Agenda and minutes

Purpose: To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting of the Commission held on 22^nd November 2011.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 22 November 2011 were approved as a true and correct record and signed by the Chairman.

(Note: 6.33pm – Councillors Tony Vickers and Andrew Rowles joined the meeting.)

Councillor Tony Vickers questioned whether more action could be taken by the Council to represent parents of pupils at academies, as recorded on page 2 of the minutes. It was agreed that a letter would be sent from the Chairman to the Department for Education outlining the Commission’s previously expressed concern.

Members requested an update on the recommendation to circulate to all Elected Members the plan template in order that they promote with their local school governors its adoption, regardless of whether the Member was a governor or not.

RESOLVED that:

(1)               A letter would be sent from the Chairman of the Commission to the Secretary of State for Education outlining the Commission’s concerns about representation of the views of parents of pupils at academies.

(2)               An update on progress would be provided on the recommendation to circulate to all Elected Members the plan template in order that they promote with their local school governors its adoption, regardless of whether the Member was a governor.

Purpose: To receive any Declarations of Interest from Members.

Councillor David Rendel declared an interest in Agenda Items 8 and 10, but reported that, as his interest was personal but not prejudicial, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Marcus Franks declared an interest in Agenda Item 8, but reported that, as his interest was personal but not prejudicial, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Emma Webster declared an interest in Agenda Item 6, but reported that, as his interest was personal but not prejudicial, she determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

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

No follow up actions from previous Commission meetings were reported.

Purpose: To consider any items called-in by the requisite number of Members following the previous Executive meeting.

No items were called-in following the last Executive meeting held on 15 December 2011.

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

There were no Councillor Calls for Action although Councillor Brian Bedwell was able to advise the Commission that the Underwood Road shopping centre which had previously been dealt with as a Councillor Call for Action had resulted in work now beginning on the site. Councillor Bedwell thanked the Members of the Commission for their co-operation in achieving a good result for the people in the area.

Purpose: To receive any petitions requiring an Officer response.

No petitions were received at the meeting.

(Note: 6.36pm – Councillor Jeff Brooks joined the meeting.)

Purpose:

1. To report quarter 2 progress against the key accountable measures and activities for West Berkshire Council for 2011/12.
2. To report by exception those measures / activities not achieved / expected to be achieved and cite remedial action that is being taken.

In introducing Item 8 Jason Teal advised that the purpose of the report was to provide an update on progress against the Council’s key accountable measures and activities for Quarter 2 of the Municipal Year 2011/2012.

Jason Teal informed the Commission that of the 39 key measures, (33 of which were reported quarterly) 7 were signposted as amber – i.e. behind anticipated performance, but expect to achieve the target by year end. These were:

·      Children’s social care assessments conducted on time;

·      The level of commissioned early intervention services in the Children and Young People directorate;

·      People presented as homeless who were prevented from being homeless;

·      The proportion of young people who were not in education, employment or training

·      The proportion of upheld planning appeals;

·      Calls to the Contact Centre answered within 30 seconds;

·      Users’ ratings of the Contact Centre.

Three targets were reporting as red (would not be achieved) in Quarter 2:

·      The proportion of adult social care service users receiving self directed support;

·      Pupils gaining 5+ high grades at GCSE;

·      Adopting the Local Development Framework by March 2012.

The following specific returns were discussed:

·      The number of people presenting as homeless who were prevented from being homeless. The Commission was of the collective view that this indicator should have been reported as red.

·      Young people 16 – 19 who were not in education, employment or training (NEET). The data was provided from the Connexions Service but Members were of the view that this data would be difficult to track and wished to know whether the expected drop in the number of NEETs predicted for November actually occurred.

·      The percentage of pupils gaining 5+ GCSE grades A* - C including English and Mathematics. Clarification was required as to whether there was a correlation between the recognised national shortage in skilled mathematics teachers and the drop in performance in the subject locally and whether the actions taken to address the matter were likely to be effective. These actions should be able to be tracked in future years.

·      The number of service user and carers receiving Self Directed Support (including Personal Budgets). The cost of amending the RAISE system to provide electronic records for Personal Budgets was not articulated.

·      The level of commissioned early intervention services in the Children and Young People Directorate. The figures quoted in the return were unclear and clarification was required.

·      The number of people entering the Youth Justice system. It was accepted that the low numbers being reported were part of a national trend but it was not clear to Members the reasons for it.

·      Adoption of the Local Development Framework’s Core Strategy. It was understood that the Core Strategy would not be re-examined in public until March which made the achievement of this target impossible. Although the achievement of the target was outside the Council’s direct control, at the time the target was set it was believed that it was.

