Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Craig Warhurst. Councillor Brandon Clayton attended the meeting as a substitute for Councillor Warhurst.

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 any Party Whip.

During consideration of item 7 (Minute No. 86), Councillor Rogers declared an other disclosable interest in agenda item 7, Redditch Partnership – Annual Report Update (Minute No. 86.). Councillor Rogers was employed by Worcestershire County Council and as part of work duties was involved with the Bromsgrove Partnership. It was noted that Councillor Rogers had no work or other involvement with the Redditch Partnership or the Redditch District Collaborative which were the subject of this agenda item. Councillor Rogers remained in the room and took part in the debate for the consideration of this item.

There were no other declarations of interest or of party whip.

The minutes of the meeting of Overview and Scrutiny Committee from 3^rd February 2025 will be considered at this meeting.

The minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 3^rd February 2025 were submitted for Members’ consideration.

RESOLVED that

the Minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 3^rd February 2025 be approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chair.

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

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

The report will follow in a supplementary pack for this meeting after it has been published for the meeting of Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 3 March).

The Environmental Services Manager presented the Future Cemetery Provision report for the consideration of Overview and Scrutiny.

It was noted that it was previously envisaged that burial provision would be enlarged at the Ipsley Church Lane site. Following elections in May 2024, the new administration had requested putting a hold on any further works on the Ipsley Church Lane site whilst a review of alternative sites was carried out.

Following an independent review of potential alternatives for burial provision within the Borough, looking at 10 locations and 13 sites across the Borough, a potential new site for burial provision was proposed in the report on Land North of Morrisons and West of the B4497, B98 0JD (Proposed Site 2B).

There remained a need for burial provision whilst this site was further investigated. It was added that even with the additional two years of provision found following internal review, there was not enough provision available to last before the proposed site could be operational. It was therefore proposed that a section of land within the Abbey Cemetery that had previously been used for ashes scattering be repurposed to provide ten years of further burial provision.

It was acknowledged that the use of the former ashes scattering area at the Abbey Cemetery and Redditch Crematorium could be upsetting for those who had used this area previously. However, it was confirmed that there would be detailed searches of records and communications provided to those residents who had used this site previously. These communications would be made through social media, websites, and notices posted at the location to inform people of the proposed future use. Residents would be listened to and Members were reassured that this would be an open and transparent process throughout. An appropriate memorial would be considered for installation at the site.

A further proposal contained within the report was that burial provision be included as a specific reference within the Redditch Local Plan, the development of which was currently underway. This recommendation would enable all feasible options and funding for providing new burial space to be considered through the policies and allocations in the new Borough of Redditch Local Plan.

The Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Environmental Services was invited to speak and in doing so highlighted that the resolutions arrived at within the report were not proposed lightly and full consideration would be given to residents affected by the proposals. The Deputy Leader stated that the first recommendation would ensure the Council had sufficient time to find alternative sites for burial provision and in this regard it was noted that as part of the proposals there would still remain a large area for ashes scattering within the Abbey Cemetery. It was acknowledged that many people may find this place very special to them, and the Council would therefore do its best to alleviate people’s concerns.

The Deputy Leader clarified that for the proposed site identified for burial provision, the Land North of Morrisons and West of the B4497,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 84.

The report will follow in a supplementary pack for this meeting after it has been published for the meeting of Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 3 March).

The UK Prosperity Fund Manager presented the report. It was explained that there had been a one-year extension of the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) for the financial year 2025/2026 at a reduced rate of funding. This had resulted in Redditch Borough Council being allocated £818,536.

It was reported that there had been some further changes in the UKSPF for this financial year, in that the list of fifty plus interventions had been replaced with five themes and twelve sub-themes.

The Investment Plan for the funding for 2025/26 had been aligned with the priorities outlined by Members and included support for communities and the Voluntary Sector, improvement of the Town Centre, Parks and Green Spaces and the Cost of Living. Furthermore, there had been consultation with the Redditch Town Deal Board who also supported the priority of investment in upskilling, youth unemployment and support for local businesses as key priorities.

It was noted that one of the proposed recommendations contained within the report would also allow any funds that had not been spent as per the Investment Plan to be reallocated following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Regeneration and Governance. This would ensure that all available monies were spent within the deadline.

It was highlighted that the guidance for the UKSPF recommended that a Local Partnership Group, made up of key stakeholders, advised the Council regarding the strategic fit and deliverability of the UKSPF Investment Plan. It was confirmed that the Redditch Town Deal Board, which performed the local partnership group function for Redditch, supported the 2025/26 Investment Plan.

The Leader of the Council was invited to speak and in doing so thanked the Officers for preparing the Investment Plan. The Leader stated that it was felt important to focus on economy within the Plan, supporting local businesses and the voluntary sector. Another key aspect was to support young people, which included the new youth hub in Redditch. It was highlighted that for businesses to grow within the Borough, there was a need for people to be provided with training and upskilled, and having a fund to support with these objectives was welcomed.

