Agenda and minutes

To approve the record of the meeting held on 4 October 2012.

The record of the meeting held on 25 September 2012 was agreed and signed as correct by the Chairman. 

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tolhurst and Watson. 

The Chairman will announce any late items which do not appear on the main agenda but which he/she has agreed should be considered by reason of special circumstances to be specified in the report.

There were none. 

A member need only disclose at any meeting the existence of a disclosable pecuniary interest (DPI) in a matter to be considered at that meeting if that DPI has not been entered on the disclosable pecuniary interests register maintained by the Monitoring Officer.

A member disclosing a DPI at a meeting must thereafter notify the Monitoring Officer in writing of that interest within 28 days from the date of disclosure at the meeting.

A member may not participate in a discussion of or vote on any matter in which he or she has a DPI (both those already registered and those disclosed at the meeting) and must withdraw from the room during such discussion/vote.

Members may choose to voluntarily disclose a DPI at a meeting even if it is registered on the council’s register of disclosable pecuniary interests but there is no legal requirement to do so.

In line with the training provided to members by the Monitoring Officer members will also need to consider bias and pre-determination in certain circumstances and whether they have a conflict of interest or should otherwise leave the room for Code reasons.

There were none. 

The Portfolio Holder for Customer First and Community Safety will attend the meeting to give account of his performance against Council targets in his portfolio for matters in the remit of this committee.  

Discussion:

The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety and Customer Contact, Councillor O’Brien, addressed the committee outlining the main achievements within areas of his portfolio within the remit of this committee which included:

Customer First

·        first point of contact for environmental/street scene services and pupil service enquiries, handling approximately 14,500 calls per month

·        successful management of the dedicated lines that received enquiries about the Olympic Torch Relay, the Medway Test and the Police and Crime Commissioner Elections.

Customer Contact

·        currently received all initial revenues and benefits, social care, development management and housing solutions enquiries and was responsible for revenues and benefits assessment activity, social care financial assessments and planning application validation

·        under the next phase of the ‘Better for Less’ programme (to be fully implemented by the end of January 2013) it would additionally take ownership of initial library service, licensing, heritage, greenspaces, traffic and road safety, integrated youth, integrated transport, early years and Medway adult and community learning enquiries

·        the new Customer Contact and Administration models were on target to deliver £6 million savings between 2011-2014

·        90% plus of customers surveyed in random monthly surveys of customers contacting Customer Contact expressed satisfaction with the way their contact was handled

·        Macmillan welfare benefits service - a tripartite agreement between the council, Macmillan Cancer Care and NHS Medway

·        community interpreting service

·        community hubs

·        single contact number - 333333

·        cross-party Member User (Review) Group.

Blue Badges

·        a very important part of the package of support for people with severe mobility problems

·        in the year to date, the council had received 3,909 applications of which 3,127 badges had been issued

·        there had been continuous improvement on the percentage of Blue Badge application customer journeys achieved to 20 days: from 40.2% in Quarter 1 (during the introduction of new national requirements and new national supplier of badges) to 75.9% in Quarter 2, with a target of 95% by Quarter 4

·        a programme of improvements was planned, including: Members guide on Blue Badges eligibility; Blue Badge amnesty i.e. encourage people to return Blue Badges of deceased relatives or for those who no longer require the badge; and Blue Badge anti-fraud campaign, including the introduction of a Blue Badge Fraud Hotline.

Legal

·        the Portfolio Holder gave his thanks and best wishes to the ex-Head of Legal Services and announced the appointment of her successor

·        continued to provide a broad range of in-house legal advice and representation to a variety of council teams

·        retained the legal practice management standard ‘Lexcel’, as well as the quality management standard ISO 9001

·        key to the delivery of major projects, such as the ground breaking private public partnership between the Kings’ School in Rochester and the council over the Stirling Leisure Centre and the procurement of the successful application for £14million of grant from DCLG to facilitate weekly recycling in Medway

·        enforcement work, followed up by successful prosecutions in court, including benefit fraud, a resident putting trade waste in a domestic container and the conclusion of a long running planning enforcement  ...  view the full minutes text for item 621.