·      The proportion of planning appeals which were upheld compared to the national average. The return did  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

Purpose: To outline the role the OSMC could play in assessing and assuring the measures and corresponding targets for the Council for the upcoming year.

Jason Teal introduced Item 9 by stating that his accompanying report outlined a proposal for Scrutiny to be involved in the development and adoption of appropriate targets for the new Council Strategy.

The suggested objective for the activity would be to ensure that measures and targets were an appropriate reflection of priorities as set out in the Council Strategy and the resources available to be committed to them, and that they were logical and robust.

The Commissioned welcomed the opportunity to be involved in this important work, particularly in light of the discussion held on the previous item.

Councillor Rendel wondered whether in future years, targets might be developed and then resources allocated to the achievement of them, rather than the targets being set and then having to be constrained by a lack of available resources. Jason Teal was able to advise that in practice the current system usually resulted in targets being made more rather than less demanding after they had been independently reviewed. Nick Carter informed the Commission that the Community Strategy was developed in tandem with the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS). Resources were first allocated to high priority activity and then to things that were less important.

It was agreed that a small group of two Conservative and one Liberal Democrat Members would be created to take forwards the work. Councillors Quentin Webb and Emma Webster volunteered to sit on the group.

RESOLVED that a working group of three Councillors will be established to help develop the measures and targets to be incorporated into the Council Strategy.

Purpose: To provide a verbal update on the work of the Health Scrutiny Panel and provide information on the meeting planned for 17^th January 2012.

In respect of Item 10 Councillor Quentin Webb advised the Commission that although there had been no formal meetings of the Panel since the Commission last met, it had held a briefing in preparation for its next meeting, scheduled for 17^th January 2012.

The substantive agenda item for 17^th January was the investigation into Continuing Healthcare, as approved by the Commission. Evidence was to be received from Charles Waddicor and Bev Searle, respectively the Chief Executive and Director of Commissioning at NHS Berkshire West, as well as a representative from the Newbury and District Commissioning Group (Dr Abid Irfan).

The Chairman thanked Councillor Webb for the update and for the important work that the Panel was doing, particularly on Continuing Healthcare.

RESOLVED that the report would be noted.

Purpose: To provide a verbal update on the work of the Resource Management Working Group and provide information on the meeting planned for 17^th January 2012.

In introducing Item 11 Councillor Tony Vickers informed the Commission that the Working Group was due to meet next on 17^th January 2012, having not met since the last meeting of the Commission.

Councillor Vickers advised that the Parkway development and car parking, along with revenue outturn reports, were items to be considered.

RESOLVED that the report would be noted.

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

Berkshire Council from November - 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.

Councillor Jeff Brooks commented that there was considerable interest from Thatcham Town Council in Item EX2350 (the redevelopment of Taceham House), which he, as one of the District Councillors for the Ward, shared. He was concerned that the building had been vacant for a significant period and action was apparently only now being taken. He stated that he would be interested in seeing the Executive report and hoped that it reflected the history of the property. He also wanted to know when it would be considered by the Executive.

RESOLVED that:

(1)              the Forward Plan be noted.

(2)              the Executive report on Taceham House would be passed to Councillor Brooks, along with information about its passage through the Executive Cycle.

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 those of the Health Scrutiny Panel and Resource Management Working Group.

The Chairman advised that Corporate Board had suggested that the Housing Allocations policy, which was being reviewed following a significant shift in government policy, might be considered by the Commission. As this presented a big opportunity for the Council to change the way that housing allocations were considered, there was agreement that it would be appropriate for the Commission to consider the matter.

Members were concerned that the task group review of processes to repair pot holes was being delayed unduly by a shortage of staff available to support the work  from the Policy and Communication service.  This led to the Commission discussing more generally its workload and the resources at its disposal. Concern was expressed that sufficient numbers of officers from Policy and Communication were not available to support the amount of activity that Members wished to undertake. Nick Carter reminded the Commission that significant cuts had been made to staffing across the Council and the approach taken by the Executive was that frontline areas would be protected. This policy came at the expense of back office or support services, such as Policy and Communication, which had had a number of posts removed from its establishment.

The Chief Executive gave an undertaking that he would review the amount of staff resource available to support Scrutiny activity.  The Chairman and Vice-Chairman also agreed that they would review the Commission’s work programme to ensure that it was appropriately focussed.

In order to make progress on the pot holes review, it was suggested that a possible solution was for Members to conduct the scrutiny without support from Policy officers. Councillor Emma Webster volunteered to participate in the review of this topic.

RESOLVED that:

(1)              a review of the Housing Allocations policy will be added to the work programme;

(2)              the Chairman and Vice-Chairman will review the Scrutiny work programme;

(3)              the Chief Executive will review the resources available in the Policy and Communication service to support Scrutiny.