Agenda item

Health Inequalities Task Group review report

This report asks Members to consider the final report of the Review of Health Inequalities in Medway in-depth Task Group and agree the findings and recommendations of the Task Group for consideration at the Health and Wellbeing Board on 22 April 2013 and then for referral to the Cabinet on 13 May 2014.

Minutes:

Discussion:

 

The Chairman introduced the report, as Chairman of the Task Group, and explained how the evidence had been gathered and set out the findings and recommendations of the Task Group for the Committee’s approval.  He thanked those who had participated in, and supported, the Task Group’s work.

 

Members commended the report and it was stated that the report was comprehensive and a fair summation of the challenges facing Medway in relation to health inequalities. 

 

The Healthwatch Medway representative particularly commended recommendations 7, 9 and 11 and referring to the standardised questions, which were appended to the review document and stated that any organisation in Medway could usefully ask themselves those questions.

 

In response to a question, the Democratic Services Officer explained that the review would be considered next by the Health and Wellbeing Board on 22 April 2014 and Cabinet on 13 May 2014.

 

Decision: 

 

(a)                           The Committee agreed that the Report of the Scrutiny Review Group is referred to the Health and Wellbeing Board on 22 April 2014 and Cabinet on 13 May 2014.  The specific recommendations are as follows:  

 

1.      That Cabinet tasks the Council to continue to work with landlords, developers, partners and residents to aspire to raise housing standards.  Where it is apparent that the legal standards are not being met to seek a resolution to those issues in line with the Council’s Housing Enforcement Policy.

2.      That Cabinet task the Director of Public Health to engage with the Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture to inform the development of the Medway Local Plan and establish a joint officer project group to ensure that the local plan maximises the opportunity to improve the wider determinants of health through planning.

3.      That Cabinet tasks the Director of Public Health to continue to engage with Licensing Officers to maximise the opportunity to improve the wider determinants of health through licensing, building on the partnership working to date between Public Health, Licensing and other departments and agencies to provide ongoing messages to licensees and the public on public safety and public health issues.

4.      That Cabinet asks NHS England (Kent and Medway Local Area Team) to work with NHS Medway Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) to investigate inequity in access and outcomes at GP practices and report back to the Health and Wellbeing Board with its plan to address the issue.

5.      That Cabinet acknowledges that as a large employer Medway Council plays an important leadership role in reducing health inequalities.  As such the implementation of workplace health initiatives are welcomed, and it is suggested that the drug and alcohol policy for the Medway Council workforce is refreshed covering all types of workers.

6.      That Cabinet asks the Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture and the Director of Public Health to expand and build on work with local businesses to support them to implement workplace health initiatives within the framework of the Public Health Department’s ‘A Better Medway’ services.

7.      That Cabinet:

(a)   asks the Health and Wellbeing Board to engage with members of the public and seek views on barriers to uptake of services – whether they be Council, NHS or volunteer – in the development and implementation of the Health and Wellbeing Board engagement plan in the next 12 months; and

(b)   that the findings of this engagement exercise should be used to programme and target further work to address health inequalities with Council service managers, NHS colleagues and the voluntary sector.

8.      That Cabinet notes that one mechanism for providing services to reduce health inequalities, consistent with proportionate universalism, is to provide a universal service with targeted support where appropriate, and asks Public Health to investigate developing a framework to enable the application of proportionate universalism approaches in a structured way in the planning and delivery of all services.

9.      That Cabinet asks:

(a)   the Health and Wellbeing Board to identify where health equity audits may help to determine action that would reduce health inequalities across council services and those commissioned by the CCG and NHS England (Kent and Medway Local Area Team); and

(b)   that the Public Health department then provides support or leads on conducting those which are determined to be the highest priority by the Health and Wellbeing Board.

10.             That Cabinet tasks the Director of Regeneration, Community and Culture and Director of Public Health to work together to develop a protocol for dealing with any future planning developments in Medway that may have a significant impact on the health and wellbeing of the local populations. (This is to enable the Director of Public Health’s comments to be considered as a material consideration in the determination of those applications).

11.       That Cabinet recommends the following three principles to assist the Council and partners, where relevant, to direct investment where it is most needed in order to tackle health inequalities:

                         Principle 1: Actively seek ways of working in partnership across teams and agencies to tackle health inequalities and direct resources

 

                         Principle 2: Assess the impact of investment decisions on health inequalities before decisions are made

 

                         Principle 3: Review and evaluate how equitable services are, e.g. through health equity audit, and adjust service delivery to address any inequalities found

 

(b)                    As with previous in-depth scrutiny reviews it was agreed that there would be a six month review of progress back to this Committee.

Supporting documents: