Agenda and minutes

Purpose: To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Commission held on 20^th September 2011.

The Minutes of the meeting held on the 20^th September 2011 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Councillor Tony Vickers asked whether the meeting to discuss the matters arising from the debate on the Council’s performance reporting arrangements had taken place, as resolved under minute 51. Councillor Brian Bedwell advised that as Councillor Jeff Brooks’ other, external, commitments had understandably taken precedence, the meeting had not yet been held. It was hoped that Councillor Brooks’ diary would soon be sufficiently clear to allow the meeting to go ahead.

Purpose: To receive any Declarations of Interest from Members.

There were no declarations of interest received.

Purpose: To receive an update on actions following the previous Commission meeting.

1. School Severe Weather Plans: Verbal report agenda Item 8;

2. Planning Performance Data Q1 2011/12: Verbal report agenda Item 11.

There were two actions followed up from previous Commission meetings:

1. School Severe Weather Plans: Verbal report was discussed under agenda Item 8;

2. Planning Performance Data Q1 2011/12: Verbal report was discussed under agenda Item 11.

Purpose: To consider any items called-in by the requisite number of Members following the Executive meeting held on 20^th October 2011.

There were no items were called-in following the last Executive meeting held on 20^th October 2011.

Purpose: To consider any items proposed for a Councillor Call for Action.

There were no Councillor Calls for Action.

Purpose: To receive any petitions requiring an Officer response.

There were no petitions to be received at the meeting.

(Note:  6.35pm: Councillor David Holtby  joined the meeting).

Purpose: School Severe Weather Plans update report – to receive a verbal update report and discuss and agree any recommendations as necessary.

In introducing Item 8 Councillor Brian Bedwell reminded the Members of the Commission that in previous years, schools in the District had closed due to episodes of severe winter weather. These closures had had a consequent effect on parents, who had to make alternative arrangements for the care and supervision of their children. Although lessons had been learnt from past experiences, the Commission had not to date been satisfied that these had been sufficiently well communicated to or acted upon by schools in advance of any severe weather that might reasonably be expected in the coming winter.

The Children and Young People Assets Manager, Mark Lewis, advised that although in January 2010 there were a number of school closures, last year only 1 school had actually had to close (for a heating failure).

Since he had last updated the Commission in August of 2011, the Local Education Authority (LEA) had completed its review of the severe weather plans received from schools (circa 30 plans from the 80 schools in the District). The review had highlighted examples of good practice that the LEA had collated and then shared with all maintained schools, along with a revision to the Severe Winter Weather Guidance for Schools, which was formatted in the form of a template that could be used for those schools that did not already have a plan in place. The template was based on the Council’s Severe Weather Plan and was structured under logical headings.

(Note: 6.40pm: Councillor Jeff Brooks joined the meeting).

Although progress had been made in highlighting to schools the benefit of having a plan in place, due to limited resources and conflicting priorities, it  was not as much as might have been hoped. Mr Lewis was however able to report that he had noticed a definite shift in the approach that schools were taking to avoiding severe weather closures and there was considerable engagement with the LEA on the matter. Mr Lewis expected that even if the coming winter was as severe as the previous two, fewer schools would be forced to close. This was welcomed by the Commission.

It was recognised by Members that, as responsibility for doing so rested with Head Teachers, the LEA could not compel schools to have a plan in place. The Commission was however collectively of the view that robust encouragement should be given, including through governors. It was consequently considered desirable that the LEA should be able to know how many schools had plans in place so that effort could be targeted appropriately. Support might also be offered to those schools, especially those with small numbers of staff and therefore limited capacity for the development of plans that might not otherwise be able to do the work on their own.

As separate entities, the LEA had no responsibility to provide advice and guidance to the new school academies, although Councillor Tony Vickers wondered whether the Council had a wider responsibility to the parents of children at the schools to ensure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

Purpose: To receive a presentation on activities in West Berkshire celebrating the 2012 Olympic Games.

The Head of Cultural Services, David Appleton, introduced Item 9 by stating that the West Berkshire Partnership was co-ordinating the delivery of a programme of local activities designed to allow the residents of West Berkshire to meet the potential of the opportunities offered by the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games. He then showed the Commission a short film that showed in general terms the route of the Olympic Torch from its arrival in Britain.

(Note: 7.17pm: Councillor Andrew Rowles joined the meeting).

