Agenda and minutes

To approve the records of the meeting held on 1 March 2011 and of the joint meeting of all committees, held on 25 May 2011. 

The minutes of the meeting held on 1 March 2011 and the joint meeting of all committees held on 25 May 2011, were signed as correct by the Chairman.

To receive apologies for absence. 

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Baker and Gilry and Sam Tutt (Medway Youth Parliament representative). 

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)                Personal interests under the Medway Code of Conduct.

A Councillor who declares a personal interest in a matter, including the nature of the interest, may stay, speak, and vote on the matter.

(b)               Prejudicial interests under the Medway Code of Conduct.

A Councillor who declares a personal and prejudicial interest in a matter, including the nature of the interest, must withdraw from the room and take no part in the debate or vote on the matter.

Councillors who have declared a personal and prejudicial interest may make representations, answer questions and give evidence before leaving the room but only if members of the public are allowed to attend for the same purpose.

If an interest is not declared at the outset of the meeting, it should be disclosed as soon as the interest becomes apparent.

(c)            Whipping – the Council’s constitution also requires any Member of the Committee who is subject to a party whip (ie agreeing to vote in line with the majority view of a private party group meeting) to declare the existence of the whip

Councillor Cooper declared a personal interest in item 6 (Medway Safeguarding Children Board) as the report referred to Council for Voluntary service (CVS) Medway, of which some of her friends were members and in item 7 (review of healthy eating among children and young people in Medway – update report) as it referred to Saxon Way Primary School, of which she was a Community Governor, and retained her right to speak and vote on the items.

Councillor Adrian Gulvin declared a personal interest in item 5 (Work Programme) and item 6 (Medway Safeguarding Children Board) as both reports referred to the Medway Youth Offending Team and his brother managed this service, and retained his right to speak and vote on the items.

This report sets out the proposed work programme previously agreed by the Committee for 2010/11. 

Discussion:

The Committee considered the report and suggested additions to the work programme.  In answering questions about in-depth scrutiny work the Democratic Services Officer confirmed all Opposition Spokespersons would be involved in the discussion and that any cross-cutting issues that arise from discussions with officers would be reported back to the Business Support Overview and Scrutiny Committee to ensure a co-ordinated approach with other relevant overview and scrutiny committees and partners.

Decision:

The committee agreed that: -

(1)               the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and Opposition Spokespersons of the committee meet with the Director of Children and Adult Services to consider possible in-depth review topics for 2011-12 and possible reports to add to the committee’s work programme.

(2)               a report is added to the work programme for September on the make up of schools in Medway.

(3)               a briefing note be circulated to the committee on the outcome of the national consultation on the draft School Admissions Code when completed.

This report updates the Committee on the work of the Medway Safeguarding Children Board (MSCB) in 2010.  It presents the MSCB annual report and the MSCB business plan for 2011- 12.

Discussion:

The Independent Chairman of the Medway Safeguarding Children Board (MSCB) gave a presentation to the committee, which included: -

·        A background to the role of Local Safeguarding Children Boards;

·        The Board’s Annual Report;

·        The challenging context of safeguarding nationally due to increased referrals following the death of Peter Connelly and changes in the public sector due to budget reductions and reforms;

·        Things that had gone well - the unannounced inspection of Children’s Social Care, Medway Secure Training Centre and the development of understanding from GPs on safeguarding;

·        Priority areas for 2011/12:–

(a)   domestic violence (DV)and parental mental health and the impact they have on children’s safety;

(b)   antenatal and postnatal assessments and care planning;

(c)   quality assurance to measure impact of agencies’ safeguarding activity, and ensuring voices of all involved including children are heard;

(d)   continued support for YOI Cookham Wood to improve its safeguarding practice;

(e)   early interventions for adolescents at risk of harm.

The committee then asked a number of questions, which included: -

·        Assurance that all communities are provided with support, not only deprived areas;

·        Common Assessment Framework (CAF) assessments - concern that some agencies were not sufficiently using the CAF and suggested the Board hold those agencies to account, how Medway’s CAF data compared with other local authorities;

·        Concern of the 30% increase in referrals by police relating to DV incidents and the reasons for this;

·        Concern that not all midwives are able to carry out visits at the home and how this can be improved;

·        Engagement between the Board and housing providers, particularly those that provide housing services for ex-offenders;

·        Concern with the quality of data and statistics from some partners;

·        Roles of Education Welfare Officers and support for schools.