During the debate, the following themes were discussed:

·       Future of UKSPF – There was a one-year extension to UKSPF for 2025/26. When this extension was announced, the Government stated that a new set of growth funding was being developed, and it was expected that UKSPF would be replaced by a different fund in the future.

·       Reduction in projects funded from UKSPF – It was reported that the 49 per cent reduction in UKSPF funding for 2025/26 would necessitate the discontinuation of some programmes that had been funded from UKSPF in previous years. In assessing which programmes would continue for 2025/26, Officers assessed how the programmes were performing and prioritised those which had been the most successful. In addition, those programmes which had no access to alternative sources of funding and met the ambitions of the Council Plan would also be continued where possible. It was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 85.

The Redditch Partnership Manager introduced the report and in doing so noted that Redditch Partnership was the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) for the Redditch area and aimed to bring together representatives from a wide variety of agencies across the public, private and voluntary and community sectors to enable partnership working for the benefit of local residents.

There were a number of groups that stemmed from the Redditch Partnership. The Redditch Community Wellbeing Group (RCWG) was a longstanding partnership group that met bi-monthly and covered health and wellbeing across all ages. The RCWG had recently developed a monthly in-person multi-agency drop-ins for residents to access advice from multiple agencies.

The Cost of Living Partnership Group was a group operating across Redditch and Bromsgrove that was chaired by the Council’s Assistant Director Community and Housing Services. This Group aimed to minimise the impact of the cost-of-living crisis and ensure that people were aware of where they could access support. The messages were distributed in many formats including on the website, via social media messages, and through a printed cost of living leaflet. Most recently, a ‘useful contacts’ business card had been printed and distributed via the Council teams and partners.

The Redditch Business Leaders (RBL) was a group that originated from the Redditch Partnership but became an independent self-sustained group. The aim of the group had been to focus on skills, in particular employment and career skills of young people. In response to a question, it was stated that RBL was not defunct, and meetings were still being held but the Council had not been directly involved for some time. It was confirmed that the last meeting of RBL took place in December 2024 with the next meeting due to take place in April 2025. In terms of the RBL’s Youth Group, it was clarified that the current approach was for RBL representatives to deliver training and undertake mentoring for young people within schools.

Redditch Mental Health and Housing Group was a Redditch specific group focused on bringing together Redditch Council’s Housing and NHS Mental Health Teams, along with other relevant agencies.

The Redditch District Collaborative (RDC) was developed following changes nationally with the formation of the Integrated Care Systems (ICS). The RDC was part of the Herefordshire and Worcestershire ICS, with the ICS represented at county level through the County Council’s Health and Wellbeing Board and at local Redditch level through the RDC. There were two Primary Care Networks (PCNs) within Redditch and it was the PCNs which had worked closely with the County Council’s Public Health and Redditch Borough Council to establish the RDC.

The Redditch Partnership Manager highlighted that due to resource changes, there was no longer a programme lead for the RDC. This triggered a review of how RDC would operate going forward. Following the review there had been a reduction in the number of RDC groups and the focus had shifted towards enhancing connections within established local networks, such as the Redditch Partnership’s Community Wellbeing Group.

It  ...  view the full minutes text for item 86.

The report will follow in a supplementary pack for this meeting after it has been published for the meeting of Executive Committee (due for publication on Monday 3 March).

The Policy Manager presented the Redditch Borough Council Plan, which had been developed by the Executive Committee alongside Officers and the Local Government Association (LGA). It was stated that in addition to the Council Plan there would be a separate Implementation Plan to link the Council Plan to the Medium Term Financial Plan and Service Areas Business Plans. It was anticipated that the Council Plan would be reviewed annually and key objectives and outcomes measured as part of the Quarterly monitoring reporting regime.

The Council Plan had three new priorities for the Borough which were Economy and Regeneration, Green, Clean and Safe, and Community and Housing. There was also a section on organisational priorities. Other sections of the draft plan were also outlined during the presentation.

The Leader of the Council addressed the Committee and in doing so thanked the Officers and Members for their work in putting the Council Plan together. The Leader outlined developments that had taken place under the current leadership including finding alternative sites for burial provision, the ability to use Towns Fund for other projects apart from Town Hall redevelopment, continued progress on the digital manufacturing and innovation centre (DMIC) and the opening of the outdoor market. It was highlighted that in addition the Council Plan contained a number of other, simpler initiatives such as area warders. The Leader highlighted the work undertaken by the Portfolio Holder for Performance together with the Policy Manager in developing this Council Plan.

Some Members raised concerns with the impact of local government reorganisation on the delivery of this Council Plan and the potential that some initiatives could be scrapped if they were not delivered before the commencement date for the new unitary structure of April 2028.

