Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Baker.

To invite Councillors to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary Interests and / or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in items on the agenda, and to confirm the nature of those interests, and to declare any Party Whip.

There were no declarations of interest nor of party whip.

To invite members of the public who have registered in advance of the meeting to speak to the Committee.

There were no public speakers registered to speak at this meeting.

Verbal update to be provided on the meeting of Budget Scrutiny Working Group which was due to take place on Thursday 23 July 2026.

The Committee received a verbal update in respect of the finance reports that were due to be reported to the Budget Scrutiny Working Group (BSWG). The Chair explained that, as the BSWG meeting had been cancelled, officers present would provide an overview of the three financial reports due to be considered by the Executive Committee at its meeting tomorrow evening (28 July 2026).

Three finance reports were due to be considered by the Executive Committee at its meeting on 28 July 2026: Medium Term Financial Plan Scene Setting Report 2027/28; Treasury Management Outturn Report 2025/26; Quarter 4 Financial Monitoring and Outturn Report 2025/26.

The Financial Services Manager advised that the first report related to the Medium Term Financial Plan scene setting. Members were informed that this report represented the first stage in setting out the Council’s budget for 2027/28 and the Medium Term Financial Plan through to 2030/31. It did not seek approval of a budget at this stage, but instead set out the timetable, assumptions and key financial issues that would shape budget proposals later in the year.

Members expressed disappointment that the Budget Scrutiny Working Group (BSWG) had not been able to meet, noting that this had limited the opportunity for detailed financial scrutiny before consideration by the Executive Committee. It was clarified that the reports had been published as part of the BSWG agenda before the meeting had had to be cancelled. However, Members noted their disappointment that BSWG had not been able to meet and report back to Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

In discussing the Medium Term Financial Plan scene setting report, Members raised questions about budget pressures, including undelivered base budget efficiencies and savings. Officers explained that efficiencies and savings were built into service budgets each year to encourage services to identify and deliver efficiencies. It was acknowledged that some efficiencies had not been delivered, and Members were advised that a full review of savings and efficiencies by service area would be undertaken as part of the 2027/28 budget process.

Members also discussed the provision included for the cost of Members joining the pension scheme. Officers clarified that the budget pressure reflected the maximum potential cost if all eligible Members joined the scheme. Where Members did not join, this would be recognised as a saving within the year.

A question was raised regarding Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and the potential constraints that might apply once a shadow authority was in place. Officers advised that further detail had not yet been provided and confirmed that clarification would need to be sought once more information was available from Government about the arrangements and the implications for spending and budget decisions for the district authorities once a shadow council was in place after May 2027 local elections.

The Committee then discussed the capital outturn position. Members queried the low level of spending reported on the capital outturn position, with the capital outturn position of £8.154 million expenditure, against the total estimated capital budget of £31.7 million. It was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 19.

Appendix 2 to this report will follow in a supplementary pack (following Executive publication).

The Private Sector Housing Manager presented the Housing Assistance Policy and explained that the policy set out how the Council provides financial assistance to residents to help them adapt, repair and improve their homes. Members were advised that the policy focused particularly on supporting disabled and vulnerable residents to live independently in their own homes. It was noted that the policy was a statutory requirement and provided the framework for the delivery of mandatory Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs), together with a range of discretionary assistance schemes, including support for property repairs, energy efficiency improvements and top up funding where adaptation costs exceeded the mandatory grant limit.

Members were informed that the revised policy had been developed jointly with all six Worcestershire local authorities to provide a consistent county-wide approach to housing assistance. It was reported that the policy would support the Worcestershire Home Adaptation Service, improve customer experience and help prepare for the Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) arrangements. Key changes included the introduction of a single Worcestershire-wide Housing Assistance Policy, adoption of nationally recognised performance targets for the delivery of adaptations, removal of certain administrative fees to maximise funding available for adaptations, greater flexibility to approve exceptional cases, and formal recognition of the Armed Forces Covenant through the provision of additional support where appropriate for serving personnel, veterans and their families. The Committee was advised that the policy would continue to be funded through the Better Care Fund and recycled grant repayments and would not place any additional financial burden on the Council.

During consideration of the report, Members queried the implications of Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) and whether the proposed county-wide arrangements would remain appropriate once new unitary authority arrangements had been established. Officers advised that the shared approach would assist with consistency across the county and support future transitional arrangements.

Detailed discussion took place regarding Disabled Facilities Grants (DFG) and the extent to which applicants understood the application process, eligibility requirements and financial contributions that might be required. Members expressed concerns that applicants were sometimes unaware that grants could be means tested and that financial contributions might be required, which could cause distress, particularly for disabled and vulnerable residents. It was suggested that clearer communication should be provided at the outset of the process, including information about what adaptations could and could not be funded, how means testing was undertaken and the circumstances in which applicants may be expected to contribute towards costs.

