Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence and details of any Councillor (or co-optee substitute) nominated to attend this meeting in place of a member of this Committee.

There were no apologies or named substitutes.

To invite Councillors to declare any interest they may have in items on the Agenda and any Party Whip.

There were no declarations of interest nor of any party whip.

To confirm the minutes of the most recent meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as a correct record.

(Minutes attached)

RESOLVED that

the minutes of the meeting of the Committee on 19th January 2011 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

To note the contents of the Overview and Scrutiny Actions List.

(Report attached)

Members considered the latest version of the Committee’s Actions List.  Officers advised Members that all the actions had either already been completed or were due to be completed during the course of the meeting.

Members heard that the Chair had received a written response from Ms Trish Haines, Chief Executive, Worcestershire County Council, in reply to the Chair’s letter of 13th January 2011, outlining the Committee’s concerns with the Joint Worcestershire Hub Scrutiny Review. The letter acknowledged the Committee’s concerns regarding the number of recommendations within the report, although it was argued that the number of recommendations was relative to the size and scope of the review.

RESOLVED that

1)     Officers circulate a copy of the letter from Ms Trish Haines amongst members of the Committee; and

2)     the Committee’s Actions List be noted.

To consider whether any Key Decisions of the Executive Committee’s most recent meeting(s) should be subject to call-in and also to consider whether any items on the Forward Plan are suitable  for scrutiny.

(No separate report).

There were no call-ins and no items were identified on the Council’s Forward Plan as suitable for further scrutiny.

To consider any scoping documents provided for possible Overview and Scrutiny review.

(No reports attached)

Members were informed that a draft scoping document would be received for consideration under the Referrals item.

To consider progress to date on the current reviews against the terms set by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The current reviews in progress are:

1.                  External Refurbishment of Housing Stock – Chair, Councillor Graham Vickery;

2.                  Work Experience – Chair, Councillor Peter Anderson.

(Oral reports)

The Committee received the following reports in relation to current reviews:

a)            Promoting Redditch – Chair, Councillor Graham Vickery

The Chair informed the Committee that the review was nearing completion. No further evidence was being collected and the final report was in the process of being drafted.  It was fully expected that the Group would meet its deadline and submit its final report for consideration at the Committee meeting on 2nd March 2011.

The Committee heard the report would be wide ranging and comprehensive following a thorough evidence collection process. The Group had met with a range of expert witnesses and had considered written evidence.

a)            Work Experience Opportunities – Chair, Councillor Peter Anderson

The Chair informed the Committee that the Group had recently met with Forward Consortium, a consortium of secondary schools and colleges in North East Worcestershire that provides students with the opportunity to achieve a Diploma Certificate, involving a mixed element of academic and vocational learning.  Work experience was an important component of the Diploma.

The Group had discovered that there was uncertainty regarding the ongoing role of Forward Consortium and other local organisations that facilitated work experience opportunities. The Chair suggested that the significance of this was increased by the fact that legislation would soon require children to remain in education beyond the current minimum age of 16. School children would continue to need to be provided with vocational learning opportunities, including work experience placements.

The Committee was further informed that the Group was due to consult with local schools and colleges regarding work experience opportunities and to discuss how these could be increased.

RESOLVED that

the update reports be noted.

To receive a report from the Chair of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel on any further developments in the work of the Panel that may have occurred since the previous meeting of the Committee.

(Report attached).

The Chair of Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel provided a summary of his written report which detailed the Panel’s most recent meeting held on 20th January 2011.

The Chair referred the Committee to a formatting error within the report that misrepresented a comment regarding the effect of changes to the licensing law to mistakenly state that the new licensing laws had produced the expected outcomes expected that were hoped for, that of reduced alcohol consumption, sensible drinking and the café culture. Officers agreed to amend the report as necessary.

The Committee queried whether the Alexandra Hospital’s policy of admitting intoxicated under age alcohol users was consistent with the policies of other hospitals. Concerns had been raised that this policy might have created a misconception of the town’s drinking culture when compared to that of other areas. The Chair of the Panel undertook to contact relevant authorities to ascertain whether the hospital’s policy was rare or common practice. The Chair did suggest, however, that it was useful to have a clear picture of the town’s drinking patterns in order to provide appropriate support for those in need.

