Agenda item

The Motions on Notice will be published in an Additional Papers pack.

The Mayor advised that three Motions on Notice had been received for this meeting.

 

Post 16 Education

 

Councillor Jane Spilsbury submitted the following Motion for consideration:

 

“In light of Osprey House being repurposed, I move that Redditch Borough Council seek guarantees from Worcestershire county council that the quality and breadth of the post-16 education offer in Redditch is at least maintained, and ideally, enhanced to address the needs of school leavers and adult learners, as well as addressing the needs of the local economy.”

 

In proposing the Motion, Councillor Spilsbury referred to the current provision for post 16 education across the town.  She reported that Sixth form provision was thriving and there was a broad and balanced offer at A-level.  In the past Osprey House had offered level 4 and beyond provision via Heart of Worcestershire (HOW) College.  In the light of Osprey House being repurposed, she was concerned that degree level education would no longer be provided in Redditch, especially in disciplines such as social work and education.  It appeared that only one level 4 course would be offered by HOW College, in Therapeutic Counselling. Councillor Spilsbury acknowledged that the Borough Council was not responsible for education provision in the town, but suggested it was in a position to influence provision via the County Council.

 

Councillor Sid Khan seconded the Motion.  He referred to the regression in the levels of education available in Redditch which increased the potential for young people to get into debt if they had to leave to complete their studies. Enhancing the post 16 education provision would increase the intellectual capital in the local population.

 

The main points raised during the debate were:

 

·       Worcestershire County Council was not responsible for post 16 education, it was the responsibility of HOW College.

·       The Leader offered to raise this issue at one of his regular meetings with the Principal of the College who he considered was receptive to the need for change.

·       There would potentially be access to resources via regional funding, so it was important that the Council pursued this issue with other authorities, including the West Midlands Combined Authority.

·       Retaining in Redditch the ability to learn at degree level was important in enabling access to a wide range of the population as an alternative to leaving the Borough to attend University.

 

Councillor Craig Warhurst proposed an amendment, that the issue was tackled via a Short Sharp review.  This would enable the relevant organisations to be approached for input whilst reflecting the concerns expressed by Councillors.  The amendment was seconded by Councillor Joanne Beecham and was accepted by the proposer, so became the substantive motion.

 

 

During discussion of the Motion the following points were made;

 

·       Work was being undertaken by the County Council and partners to achieve a smoother transition between children’s and adults’ services.

·       The statistics on educational achievement quoted earlier in the meeting formed the basis of a case for improvement and to raise the aspirations of young people in the town.

·       Adult learning was also important for those learning in later adult life.

 

RESOLVED that

 

In light of Osprey House being repurposed, Redditch Borough Council undertake a Short Sharp review into the quality and breadth of the post-16 education offer in Redditch so it is at least maintained, and ideally, enhanced to address the needs of school leavers and adult learners, as well as addressing the needs of the local economy.

 

Proposed Cuts to Local Fire Services

 

Councillors Brandon Clayton, Matt Dormer and Emma Marshall declared an interest in this item and left the room prior to its discussion and determination.

 

Councillor Sharon Harvey submitted the following motion for consideration:

“As community leaders, this council opposes the proposed cuts to local Fire Services, which will leave Redditch with only 2 fire engines and calls on Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire and Rescue Authority to reconsider their proposal.” 

 

In proposing the Motion, Councillor Harvey referred to a recent consultation on proposals to reduce the number of engines across Herefordshire and Worcestershire.  In the proposals the three engines currently based in Redditch would be reduced to two.  She believed the proposals put the community at risk and that the reduced capacity represented cuts disguised as efficiencies.  There were huge financial costs to the community from fire, in terms of housing, lost business and emotional impact.  Councillor Harvey gave examples of the deployment of the third engine at Redditch for incidents including an explosion and flooding.  A reduction in the number of engines also risked the availability for large events where engines were called from other stations to assist.  The consultation document itself was large and could dissuade people from responding as it was difficult to navigate.

 

Councillor Joe Baker seconded the Motion.

 

Councillor Craig Warhurst proposed an amendment, to add the following to the Motion:

 

“The Council should submit a formal, cross-party response to the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire Authority’s Resource Review Public Consultation.