After the film Mr Appleton informed the Commission that there were three strands to the programme, with the passage through West Berkshire of the Torch Relay providing one of the links between each strand. The strands were:

• Education, Sport and Community;

Delivered by schools themselves with Park House and Theale Green taking a lead role as the employers of the “School games organisers”;

• Local Economy;

Suppliers to London 2012;

Visitor Economy;

• Community Celebration;   

Mainly led by town and parish councils or voluntary and community groups supported by WBC arts and leisure staff.

In amplifying the Education, Sport and Community strand, Mr Appleton was able to advise that school games were being organised and that Park House and Theale Green schools had funding for two years to employ School Games Organisers. The games would be structured into 4 levels:

·         Level 1           - Competitions organised within the school;

·         Level 2           - Ongoing and regular inter school competition;

·         Level 3           - County of Berkshire School Games;

o       Primary Festivals     19/20 April (Berkshire) and 26th June 2012 (West Berkshire);

o       Secondary Festival 27/28 June 2012 (Berkshire);

·         Level 4           - National Event. Participation by invitation only.

There would also be curriculum activity, led by Park House School which had been grant aided to support other schools in the area. The aim was to create a ‘cross curricular Olympic and Paralympic Values resource’ available for all West Berkshire Schools. Independent schools would need to buy into the Schools Sports Partnership to be included.

Finally there was a link with an International Learning Programme. This formed part of the British Council Connecting Classrooms Partnership. Other schools involved were St. Nicholas (Woolhampton), The Castle (Theale Green), Falkland Primary and The Willows.

The Local Economy stand was broken down into two elements, ‘Compete For…’ and The Visitor Economy.

‘Compete For…’ encouraged local businesses to bid for the some of the many contracts arising directly from the games. Although awareness had previously been raised, through the Chamber of Commerce, and some local companies had been successful (IFP Forest and Paper Products (Newbury), Berkshire Consultancy (Beech Hill) and Tony Ridley Hyperbaric Associates Ltd (Westridge Green by Basildon) were cited as examples) many local companies had not registered and had no intention of doing so. 

The main impact on the Visitor Economy was likely to be on the retail footfall figures resulting from event’s programmes across the district.  Some work was still needed to bring together the performance outcomes of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

Purpose: To consider a request to scrutinise the methodology of repairing potholes and attending to sunken drains.

Councillor Brian Bedwell introduced the proposal to review the methodology in place for the repairing of pot holes which had arisen from a Motion to Council made by Councillor Keith Woodhams. Councillor Bedwell advised that he thought that this would be a worthwhile piece of scrutiny as it was a topic that had the potential to affect many people in the District.

Councillor Woodhams informed the Commission that in researching the topic prior to the Motion to Council he had had discussions with staff in the Highways Department of Hampshire Council in order to understand their operational processes. He had also had an e-mail dialogue with a company that manufactured a road surfacing material. The research findings had been compiled into a dossier for dissemination to Members who would be involved in the scrutiny. He added that he would be happy to join the proposed Task Group that would carry out the review.

Councillor Jeff Beck stated that the presentation recently given by officers from Highways and Transport would also provide useful background information and should form part of the briefing dossier.

 RESOLVED that

1. The subject, proposed Terms of Reference and methodology be approved for incorporation into the Overview and Scrutiny Commission’s work programme.
2. Councillor Woodhams would be the Liberal Democrat Member of the Task Group.
3. The Highways and Transport briefing presentation forming part of the Member Development session should be incorporated into the Task Group

Purpose: To scrutinise the planning performance data reported for the quarter one 2011/12.

Councillor Brian Bedwell introduced Item 11 by reminding Members that the Commission had previously expressed concern about the Planning Service’s performance as reported at Quarter 1. Gary Lugg, the Head of Planning and Countryside, had been invited to comment on the Commission’s view that his service could do better.

Gary Lugg thanked the Chairman for the opportunity to explain the full picture behind the statistics reported through the corporate performance monitoring system. He advised that the Executive Member for Planning, Councillor Alan Law, would otherwise have also been in attendance for the Item but he had a long standing prior commitment.

Mr Lugg outlined that although Quarter 1 performance had highlighted poor performance, its causes were understood and measures had been taken to address them. The service was now in fact well on course to return to the standard that Members of the Council and service customers had come to expect. He was able to advise that as at the end of the second quarter of 2011:

·         The determination of major applications within 8 weeks was above the target set for this point in the reporting cycle;

·         The percentage of minor applications determined within 8 weeks had risen from 33% to 50%;

• 83% of all other applications had been determined within 8 weeks.

The service was on course to meet its end of year targets.

Members of the Commission appreciated the clarification on the service’s performance and a number of views were expressed on the manner in which the reporting regime was operating during this Municipal Year. Mr Lugg explained that whilst the new presentation of statistics had led to some confusion in the first quarter, he expected that future reports on planning performance would be more straightforward.