Officers outlined the role of the Worcestershire Home Adaptation Service and explained that all applicants were initially assessed by an Occupational Therapist (OT). Following referral, applicants were allocated a caseworker who would undertake a means test assessment and provide support throughout the application process. Members were informed that the service assisted residents with applications, contractor procurement, planning permissions, building control requirements and access to wider support services. Officers explained that mandatory Disabled Facilities Grants were subject to national legislation and that means testing arrangements were applied consistently across the country. It was also confirmed that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

The Committee considered a report on Food Waste Collections Implementation. The report set out the proposed way forward for the introduction of a weekly domestic food waste collection service within Redditch.

Members were advised that the requirement to introduce a separate food waste collection service had been established under the Environment Act 2021, with a statutory deadline of March 2026 to introduce the service. As the service had not yet been introduced, the Council was not currently compliant with the statutory duty. However, officers explained that Redditch was not alone in this position, as no local authorities in Worcestershire were yet compliant and a significant proportion of authorities nationally were also not yet meeting the requirement.

The Committee was informed that the Council had previously sought to procure an external contractor to provide the service jointly for Redditch Borough Council together with Bromsgrove District Council and Wyre Forest District Council. This approach had been pursued because the Council did not have sufficient land to operate a full food waste collection service. Outsourcing had also been considered a way to manage risk, given that the Council had a duty to provide the service, but the level of take up by residents was unknown.

Officers explained that central Government had provided capital funding to support implementation, including the purchase of vehicles and food waste caddies. However, no clear additional ongoing revenue funding had been confirmed to cover the ongoing cost of the service. Also, no specific allocation for food waste collections had been identified within the Local Government Finance Settlement. Members were advised that £500,000 had therefore been allocated in the Medium Term Financial Plan to cover a significant proportion of the revenue costs, although further funding would be required to enable the provision of the service to all households.

The Committee was advised that officers were proposing to implement the service in phases. The first phase would cover approximately half of households in Redditch and was expected to begin in late January or early February 2027, following delivery of the vehicles in December 2026 and after the high-pressure Christmas waste collection period. Officers explained that this approach would allow the service to be introduced carefully, monitored and expanded once operational arrangements were working effectively.

It was highlighted that a number of local authorities, including Dudley Metropolitan Borough Council (DMBC), that had implemented their services on a Borough-wide basis from the outset, had subsequently experienced significant operational difficulties. Members were advised that the phased rollout was intended to mitigate these risks and avoid disruption to existing recycling services.

Members were informed that the principal operational challenge related to the availability of land from which to operate the service. Officers were in negotiations with the private sector regarding the sites that the Council could lease. The proposal was for Redditch Borough Council and Bromsgrove District Council to operate from a shared site, which would reduce costs and provide greater resilience through shared staffing and vehicle arrangements.

The Committee was advised that the report  ...  view the full minutes text for item 21.

The Committee considered the Executive Committee Work Programme. The Committee noted that the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme already contained a significant number of items for forthcoming meetings, including items for overview. No further Executive items were added to this Committee’s work programme at this stage.

RESOLVED that

the Executive Committee Work Programme be noted.

The Committee considered the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme. Members noted the items already scheduled for forthcoming meetings and did not request any amendments at this stage.

RESOLVED that

the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme be noted.

a)          Budget Scrutiny Working Group – Chair, TBC

b)          Performance Scrutiny Working Group – Chair, TBC

c)           Post-16 Education Task Group – Chair, Councillor Spilsbury

The Committee received updates in respect of Task Groups and Working Groups as follows:

a)    Budget Scrutiny Working Group

it was noted that the meeting originally scheduled had had to be cancelled and that, as agreed earlier, this meeting would be rescheduled to a date in August to provide Members of the Working Group with an opportunity to scrutinise the finance reports before they are submitted for a meeting of full Council in September 2026.

b)    Performance Scrutiny Working Group

The first meeting of this Working Group in the 2026/27 municipal year would take place on Wednesday (29 July 2026).

c)     Post-16 Education Task Group

Councillor Spilsbury reported that the Task Group had met on 2^nd July 2026 to review the work undertaken previously by the Task Group (under previous memberships) and to consider how the review should proceed going forward. The Group had concluded that the focus should be on practical strategies to improve employment opportunities and skills for young people aged 16 to 24 in Redditch, rather than on post-16 education provision more broadly.

