Agenda item - Public Involvement

To consider the following items raised by members of the public:

(a)       Petitions: To receive any petitions presented by members of the public to the full Council or to the meeting itself;

(b)       Written Questions: To receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12noon on the 13^th November 2025.

(c)        Deputations: To receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 6^th November 2025.

18.1    There was a public question from Mr Adrian Hart. Mr Hart asked:

          In January, HOSC heard a presentation from the Sussex Gender Service       (SGS) but many questions on prescribing practice, age of access, and         pathway safeguards were not answered and remain outstanding. The Cass Review nationally, the ongoing NHS Sussex review locally           alongside the jaw-dropping New Statesman expose of the scandal here           in Brighton & Hove, emphasise the need for clear safeguarding protocols        and transparent communication with families. The Council’s Trans       Inclusion Schools Toolkit and the role of activist organisations in schools           have correlated directly with NHS pathways for gender care such as SGS (yet this committee applies zero scrutiny). In light of these links,   what steps will HOSC take to assure residents that appropriate safeguarding oversight exists between education, primary care and     specialist services (and data on referrals and prescribing are available for scrutiny), and that the affected families whose invitations to meet           councillors are typically ignored, will henceforth be consulted?

18.2    The Chair responded:

          Thank you, Mr Hart, for your question and for raising these concerns with           the Committee. I want to begin by saying that safeguarding is taken extremely seriously by this Council, and we work closely with our local       children’s and adults’ safeguarding partnerships.

          As you’ll be aware, the issues you refer to are currently the subject of a        live and independent investigation being led by NHS England and NHS           Sussex. That investigation focuses on prescribing for under-18s and is      being carried out by independent clinicians. The Terms of Reference set           out the safeguarding duties involved, and the process is already         underway.

          Because that work is ongoing, and because it relates directly to clinical     practice and individual patient care, HOSC, like the Health & Wellbeing          Board, must respect the boundaries of that process. We cannot   comment on individual cases or make assumptions about clinical         decision-making while the investigation is under way.

          What we can do, within our scrutiny role, is ask NHS Sussex and NHS     England to provide HOSC with the system-level information that can   lawfully be shared during the investigation. That includes updates on safeguarding arrangements between schools, primary care and       specialist services, and any aggregated activity data that NHS Sussex is           able to publish at the appropriate time.

          I am aware that some stakeholders have suggested a range of actions      for HOSC to take at this stage. It would not be appropriate for the        Committee to commit to any such actions while the NHS Sussex      investigation is still in progress. However, once the investigation        concludes and the final report is available, HOSC will consider its       findings openly and transparently, and will then determine whether any           further scrutiny activity is necessary. That ensures we remain within our     statutory responsibilities, avoid prejudging independent clinical           processes, and uphold appropriate safeguarding and governance      standards.

          On the point about families, I want to be clear and consistent with the   position already set out by the Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board.        Councillors cannot engage with individual clinical cases. However, once     NHS Sussex is able to report on broader system issues, those will be           considered openly by HOSC in the usual way.

          Also, just to be clear: schools  are not involved in the prescribing of          medication, that is a clinical decision between the patient and their       doctor. The schools Toolkit was revised earlier this year taking into   account the Cass Review, and emphasised the need for a case by case           approach seeking legal advice where necessary. There has been no legal challenge to the Toolkit.  If there are safeguarding concerns about       an individual child, there are mechanisms to report them to Childrens           Services. 

          Finally, NHS Sussex has committed to publishing as much information     about the investigation as it can on its website, and will continue to         update the public as more can be shared

          HOSC will continue to scrutinise this matter carefully, within the limits of    our statutory role, and we will ensure residents are kept informed at the           appropriate and lawful points in the process.

18.3    Mr Hart asked a supplementary question:

          Given the weight of parental evidence already known to the council, and       given that NHS Sussex is effectively investigating its own actions, how           does HOSC justify taking no direct scrutiny action to ensure children in    this city are safe — including considering whether the threshold has           been met to request a Child Safeguarding Practice Review? Thank you.

18.4    The Chair responded:

          Mr Hart, HOSC must follow a due process. We cannot intervene in our       in or run parallel to an active clinical and safeguard investigation. Our        role is to receive the completed findings and then consider what if any        scrutiny action is necessary. Acting prematurely would risk undermining           both the investigation and our statutory responsibilities.

          If the final investigation report identifies systemic issues, HOSC will     scrutinise the response and may make formal recommendations, but we will not pre-empt the findings of an active independent process. Thank        you for your supplementary question.