The Independent Chairman and officers responded to the questions raised which included: -

·        Referrals by police relating to DV incidents had increased significantly nationally and the volume had the potential to become overwhelming for authorities, therefore, ways to prioritise such referrals were being investigated;

·        In Medway, midwives carry out a minimum of one postnatal home visit for at least first births;

·        Each GP practice in Medway has been asked to identify a safeguarding lead and all GPs were more aware of their role in safeguarding;

·        Medway was working with some other local authorities to consider ways of measuring the impact and difference made through using the CAF, which was being piloted;

·        Recognition that more work needed to be done to engage with housing providers in terms of their safeguarding role and sharing information;

·        Representatives from primary and secondary schools were now on the MSCB to enable improved engagement with schools regarding safeguarding issues around Medway.

Decision:

(1)               The committee thanked the Independent Chairman of the Medway Safeguarding Children Board and officers for the report and presentation.

(2)               The committee requested that a briefing note be provided on comparisons with other Councils on the use of CAF and suggested that the Board improve engagement with housing providers.

This report updates the committee on the progress made with the outcomes from the healthy eating review, which took place during 2010. 

Discussion:

The Senior Public Health Manager (healthy weight) introduced the report and updated the committee on the following: -

·        ‘Mind, Exercise, Nutrition…Do it!’ (MEND) had been re-commissioned for 5-7 year olds;

·        Officers were considering the development of an adolescent weight management programme;

·        A Community Food Consultation had taken place across Medway earlier in the year and the information collected would be used to develop food programmes;

·        The team were currently running the Change4Life swapathon event, which encouraged people to swap behaviour for a healthier option.

The committee then asked various questions and made comments which included: -

·        How the breastfeeding peer mentors were structured;

·        How many schools were continuing with their work on health and wellbeing since the Healthy Schools Programme had been discontinued nationally;

·        Concern about enforcing the stay-on-site policy to students who go out at lunchtime to do something active, such as sport;

·        Success of the free school meal pilot in the schools it was carried out in;

·        High demand for allotments in Medway;

·        Comparisons with previous year’s national child measurement programme (NCMP) figures;

·        Suggestions that when Section 106 Agreements are replaced with the Community Infrastructure Levy that officers ensure that funding for allotments is included;

·        Concern that getting the appropriate insurance was a barrier for some schools to create a community allotment and play space within their grounds.

Officers explained that a breastfeeding peer support co-ordinator was overseeing the volunteers who were working in various settings such as the postnatal ward in the hospital and children centres.  In relation to schools, officers explained that schools recognise that when children and young people have positive self esteem and a sense of well-being it contributes to increased readiness to learn.  The NCMP figures for 2010/11 were still being collated but the coverage of year 6 children measured had increased and feedback was now given to the school as well as the parents.

Decision:

(1)               The committee noted the report and the progress outlined in Appendix 1 of the report.

(2)               The committee requested that the possibilities for overcoming the difficulties for schools to get the relevant insurance for community allotments and play space be investigated by the relevant officer and report back to the Director for Children and Adults;

(3)               The committee requested officers to ensure that the recommendation relating to allotments be transferred to Community Infrastructure Levy when it replaces Section 106 Agreements.

The annual report provides information on the number and type of social-care complaints and compliments Medway Council have received during the period April 2010 to March 2011. 

Discussion:

The Director of Children and Adults introduced the report and explained to the committee that Medway’s Young Inspectors had helped to re-design the children’s version of the report which was attached at Appendix 1.

The committee asked the Director a number of questions, which included: -

·        Concerns about the impact malicious complaints can have on the careers of staff affected;

·        Concern with regard to the large increase in complaints and that none were directly from children and young people themselves;

·        The need to learn from the findings of serious case reviews;

·        The need to learn from mistakes when they are made.

In response, the Director explained that she understood the concerns with regard to malicious complaints but confirmed that complaints were always dealt with fairly, fully and in total confidence.  She explained that Medway had improved in informing people how to complain which had led to the rise in complaints received and that there were a number of opportunities for children and young people to confide in a trusted adult, which had resulted in no complaints being received directly from children themselves.  In relation to learning from mistakes made and from serious case reviews the Director agreed that learning was vital to improve services for people and ensure agencies are working together to protect children.

Decision: 

The committee noted the report and thanked the Director for Children and Adults for her responses.