Agenda and minutes

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any Personal, Disclosable Pecuniary or other interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Monitoring Officer noted that Councillor Lynne Doherty had been granted a dispensation by the Governance and Ethics Committee to speak and vote on financial proposals pertaining to Short Breaks Funding.

Purpose: Due to Judicial Review proceedings brought against the Council by parents of users of short breaks services, Members are asked to consider the budgetary decision taken 1 March 2016 to reduce short breaks funding and to confirm whether that decision should stand.

(Councillor Lynne Doherty’s employer was a recipient of Short Breaks funding. Following the granting of a dispensation to speak and vote on this item she determined to remain in the meeting and vote on the item).

The Council considered a report (Agenda Item 3) which had been brought to Council due to Judicial Review proceedings being brought against the Council by parents of users of short breaks services.

MOTION: Proposed by Councillor Lynne Doherty and seconded by Councillor James Fredrickson

That the Council:

“considers the report and its appendices and resolves that the decision of the 01^st March 2016 be reaffirmed.”

Councillor Lynne Doherty in introducing the item commented that it was necessary to revisit the budget decision made on the 1^st March 2016 with regard to the provision of short breaks for disabled children within West Berkshire.

Councillor Doherty explained that litigation was being brought against the Council by two families who were in receipt of the short break service. The original budget decision was taken with all the information provided at this meeting and was included in Appendix B. The decisions taken in March 2016 were the result of an unprecedented demand to make budgetary savings whilst still meeting all of the Council’s statutory duties. The Council also needed to continue to protect other areas of children’s and adult’s social care provisions. All options were considered and there was very little ‘room for manoeuvre’.

Councillor Doherty emphasised that the original decision was not taken easily, but that it had been an informed decision. Councillor Doherty stated that, unless similarly affected, it was difficult to comprehend the daily difficulties faced by disabled children or the impact this had on their families. The Council fully recognised the need to protect and promote the welfare of this vulnerable group. Councillor Doherty believed that an effective service could still be delivered on the reduced budget proposed in March. She also believed that it was possible to minimise the effect of the proposed reduction and still meet the needs of both children and carers within the District. The local offer which was promoted to all families contained many supported services that the Council did not fund. Current providers were continuing to deliver services and new providers continued to emerge.

Councillor Doherty recognised that change could be difficult at the best of times and for this group it might be even more of a challenge. She highlighted that the Council would continue to review its offer to ensure it was meeting need. Councillor Doherty therefore requested that Members reaffirm the decision taken in March 2016.

Councillor Graham Pask queried why the Council was having to revisit the decision if all the information had already been presented to Members.

Councillor Alan Macro raised a point of order. He noted that the decision taken on the 01 March 2016 was subject to the ‘six month rule’ and therefore according to the Constitution it could not be rescinded. The Monitoring Officer explained that In accordance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.