The report asks the committee to consider the amendments made to the current Council Statement of Gambling Policy. 

Discussion:

The Assistant Director for Legal and Corporate Services introduced the report advising that the amendments to the policy had been out to public consultation between July and October 2012 but no comments were received. The proposed changes were set out in paragraph 5 of the report and shown as track-changes in the appendix.

Members discussed the council’s Statement of Gambling Policy and supported the proposed amendments made and referred the amended policy to Cabinet and then Council, in accordance with the policy framework rules.

A Member asked for the definition of “living sufficiently close to the premises” as set out in paragraph 8.5 (on page 22 of the agenda) and officers undertook to provide a written response to the committee.

Members also discussed the increase in the number of gambling establishments and bookmakers in High Streets, especially the proliferation of Fixed Odds Betting Terminals. Recent television programmes had revealed this to be a significant issue in terms of impact on individuals and their families, which could include debt, employees stealing from work, suicide, bankruptcy and homelessness. The committee agreed that the Chairman and Spokespersons, together with relevant officers, should seek a meeting with the Gambling Commission to discuss an approach to the gambling industry about this. The committee also suggested research into whether local initiatives to address these issues had been introduced elsewhere and could be applied in Medway.

The committee also discussed planning class use for businesses, with particular reference to A3 class use. Members used the example that enabled a business to use a property as a café but change to an outlet for payday lending or gambling (which is a change from A3 to A2 class use) that does not require planning permission. Members asked officers to review current planning policy to overcome this. It was also suggested that Medway’s Members of Parliament could be asked to lobby the government about changing planning class use to identify a new class for gambling outlets (as per a similar request which formed part of the recommendations of the Fair Access to Credit review.)

The committee asked the Assistant Director of Legal and Corporate Services to advise Members if there was scope to restrict the number of premises licensed for gambling in Medway on the basis of cumulative impact or saturation in particular areas. The Assistant Director advised that he would investigate this and inform Members of the outcome.

Decision:

The committee agreed to:

(a)               support the amendments made and referred the amended policy to Cabinet and then Council in accordance with the policy framework rules;

(b)               request officers to provide the definition of “living sufficiently close to the premises” as set out in paragraph 8.5 of the council’s Statement of Gambling Policy;

(c)               seek a meeting between the Chairman and Spokespersons of this committee and the Gambling Commission to discuss the increase in the number of gambling establishments, especially the proliferation of Fixed Odds Betting Terminals;

(d)               request that officers research whether there are local initiatives to address  ...  view the full minutes text for item 622.

This report reviews the Overview and Scrutiny function in Medway and how it compares with other local authorities. The report also provides a response to concerns raised by Members about how the e-petition facility in Medway is currently working with particular reference to the accessibility of the e-petition pages on the Council’s website.

Discussion:

The Democratic Services Manager introduced the report, which set out details of the council’s overview and scrutiny function and how it compared to other local authorities, based on Centre for Public Scrutiny survey results and CIPFA benchmarking information. The committee was advised that the review had provided reassurance that Medway’s Overview and Scrutiny arrangements were operating in line with best practice although members had the option of commissioning external validation of this at any time. Notable innovations in Medway had been the early integration of the scrutiny of health and social care, the use of themed meetings to look at topics in depth and the introduction of a new and systematic process for choosing and programming Task Group work. The Committee was advised that levels of staffing support and expenditure on discretionary scrutiny activity was lower in Medway than the national average. The number of scrutiny reviews undertaken in Medway compared favourably with the national average but was lower than the average in other Unitary Councils. It was encouraging to note that Medway had a high number of scrutiny recommendations accepted by the Cabinet compared to other Councils, as this was a key measure of scrutiny impact.

The report also set out areas suggested for further review and improvement over the next year. One of the recommendations suggested transferring responsibility for scrutiny of children’s health from the Children and Young People (CYP) Overview and Scrutiny Committee to the Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee with Members of the CYP continuing to be notified when children’s health issues were to be discussed.

The committee was advised that following Member’s concerns, there had been a rigorous test of the e-petitions facility and the route to accessing this facility on the website had been improved so that it only involved two clicks to reach it from the home page.