RESOLVED that:

1)     the Chair of the Crime and Disorder Scrutiny Panel write to both Worcestershire County Council and the relevant Government Minister to clarify the alcohol related admissions practices at hospitals outside Redditch; and

2)     the report be noted

To receive a presentation from the Portfolio Holder for Community Leadership and Partnerships, Councillor Carole Gandy, based on the questions proposed by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. 

(Report attached)

Councillor Carole Gandy, Portfolio Holder for Community Leadership and Partnership, provided Members with responses to the Committee’s list of questions that had been agreed at the previous meeting of the Committee, as detailed below:

1)           What did the educational attainment conference achieve? What further action is planned on this by the Council?

The prevailing message from the conference was that a school’s success was largely dependent upon the effectiveness of its governors. For example, the improved performance of a local school was attributed to the excellent performance of its governors to ensure that the school’s decision makers were robustly challenged. However, there was a shared sense at the conference that the general standard of the governors at some local schools required improvement.  Members responded that a successful school was also likely to be reflective of high quality teaching and an appropriate level of parental input.

Members were advised that a number of Council staff and members of the local police had recently become school governors. All local schools were said to have become more aware of mentoring opportunities following a move to bring together mentoring organisations.

Councillor Gandy had met with the Head of Children’s Services at Warrington Borough Council to discuss adopting measures in Redditch that had been introduced in Warrington to improve pupil’s performance. Instilling a sense of pride amongst pupils in where they lived, predominantly through incorporating references to the heritage of the town into all facets of education, had worked very successfully in Warrington.

The conference had also addressed the merits of a two-tier education system against that of a three-tier system. Members were informed that a piece of research had subsequently been commissioned to investigate why approximately twenty per cent of school age children in Redditch were educated outside the town. Members commented that very similar educational outcomes were achieved at GCSE level by two tier and a three tier systems.

An Education Action Plan for Redditch had been compiled and was due to be considered for pre-scrutiny by the Committee as part of the Sustainable Community Strategy on 2nd March 2011. 

1)           Please clarify what further information will be coming through about tackling health inequalities in Redditch.

Members were advised that the Local Strategic Partnership had been tasked with assessing local health inequalities following the publication of the Comprehensive Area Assessment in December 2009. This had allocated a red flag to Redditch for quality of life issues, and had identified problems with health inequalities in the Borough.

Having undertaken a health survey at the Morton Stanley Park Festival, obesity and smoking had been identified as the main public health barriers to overcome. A Healthy Action Plan had been developed which was specifically aimed at promoting health lifestyles and actions such as smoking cessation. The action plan was due to be considered for pre-scrutiny by the Committee as part of the Sustainable Community Strategy on 2nd March 2011. 

The Committee was informed that the Local Strategic Partnership had held an away  ...  view the full minutes text for item 184.

To consider further information as requested regarding the revenue budget bids 2011/12 – 2013/14 and the capital budget bids 2011/12 – 2013/14.

(Reports attached)

Members were updated on alterations to the draft budget proposals within the Medium Term Financial Plan since the previous meeting.

A number of budget bids had been re-classified from a medium to high priority by the Executive Committee and were therefore to be included within the Medium Term Financial Plan. Under the revenue bids, this included: town centre regeneration; aftercare service; business start up grant; and the careers fair for Year 8 students. This amounted to approximately £37,000 additionally per annum.

Under the capital bids, the installation of a new telephone system had been reclassified from a medium to a high priority bid. Members were advised that significant potential repair costs for the current system were behind the rationale of the reclassification.

It was re-iterated that although there was a significant initial outlay for the Solar Panels capital bid, it was expected that this would eventually be off-set in the long-term through the Government’s commitment to rewarding green measures introduced by local authorities. The proposals to install solar panels on listed buildings had been legally approved.

It had been proposed that the budget gap for 2011/12 would be recovered from balances, while the budget gap for 2012/13 would be met through shared services and other savings.

RECOMMENDED that:

the draft revenue bids 2011/12 – 2013/14 and draft capital bids 2011/12 – 2013/14, be approved; and

RESOLVED that:

the additional information requested by the Committee regarding the budget bids be noted.

To receive the Performance Report for the services within the Planning, Regeneration, Economic Development and Local Transport Portfolio.