Mr Lugg then went on to explain the reasons behind the previous drop in performance. It was caused, said Mr Lugg, by:

·         A 16% drop in the number of applications received, attributable to the recession, with a corresponding drop in revenues received. In response to the drop in demand the service reduced the numbers of staff required to deal with it through a freeze on recruitment;

·         Central government cuts to Councils’ Revenue Support Grant which affected all services across the authority and prioritisation decisions taken by West Berkshire Council resultantly, including a freeze on recruitment;

• Cuts to the Planning Delivery Grant (PDG) received from the government;

When the number of planning applications subsequently rose, the Council’s freeze on recruitment created a mis-match between demand and the Council’s ability to meet it. This was exacerbated by a high rate of staff turnover, for example in the Registration Team where there had been vacancies in 5 out 7 posts. A number of planners had also left during the period and whilst they had almost all gone to higher posts, either internally or to other organisations, the effect was that there were insufficient staff to determine applications. Temporary or agency planners with the requisite experience were found to not be available  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.

Purpose: To provide an update on the work of the Health Scrutiny Panel. and provide information on the meeting held on 4^th October 2011.

Councillor Quentin Webb introduced the report of the Panel’s work at its most recent meeting of 4^th October 2011 (agenda Item 12). Members of the Commission had no questions or other comments.

Councillor Webb then went on to request that the Commission consider giving approval to the Health Scrutiny Panel undertaking a review into NHS continuing healthcare.

In outlining the case for a review, Councillor Webb stated that many people required ongoing personal care and support due to accident, injury or illness and most received this care through their local authority or bought it themselves. They received it either in a care home or in their own home. Some people however had nursing or healthcare needs of such a level that they were entitled to NHS Continuing Healthcare (NHS CHS). This ongoing care was fully funded by the NHS.

In England, as at June 2011, Councillor Webb advised that 53,466 people received NHS CHC support, a figure that was a considerable when compared to the 31,000 in March 2007.

It was not lawful for local authorities to provide care that should be provided by the NHS.

Figures from the Department of Health showed that the eligibility framework was inconsistently applied across the country. Councillor Webb was able to cite that against an England average of 10.5 people in receipt of NHS CHC per 10,000, the Berkshire West PCT funded just 3.3. Berkshire East, Hampshire and Buckinghamshire PCTs funded 8.8, 7.1 and 10.4 people per 10,000 respectively but he cautioned that the figures should be used to form the basis of questions and not merely as a cause for complaint.

Councillor Webb advised, and was supported by Nick Carter, that this apparent significant variation in the numbers of complex needs claimants was an issue of some importance to the local authority, as it might be unnecessarily having to fund care, and residents of West Berkshire, who might otherwise be in receipt of higher levels of care.

The request was supported by Members of the Commission.

RESOLVED that

1. The activity report be noted.
2. The review of NHS CHC be added to the work programme.

Purpose: To provide an update on the work of the Resource Management Working Group and provide information on the meeting held on 27^th September 2011.

The Commission considered a report (Agenda Item 13) on the work of the Resource Management Working Group (RMWG).

Councillor Tony Vickers advised that at its meeting of 27 September 2011 the Group had considered Items on the Quarter 1 Establishment Report, the Legal and Electoral Service budget, the Month 4 Finance Report and the Strategic Risk Register.

Councillor Vickers then went on to outline that the RMWG’s work programme included the following work items:

·         Quarterly reports on revenue, capital and establishment;

·         Highways Asset Management Plan;

·         Energy Saving;

·         Medium Term Financial Strategy;

·         Timelord;

·         Procedures for Blue Badge Holders;

·         Managed vacancies;

·         The financial arrangements for car parking and affordable housing under the Parkway development.

RESOLVED that

The report would be noted.

Purpose: To advise the Commission of items to be considered by West

Berkshire Council from November 2011 - February 2012 and decide whether to review any of the proposed items prior to the meeting indicated in the plan.

The Commission considered the West Berkshire Forward Plan (Agenda Item 14) for the period covering November 2011 to February 2012.

RESOLVED that: The Forward Plan be noted.

Purpose: To receive, agree and prioritise the work programme of the Commission, the Health Scrutiny Panel and the Resource Management Working Group for the remainder of 2011/12.

The Commission considered its work programme and that of the Health Scrutiny Panel and Resource Management Working Group for 2011/12.

The change to the combined OSMC work programme resolved under Item 12 would be made.

RESOLVED that:

The change to the work programme would be recorded.