The Chairman of the Children and Young People (CYP) Overview and Scrutiny Committee advised that he thought that the CYP committee should retain responsibility for scrutiny of three areas of children’s health which were the Child Development Centre; Children and Adult Mental Health Service (CAMHS); and paediatrics. Other aspects of children’s health scrutiny should be transferred to the Health and Adult Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee. Another Member stated his concern at any proposal to split scrutiny of children’s health between two committees, as it should remain clear and transparent to everyone where an item would be considered and this could become complicated.

A Member asked for more Member development prior to the start of Task Group work, in order that task groups began with a good knowledge of the subject matter. He also expressed support for the recommendation that Universities in Medway should be approached to see if they could assist in building capacity for scrutiny work. Members also asked for further information on the legal obligations of partner organisations to provide information and attend meetings of Overview and Scrutiny Committees. The Head of Democratic Services undertook to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 623.

As part of the Treasury Management Strategy and in line with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance Accountancy’s (CIPFA) code of Practice for Treasury Management, there should be a review of the strategy at least half yearly.  This report is the mid year review of the Treasury Management Strategy 2012/13. 

Discussion:

The Principal Accountant introduced the report advising that this was a mid-year review of the current strategy. The current position was that interest rates continued to fall and as a result the council’s borrowing strategy was to repay debt, rather than enter into new borrowing as a consequence of the relationship between investment and borrowing interest rates. To date, the council had operated within the treasury limits and the indicators set out in the Treasury Management Strategy Statement.

Members discussed the performance of the in-house and externally managed funds and asked if officers had considered managing the whole fund in-house, as it had out-performed the external fund manager in the current financial year. Officers advised that the two forms of fund management adopted different tactics in order to spread the risk. The internal funds were placed in ‘safe’ bank deposits with variability in earnings dependant on market opportunities and availability of funds at a point in time, whereas the external fund manager was also able to trade in gilts and bonds, and take opportunities presented by the markets in these areas to make gains (or suffer losses) as global markets react. The return on internal funds was easier to predict and less volatile but equally less able to respond to volatility in the market place and take a risk premium.

Members asked about the fees paid to the external fund manager, counter-party protection with regard to creditworthiness, how Investec was chosen as the council’s external fund manager and the cash flow of the council. Following the committee’s concern at the breakdown of the Nat West banking system earlier in the year, Members also discussed the council’s contract with
Nat West to act as its main bank. Members were informed that the contract with Nat West was due to end in September 2013 and invitations to tender for this business would be issued soon. Officers advised that it would be a complex process for the council to change its bank accounts, for example to re-direct all the direct debits currently paid to the council for the services it provided. Members were assured that part of the tender would include qualitative issues, including the processes the applicant had set in place to overcome technical difficulties.

Decision:

The committee noted the report and recommended to Council the adoption of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA) Code of Practice on Treasury Management 2011.

This report sets performance against the Council’s Key Measures of Success for the second quarter of 2012/13. 

Discussion:

The Assistant Director for Communications, Performance and Partnerships asked the committee about the circulation of papers provided for the performance report which included lengthy performance tables on A3 paper, as this was provided for Members on several occasions: with the Cabinet agenda; in full for this committee and then again in a shortened format for each of the other overview and scrutiny committees. The committee was asked, if the information was produced in one full set for the Cabinet agenda, whether Members would wish to keep those papers available for the other committee meetings, rather than re-printing it each time. The Chief Finance Officer suggested this could also include the quarterly revenue and capital budget monitoring papers included in the Cabinet agenda. Members responded that to avoid the cost and duplication of printing reports more than once, officers should investigate the business case for Members to access papers electronically using tablets/laptops for future agendas.

The Assistant Director introduced the report advising that the committee was provided with all the performance indicators, as it had a cross-cutting role for performance, although it had no indicators within its own service remit. Members were advised that overall the majority of indicators remained satisfactory and were travelling in the right direction, with the exception of W5 Satisfaction with how the council deals with graffiti, where alternative survey methods were being explored, CP1 Children’s participation in child protection conferences, H14 Average length of stay in B&B of households with dependent children or pregnant women and NI 117 16 to 18 year olds who are not in education, employment or training (NEET).