(Report attached)

The Committee received a written report which detailed the performance of services within the remit of the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Regeneration, Economic Development and Local Transport Portfolio, Councillor Jinny Pearce. On the basis of the information contained within the report Members requested that the following questions be addressed by the Portfolio Holder in her Annual Report to the Committee, which was scheduled to be delivered on 2nd March 2011.

a)     What proposals for investment in economic development do you have?

b)     What measurements will the Council use to gauge that effectiveness of the Economic Development Strategy?

c)      What steps does the Council plan to take to address:

(i) Changes in bus pass provision?

(ii)Changes in bus pass subsidies and the impact on routes in Redditch?

d)     How many actual jobs have been created by the Economic Development Unit? Do we have mechanisms for counting these jobs?

e)     What problems do you foresee in the future for your service areas?

f)  Why is it taking so long for town centre landscaping improvements to be implemented?

g)     Is the Town Centre Strategy overly ambitious?

h)      How are we placing Redditch on the map in terms of business tourism?

i)  What success has the Learn Direct service that replaced the REDI Centre had so far to date?

RESOLVED that

1)           the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Regeneration, Economic Development and Local Transport be invited to answer the questions detailed in the preamble above when delivering her Annual Report before the Committee; and

2)           the report be noted.

To consider and approve the Joint Worcestershire Scrutiny Framework

(Report attached)

The Committee was informed that Councillor Anderson had developed a response to the Framework. This was unfortunately not available at the meeting. It was therefore suggested that the item should be re-considered at the next meeting.

RESOLVED that:

the Joint Worcestershire Scrutiny Framework be reconsidered at the following meeting.

The Committee considered a draft scoping document for a proposed short, sharp review into road gritting following a referral from Council.

Members heard that the proposed review had emanated from residents complaints about a lack of gritting on local highways. The complaints appeared to indicate that measures identified within the County Council scrutiny review, Gritting: Winter Service Review, published in 2010, to preserve the road system during inclement weather had so far been ineffective. The referral therefore proposed closer examination of the report’s agreed actions.

The Committee was informed that Worcestershire County Council was due to monitor the implementation of the actions that had been recommended in their report during 2011. The Group’s findings could be inputted into County’s monitoring process.

The Committee felt that it would not be appropriate to undertake the proposed review as an exercise in joint scrutiny due to the distinct road systems between Redditch and neighbouring local authorities.

RESOLVED that

1)     the Overview and Scrutiny Committee undertake a short, sharp review into road gritting in Redditch, to be completed no later than 13th April 2011;

2)     Councillor Graham Vickery be appointed as Chair of the Review;

3)     Political Party Group Leaders be contacted to nominate representatives onto the review;

4)     Councillors be consulted for their thoughts on the issue and for any reports of gritting problems during the inclement weather during the winter of 2010/11; and

1)     the Committee’s Work Programme be amended accordingly.

Members were advised of recent amendments to the Work Programme as agreed at the previous meeting.

The Chair suggested that as the agenda for the meeting on 23rd March was currently very full, the following items be deferred to the meeting on 13th April:

(a)         Private Sector Home Support Service – Post Scrutiny;

(b)         Youth Employment at Redditch Borough Council – Update Report; and

(c)         Disabled Facilities Grants and the Lifetime Grant - scrutiny of the Countrywide Scheme.

RESOLVED that

1)     the Committee’s Work Programme be amended accordingly; and

2)     the remainder of the Work Programme be noted.

To consider a petition accepted as urgent business by the Chair of the Committee. The purpose of this item is to assess the Council’s housing allocations procedures and whether this is being applied appropriately.

Under the Council’s new procedures for the consideration of Petitions, the Committee received a Petition in relation to anti-social behaviour in Winslow Close. 

Members were advised that their remit was limited to considering whether the Council’s Housing Team was following appropriate housing allocations procedures. The Committee could not propose any final decision in relation to the outcome of the petition.

The Committee was advised that proper policies and procedures were being followed by the Council when allocated housing. However, Members expressed concern that providing alternative accommodation to evicted tenants was failing to adequately address anti-social behaviour problems within Council accommodation.  Officers acknowledged the concern and responded that the Council tried to allocate accommodation accordingly if problems around mental health were detected. However, it was often difficult for the Council to prevent anti-social behaviour when these instances occurred. The Council was committed to balancing support for tenants with behavioural problems with support for neighbouring tenants who had been affected by anti-social behaviour.

Officers explained that set procedures were adhered to in the event of a possible eviction.  This followed a legal course of action if it had been agreed that an eviction notice would be enforced.

RESOLVED that

the Petition be noted.