ services needed to be considered and members felt the review needed to be linked with CAMHS.

 

·         Housing providers play a key role in supporting people with mental health difficulties in the community. Members felt that the local housing allowance cap on rent cutting off after two  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

3.

Future of health and social care pdf icon PDF 127 KB

Minutes:

The Chair welcomed speakers to the session and invited Tom Kibasi, Director of IPPR to outline the scope and purpose of the Darzi review into the future of health and social care.

 

Tom Kibasi outlined the nature of the review, explaining to Members that the review team were looking at what the current system looks like, what progress had been made to date, the setbacks and challenges, and what the likely solutions could be, as well as outlining the future funding options to address the gap in resources, which is larger for social care than it is for health.

 

Tom advised members that the review was in its analytical stage, that an interim report was due in April, with a final report due in June. He noted that the key questions were what the state of care was currently, what had happened to quality and safety of care, and the equity of provision, what the impact of demographic changes were and how technology could be used to improve provision and services.

 

David Pearson from Nottinghamshire County Council is one of the ‘independent experts’ advising the Government ahead of the publication of its green paper on care and support reform for older people, and attended the meeting alongside Caroline Abrahams from Age UK (another of the green paper ‘independent experts’, and Julie Das-Thompson from NHS Clinical Commissioners. Alyson Morley, LGA Senior Adviser, noted that the purpose of this item was to bring together three distinct but overlapping agendas that related to the future of health and social care – the IPPR Review, the Green Paper and the future of integration – and to seek members’ views in order to clarify LGA messages on what a joined up and adequately funded health and social care system might look like.

 

Members made the following comments:

 

·         None of the members of the Advisory Panel of the Darzi Review had a social care background. It was also noted that there was no representation from an elected member on the panel. Members strongly supported the idea of elected member representation on the Advisory Panel.

 

·         It was also suggested that citizens and service users needed to be engaged in this debate and Members encouraged the IPPR to find ways of encouraging patients and the public to feed in their views.

 

·         Julie Das-Thompson of the NHS Clinical Commissioners also noted that they had not been consulted and were not aware of the Review. Tom Kibasi explained that the IPPR was an independent charity with a small budget and so did not have the resources to engage everyone, but he encouraged people to respond to the call for evidence.

 

·         Members were concerned that it would be difficult, given the timescales and resources available, to give sufficient consideration to all seven questions set out by the Review in respect of health and social care. There were a number of NHS experts on the panel but few who could advise on adult social care and public health. Members wanted to ensure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

4.

Children and Young People's mental health services (CAMHS) pdf icon PDF 163 KB

Minutes:

Samantha Ramanah, LGA Adviser, outlined the draft submission to the consultation on the Green Paper on Children and Young People’s Mental Health Provision and noted which aspects of the Green Paper were welcomed, and which there were some concerns about. Samantha suggested that the focus on early intervention and the additional £300 million in funding was welcomed but that there were some concerns about adding complexity to an already complex system, and the lack of ambition in relation to the waiting time standards.

 

Officers sought the views of Members and the following comments were made:

 

·         The proposals to introduce mental health support teams and in-school counsellors was welcomed but some concerns were raised including: how these would be funded given the financial burden many schools are already under; how home schooled children would be supported; the number of young people with mental health problems who do not attend school or have been sent to Pupil Referral Units; whether this would also cover primary schools; and what support would be available during school holidays.

·         Members expressed concern that many who offer talking therapies are in training rather than professionals. Members felt that there needed to be a fully trained person to be the point of contact for children, ensuring that teachers were not expected to offer counselling on top of their teaching work. It was noted that pastoral work in schools was not the same as counselling.

·         A discussion was had about the transition between childhood and adulthood, and some concerns were expressed about waiting times for care leavers once they had turned 18.

·         The impact of social media was noted and members felt that counsellors would be well placed to pick up on developing problems such as psychosis, but that there was a problem with recruitment and the low number of people looking to specialise in this field.

 

Officers noted Members’ comments and suggested that while this Green Paper would not solve all of these problems, it was a step in the right direction.

 

Decision

 

Members noted the contents of the draft submission.

 

Action

 

Officers to revise draft submission to reflect members’ comments.

5.

Update on other Board business pdf icon PDF 373 KB

Minutes:

Laura Caton, Senior Adviser, gave members a brief update on sleep-ins and noted that the Board’s lead members had agreed to apply to intervene in the MENCAP court of appeal case. Laura advised members that DHSC was due to send a survey to councils to ask for details of costs associated with sleep ins and asked members to also send their authority’s response to LGA officers.

 

Decision

 

Members noted the update.

6.

Notes of the previous meeting pdf icon PDF 167 KB

Minutes:

Members agreed the minutes of the previous meeting as an accurate summary of the discussion which took place.