 

A paper is requested from the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire and Rescue Authority setting out the rationale behind cutting the service, with risk-based data to be included.

 

Clarification is requested from Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire and Rescue Authority about how many calls could have been made had the third fire engine been available 24/7, fully crewed.”

 

Councillor Harvey accepted the additions and the amended Motion became the substantive motion.  The following points were made during debate on the motion:

 

·       It was important to retain capacity not only for the town but to enable cross county and cross border assistance to be offered; if only two engines were available then it would leave the town exposed if one was called away in such circumstances.

·       Councillors had an important role in widening understanding about the proposals since the consultation document was large and complex.

·       The increase in the population of the Borough as a result of development meant that a third engine was necessary.

·       Any delay in response times due to shortage of engines risked lives.

·       Redditch currently had 13 firefighters compared to 17 in 2021 and 950 hours per week were available compared to 1,350.

 

RESOLVED that

 

1)    As community leaders, this Council opposes the proposed cuts to local Fire Services, which will leave Redditch with only 2 fire engines and calls on Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire and Rescue Authority to reconsider their proposal

 

2)    The Council should submit a formal, cross-party response to the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire Authority’s Resource Review Public Consultation

 

3)    A paper is requested from the Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire and Rescue Authority setting out the rationale behind cutting the service, with risk-based data to be included, and

 

4)    Clarification is requested from Herefordshire and Worcestershire Fire and Rescue Authority about how many calls could have been made had the third fire engine been available 24/7, fully crewed.

 

Promotion of Council Events

 

Councillor Juliet Barker Smith submitted the following Motion:

 

“This council calls on the Executive Committee to review the public communication system designed to promote Council events with a view to making improvements to its operation.”

 

In proposing the motion, Councillor Barker Smith explained that the purpose of it was to enhance good practice.  She had heard of instances recently where people had commented that they were not aware of events in the town.  She suggested that communication by the Council should focus on addressing the challenges of:

 

·         Some people being disenfranchised as they did not use the internet.

·         The number of free publications which carried details of events were no longer delivered widely across the Borough.

·         More efficient communication of events would aim to increase footfall and support the economy.

 

Councillor Barker Smith referred to the Council’s communication strategy which set out its aims to reach as wide an audience as possible.  She suggested various ways in which current communications could be improved, including use of noticeboards.

 

Councillor Joanna Kane seconded the motion.  In doing so, she referred to encouraging a wide range of input and ideas for improving the reach of Council publicity for events.  She acknowledged that budget availability was a challenge and sponsorship and partnerships might be a realistic alternative for consideration by the Executive Committee. 

 

During the debate the following points were raised:

 

·       Recent communications about the brown bins showed the innovative approach to communications which had been adopted by the Council.

·       The lack of easy access to free newspapers was a challenge.

·       The use of noticeboards was supported but they were not always well used.

 

Clarity was sought about the events to be covered by the Motion, as the Council arranged fewer directly than it had previously.  Councillor Emma Marshall suggested that the Motion should refer to Borough-wide events rather than Council events.  Councillor Joe Baker proposed this as an amendment, and Councillor Sid Khan seconded it.  Councillor Barker Smith agreed to the amendment and it became the substantive motion. 

 

The main points made during debate of the motion were:

 

·       The Council worked in partnership to support events and it was important for people to find out what was going on.

·       The use of digital noticeboards might enable wider publicity.

·       The Discover app, funded by the Business Improvement District (BID), promoted events in the town and this might be enhanced and promoted.

·       Publicity about the light trail reached 42,000 people on social media and the calibre of event offered would help attract people.

·       Engaging with people who did not use social media was a challenge.

·       Advertising on the side of buses could reach a different audience and the Kingfisher Shopping Centre could be approached about using their noticeboard for appropriate events, although this might involve a cost.  Other screens were located in public buildings such as leisure centres.

·       Residents and community associations might be able to help reach those who didn’t access the usual methods.

·       The Council had an excellent calendar of civic events, which should be shared and spoken about with one voice.

·       School newsletters were possibly a vehicle to reach residents across the Borough.

 

RESOLVED that

 

this Council calls on the Executive Committee to review the public communication system designed to promote Borough-wide events with a view to making improvements to its operation.