Members acknowledged the issues of concern but commented that all the other indicators were positive and in particular LRCC1 Number of visitors to tourist attractions in Medway was the highest ever recorded. The committee asked that officers were thanked for their work on this indicator.

A Member asked that as the council currently exceeded its recycling rates (paragraph 7.4 of the report) and would soon move to a weekly recycling collection, rather than fortnightly, would this target be amended. He also drew attention to the implementation of the bus lane enforcement by static CCTV units operating in and around Chatham bus station (paragraph 5.3 of the report) and advised that Members had previously expressed concern about the number of tickets issued to people who lived outside of Medway and who were probably following their satellite navigation system rather than looking at the road signs. The possibility of making the road through the bus station (no longer open to traffic) a different colour and officers were asked if there had been any progress on this matter.

Officers responded that the recycling target rate would be considered for the 2013/2014 Council Plan in light of the change to weekly recycling collections, and undertook to provide information on the number of tickets issued to motorists driving through Chatham bus station, if possible, in time for the meeting of the Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 625.

This report details the revenue budget forecasts as at the end of quarter 2 (April to September 2012) and highlights the major financial risks remaining in respect of the 2012/2013 General Fund revenue budget. 

Discussion:

The Chief Finance Officer introduced the report advising that the outturn position had changed only slightly between quarter 1 and quarter 2.

Members asked about the forecast overspend resulting from higher than anticipated garden waste (paragraph 5.1 of the report) and asked that as the council was collecting larger quantities and soon to move to a weekly collection, would this have even more of an impact on costs. Officers responded that for this particular summer, as there had been continual wet weather, the grass had grown more than usual and therefore the council had seen abnormal amounts of green waste. This would be totally dependent on the weather each summer.

The committee also asked, with reference to paragraph 5.1 of the report, about the re-profiling of the disposal of waste between incineration and landfill and whether this was an additional cost for the council. Officers responded that the contract set out the agreement of each of these proportions but the council’s contractor had a limit for the amount it could send to incineration and they were currently at the capacity of their limit. Officers would discuss this further with the contractor.

A Member asked about the planned use of reserves and how much of those monies had been used. Officers advised that this funding source was shown at the bottom of Table 1 of the report with the service budgets allocated to the directorate lines and variations, if they occurred, being reported in the narrative for each directorate. The use of reserves was also set out within the Medium Term Financial Plan.

Decision:

The committee noted the forecast outturn position fro 2012/2013 and any proposed management action to reduce the potential deficit.

This report presents the capital monitoring for the period to September 2012, with an outturn forecast for 2012/13. 

Discussion:

The Chief Finance Officer introduced the report advising that Table 2 of the report (page 139 of the agenda) set out the project progress summary and all of the projects were making satisfactory progress.

A Member questioned why some of the schemes did not fall within the unsatisfactory column, as the gross cost of the schemes had increased over time. Officers responded that changes were constantly being made to the capital programme and were reported every quarter to Cabinet, this committee and Council, as necessary. Governance of the capital budget was very strict and in the Quarter 2 report the virements and additions were set out in paragraphs 4.2.1, 4.2.2 and 4.3.1. Members acknowledged that for most projects the initial estimate and final cost was the same but for projects where the cost had increased, officers were asked to consider how to clearly show details in future reports of the initial costs and the final estimate for projects where the costs had increased throughout the programme of works.

With reference to the Academy programme of capital works, Members requested that their thanks was extended to the Head of Category Management, place and projects, for her work on this programme.

Decision:

The committee agreed to:

(a)         note the spending forecasts summarised at Tables 1 and Appendix 1;

(b)         note the budget virements and additions as detailed in paragraphs 4.2.1, 4.2.2 and 4.3.1;

(c)         thank the Head of Category Management, places and projects, for her work on the Academies programme.

This report presents the Council’s draft budget for 2013/2014.  In accordance with the constitution, Cabinet is required to develop ‘initial budget proposals’ approximately three months before finalising the budget and setting council tax levels at the end of February 2013.

The draft budget is based on the principles contained in the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) 2013/2016 approved by Cabinet in October and reflects the formula grant assumptions for 2013/2014 announced as part of the consultation on the Resource Review this year. 