Members noted that further data would be gathered about the current position in Redditch to help ensure that the review was focused and evidence-based. It was also noted that the group had discussed previous proposals and considered that practical and tangible actions within the Council’s influence would be more helpful than any recommendations, including to external partners, requiring large-scale structural changes.

RESOLVED that

the updates in respect of Task Groups, Short Sharp Reviews and Working Groups be noted.

a)          West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Council Representative, Councillor Lloyd;

b)          West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Transport Delivery Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Council Representative, Councillor Pioli; and

c)           Worcestershire Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC) – Council Representative, Councillor Spilsbury.

Updates on the External Scrutiny Bodies were provided as follows:

a)    West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Overview and Scrutiny Committee

The Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Lloyd, provided the update as the Council’s Representative on this scrutiny body. Councillor Lloyd reported that there had been a change to the committee structure at WMCA which had resulted in a change to the profile of scrutiny committees. It appeared that the WMCA Overview and Scrutiny Committee was no longer in operation. Little details had been provided to Redditch Borough Council about these changes, so officers at WMCA would be contacted to request further details.

b)    West Midlands Combined Authority (WMCA) Transport Delivery Overview and Scrutiny

It was reported that the same situation also affected this scrutiny committee and clarification would be sought from officers at West Midlands Combined Authority.

c)     Worcestershire Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC)

The Council’s Representative on HOSC, Councillor Spilsbury, provided an update. Members were advised that two main items had been considered at the last meeting of HOSC on 21^st July 2026: end-of-life care provision and the redesign of adult mental health rehabilitation services. The Committee was informed with regard to mental health rehabilitation provision that proposals were being developed to reduce physical bed-based provision and to provide more support through community-based services and supported living arrangements.

Members expressed concern about the proposed reduction in adult mental health rehabilitation beds across Herefordshire and Worcestershire. It was reported that the current provision included 33 beds across two facilities and that the proposal was to move to one facility with 15 beds. Members queried whether sufficient community provision and how appropriate supported living accommodation would be made available and asked about the evidence base used to support the proposed redesign of this service.

The Committee discussed the potential implications for Redditch residents and noted that Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) could affect future health governance responsibilities and partnership arrangements. Members agreed that representatives from the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Health and Care NHS Trust and the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Integrated Care Board (HWICB) should be invited to attend a future Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting to explain the proposals, the data underpinning them, and the implications for residents. It was suggested that Members of the Committee submit any questions they wish to be raised to the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee, with the questions to be forwarded as part of the invitation.

Members also received information regarding end-of-life care. It was reported that population projections indicated an increase in the older population in Worcestershire by 2032, with a particularly high increase among residents aged 79 and over. The Committee was advised that the proposed model for end-of-life care aimed to reduce emergency admissions and reliance on hospital bed provision, increase identification of people approaching the end of life, and reduce non-elective admissions and bed days for people at the end of life. Members expressed concern about the capacity of services to provide appropriate end-of-life support and suggested  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

Should it be necessary, in the opinion of the Chief Executive, during the course of the meeting to consider excluding the public from the meeting on the grounds that exempt information is likely to be divulged, it may be necessary to move the following resolution:

“That, under S.100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following matter(s) on the grounds that it/they involve(s) the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the relevant paragraphs (to be specified) of Part 1 of Schedule 12 (A) of the said Act”.

These paragraphs are as follows:

Subject to the “public interest” test, information relating to:

·         Para 1 – any individual;

·         Para 2 – the identity of any individual;

·         Para 3 – financial or business affairs;

·         Para 4 – labour relations matters;

·         Para 5 – legal professional privilege;

·         Para 6 –  a notice, order or direction;

·         Para 7 – the prevention, investigation or prosecution of crime;

and may need to be considered as ‘exempt’.

The Committee agreed that the exclusion of the public and press would not be necessary for Minute Items No. 12 and 13 – Minutes (of the Previous Meeting) and Executive Committee Minutes – as the Committee would not be discussing the contents of the exempt minute records of those meeting.

The Committee remained in open session for the entirety of the meeting.

The minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee which took place on 8^th June 2026, including the record of the exempt session, will be considered at this meeting.

The minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee of 8^th June 2026, including the exempt record of that meeting, were submitted for Members’ consideration.

RESOLVED that

the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting of 8^th June 2026 be approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chair.

The minutes of the meeting of Executive Committee which took place on 9^th June 2026, including the exempt record of that meeting (to be attached in a supplementary papers pack), are attached for noting.

The Executive Committee minutes of the meeting of 9^th June 2026, including the exempt record, were submitted and noted by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.