Regarding the digital manufacturing and innovation centre (DMIC) it was stated that the same company was brought back in to oversee the innovation centre development as had been in place at the beginning of the project.

On being put to the vote the recommendations contained in the report were endorsed.

RECOMMENDED that

1)    The Council Plan be approved.

2)    Authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, following consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning, Regeneration and Governance in respect of any changes as a result of the Local Government reorganisation.

a)          Budget Scrutiny Working Group – Chair, Councillor Warhurst

b)          Performance Scrutiny Working Group – Chair, Councillor Warhurst

c)           Fly Tipping and Bulky Waste Task Group – Chair, Councillor Dormer

d)          Post-16 Education Task Group – Chair, Councillor Warhurst

Updates on the Task Groups and Working Groups were provided as follows:

a)    Budget Scrutiny Working Group – Chair, Councillor Warhurst

There was no detailed update as Councillor Warhurst had submitted his apologies; however, it was noted that meetings of Budget Scrutiny took place on 18^th February and 7^th March 2025. The meeting on 18^th February was to further scrutinise the Medium Term Financial Plan Tranche 2 before the report was submitted for decision-making by the Executive Committee and Full Council. At the meeting on 7^th March the Q3 Revenue and Performance Monitoring and the Finance Recovery Programme reports were scrutinised.

b)    Performance Scrutiny Working Group – Chair, Councillor Warhurst

There was no update provided as Councillor Warhurst had submitted apologies.

c)     Fly Tipping and Bulky Waste Task Group – Chair, Councillor Dormer

It was reported that this Task Group had now been concluded, and the final report of the investigation was being drafted. The Task Group’s final report would be presented to a meeting of Overview and Scrutiny in summer 2025.

d)    Post-16 Education Task Group – Chair, Councillor Warhurst

There was no update provided as Councillor Warhurst had submitted apologies.

RESOLVED that

the Task Groups, Short Sharp Reviews and Working Groups update reports be noted.

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

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

c)           Worcestershire Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC) – Council representative, Councillor Munro.

Updates on the meetings of External Scrutiny bodies were provided by the representatives as follows:

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

Councillor Kane reported that the last meeting took place on Monday 3^rd March where the West Midlands State of the Region 2024/25 report was presented. The report focused on inequalities across the West Midlands Combined Authority region in areas such as the economy, housing, health, and civic participation. It was highlighted among other things that the growth in the average disposable income in the West Midlands was lower than the UK average and that 25 per cent of the population felt they could impact on their local decision-making, slightly higher than the national figure of 23 per cent.

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

Councillor Munro reported that no matters of relevance to Redditch were discussed at the last meeting of Transport Delivery Overview and Scrutiny.

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

Councillor Munro reported that the last meeting took place on 20^th February. There were two main items on the agenda at that meeting, both of considerable relevance to Redditch: mitigation of winter pressures on urgent and emergency care, and the overview of winter pressures from West Midlands Ambulance Service (WMAS).

Councillor Munro reported that a presentation by Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust was provided into winter pressures. The Trust had a winter plan designed to reduce ambulance handover times, improve emergency department waiting times, improve emergency access standard performance, and reduce number of patients receiving corridor care, however, the representative highlighted that the overall results were disappointing and the improvements expected were not being delivered.

It was cited that the Trust had an overall performance target that by March 2025 78 per cent of patients attending the emergency department should be admitted to hospital, transferred to another provider, or discharged within four hours. The actual figure being achieved as of January 2025 was 57.2 per cent. The target for patients spending over twelve hours in emergency department was 7 per cent. The latest performance data showed this to be at 11 per cent.

It was reported that the Trust had attempted to reduce ambulance handover delays but there remained significant concern over the number of handover delays and lost paramedic hours. There were some improvements such as discharges from both the Worcestershire Royal Hospital, Worcester, and Alexandra Hospital, Redditch, increasing by circa 10 per cent compared to the previous year. Corridor care had remained a considerable problem at both hospitals, and the January 2025 figures from the ambulance service had indicated that handover delays had reduced, particularly at the Worcestershire Royal Hospital.

Councillor Munro reiterated that the Worcestershire Acute Hospitals NHS Trust had been subject of a Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection in 2023 and was found to ‘require improvement’. Councillor Munro commented that the need for improvement remained,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 89.

The latest Executive Committee Work Programme will follow in a supplementary papers pack once the latest version is released on Monday 3 March.

The Executive Committee Work Programme was presented for Members’ consideration. It was reconfirmed that the items from this work programme that had been added to the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme in previous meetings would remain for consideration at meetings in the new municipal year.

RESOLVED that

the Executive Committee’s Work Programme be noted.

The Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme was presented for Members’ consideration.

RESOLVED that

the Overview and Scrutiny Work Programme be noted.