Discussion:

The Chief Finance Officer introduced the report and advised that the government had made several announcements about future funding since the drafting of the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) that were incorporated in the report and the provisional settlement made to each Local Authority would not be published until 19 December 2012. The final budget for 2013/2014 would be very different from that presented in this report, as the forecast budget gap was now significantly greater than the MTFP had predicted and currently stood at £11,950 million. Table 4 in the report summarised the movement from the MTFP deficit of £5.917 million to the £11.950 million now shown and Members were advised of the various changes.

The Chief Finance Officer informed Members that the recent funding announcements were further complicated by a re-distribution of business rates, as set out in Appendix 1. The outcome of the combination of formula funding grant changes, changes to school funding, the Council Tax freeze and business rates re-distribution would result in the council having, over its current three year programme, a deficit of £11.9 million in 2013/2014,
£18 million in 2014/2015 and £23.5 million in 2015/2016, as set out in Table 5 of the report.

The committee discussed the late changes being made by the government to funding arrangements for Local Authorities and the far-reaching problems this caused for setting a balanced budget within the required timescales for the forthcoming financial year.

Members asked if Home to School Transport funding could be delegated to the Academies but officers advised that this was a statutory function for the Local Education Authority to be financed from a central budget and was not within the schools budgets.

The committee also asked about future funding for the Medway Tunnel and whether officers continued to lobby the government about taking over the funding for this, as it remained the only tunnel in England not funded by central government and took a large part of the council’s resources to maintain. The committee was assured that officers continued to use every means possible to lobby the government about this. Members asked that the financing of the tunnel was included in the budget report due to be considered by the committee at its next meeting.

Members discussed the proposed zero increase on pay budgets, which was one of the key assumptions that underpinned the budget requirement for 2013/2014 (as set out in paragraph 4.5 of the report) and asked what the national pay increase was estimated to be. Officers responded that this was currently set at 1% increase but there was an on-going consultation with staff about the council coming out of the National Agreement and introducing local pay negotiations.

A Member gave details of an extensive debate held by the Regeneration, Community and Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee on road maintenance which had concluded that if additional monies were not included in the budget, there would be worse deterioration of the roads that would cost more to replace in the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 628.

This item advises Members of the current work programme and allows them to adjust it in the light of latest priorities, issues and circumstances. It gives Members the opportunity to shape and direct the Committee’s activities over the year.  

Discussion:

The Democratic Services Officer introduced the report highlighting the items on the current Cabinet Forward Plan within the remit of the committee, the proposed timetable for deciding topics for future in-depth reviews and the work of the other Overview and Scrutiny Committees.

A Member requested a future report to set out responses to questions raised at a Member training course on Health and Safety held on 28 November 2012.

A Member also requested that up-to-date information on the progress of works being carried out at Medway crematorium was circulated to the committee via a Briefing Note.

The committee stated its concern at a report on Rochester Airport being added to the Cabinet Forward Plan without an opportunity for the committee to consider the report and also, that the Health and Adult Social Care work programme, which included an item on relocation of GP practices in Princes Park and Walderslade wards, had been published with the agenda for this meeting before the Ward Councillors had been informed of the proposals.

Decision:

The committee agreed to:

(a)    note the current work programme and the work undertaken by all Overview and Scrutiny Committees;

(b)         note the proposed timetable and process for determination of the next round of in depth reviews and to agree all members of the Committee should send ideas for topics within the remit of this Committee to the Chairman and Opposition Spokespersons (with a copy to the Head of Democratic Services) by no later than 28 February 2013 having regard to the criteria previously adopted for selection of topics as set out at Appendix 4;

(c)         request a report is added to the work programme setting out responses to issues covered at a  Member training course on Health and Safety held on 28 November 2012;

(d)         request a Briefing Note giving up-to-date information on the progress of works at Medway Crematorium;

(e)         note its concern at a report being added to the Cabinet Forward Plan on Rochester Airport which did not allow the committee the opportunity to consider prior to Cabinet;

(f)           note Members concern that Ward Members were not notified of the re-location of GP practices in Princes Park and Walderslade wards before publication of the agenda for this meeting.