Meeting documents

There were no apologies for absence as all members of the committee were present.

There were no declarations of interest.

RESOLVED (unanimously):

That the minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2016 be approved as a correct record and signed by the chairman subject to ?

(a) minute no. 13 (page 6, paragraph 5) being clarified to read as follows ?

?From the audience, Councillor Ogilvie acknowledged that the task group had put a lot of effort into this matter and gathered a lot of information, however, he suggested it was largely uncorroborated statements and e-mails. There had now been two reports, this one and the earlier from the external solicitors but neither appeared to have any meat in stripping down to what caused the problems within the Licensing function in the first place. Earlier tonight there was a comment that public involvement would not add value to this review. The council's General Licensing Committee?s key function was to maintain public safety, could the public really not have added value to the investigation? The public had had no opportunity to be a party to this final report?.

(b) reference being made to minute no. 13 (under the resolution) that Councillors Mrs Green and Mrs B Nathan both voted against the committee?s decision.

The committee considered the list of matters arising from the last and earlier meetings.

The chairman commented that some of these matters had been on for some time. He felt that the same explanation/progress kept appearing for Wesley Street Mill and the Worden Park Vision Plan. The chairman added that some of the explanations and progress did not correlate in the first column of the recommendations and he suggested that the report should provide clear indications and robust responses to the committee?s recommendations.

Councillor Tomlinson concurred with the chairman's comments. Councillor Tomlinson referred to the Consultation on the Draft Housing Framework and felt that the explanation provided was an update on things going on. Notwithstanding this, he added that it was important that the explanation/progress column matched the questions asked by the committee.

It was agreed that chairman write to the Leader and Chief Executive asking that Cabinet Members and Senior Management Team respond to Scrutiny Committee recommendations more effectively in the future.

Councillor Mullineaux (Leader of the Council) remained present and was joined by Denise Johnson (Director of Development, Enterprise and Communities).

Councillor Mullineaux was pleased to present his first mid-year report (April ? 30 September 2016) as Leader. He welcomed any feedback from the Scrutiny Committee on the format and presentation of the report.

The Leader explained that overall, good progress was being made by the Council against its corporate plan. However, there were recent challenges facing the Council that he was determined to deal with as Leader, and his Cabinet and councillors from across all parties, together with employees and partners.

The Leader added that the Council?s new Interim Chief Executive (Jean Hunter) had now started and he had been in touch with her over recent weeks to discuss how the Council could proactively move forward. The Leader formally welcomed the Interim Chief Executive (in the audience) to South Ribble. The committee concurred with the Leader in welcoming the Interim Chief Executive.

The Leader indicated that Cabinet looked forward to working with the Scrutiny Committee to improve the Council and strive to achieve its vision to make South Ribble a great place to live, work, visit and play.

Turning to the report, the Leader commented that there was an action in the plan that was not on track, which was the development of the Equality and Diversity Action Plan. The Leader indicated that whilst this was of concern, he understood the legitimate reasons and had gained assurances with relevant officers that this was to be prioritised and would be achieved by the end of the financial year.

The second key area which remained off-track was the achievement of the efficiency programme. This was being reviewed as part of the medium term financial strategy and the Leader was confident that the Council would be able to achieve the identified target by the year-end.

Together with members of the Cabinet the Leader had started to look at providing a more SMART, prioritised and resourced corporate plan for next year and he was happy to present this to a future Scrutiny Committee meeting.

The Leader took the opportunity to thank members of the council, all employees and partners for their hard work in achieving the performance highlighted in the report. The Leader further commented that the Council was not complacent and would continue to improve and perform for residents and the good of the borough.

In respect of reference made to developing a SMART corporate plan for next year, the Leader indicated that he would like to involve the Scrutiny Committee and would welcome any suggestions or anything the committee may have to add. The Leader indicated that he would try and get the plan in a better/smarter manner to make it easier to understand on whether the Council was succeeding in the targets set. As far as moving forward, the Leader indicated that he would get everything in line and look for the right type of things on that plan to move forward on. The Leader added that he would appreciate any updates or help from other areas.

In response to the subjective statements that the Council had continued to perform strongly and delivering good quality services to residents, the Leader explained that the Council mainly obtained feedback from Gateway, My Neighbourhood Forums and through surveys. In addition the committee asked whether the surveys were robust enough and whether the Council needed to look further into this. The Leader felt that it was robust enough although if the committee considered that the responses were from a limited number of people, he was happy to carry out on-street surveys however it would take time, effort and extra resources.

The committee felt that the answer from the Leader demonstrated the reasons why the Council needed a SMART corporate plan because it should have specific targets in the plan to aim for. This would then provide a clear indication of how well the Council had performed and hold each other to account. Although the committee acknowledged that this was all the Council had at present however it believed that there was no clear evidence and that this was not an accurate way of assessing how the Council was performing. The Leader noted the comments made.

In relation to the efficiency targets in the Performance Summary as to what was the current position with regard to the Council meeting the agreed efficiency programme, the Director indicated that there were no details in this report in respect of this in the last 6 months. The Director explained that the Council?s Governance Committee had considered a report recently on what the financial position was in respect of the efficiency targets programme. The Director added that she was aware that there had been a mixture of current vacancies and posts which were not going to be filled but all details were set out in that report considered by the Governance Committee. Notwithstanding the response provided on the number of vacancies that accrued savings, the committee commented that the question was based on efficiency targets and that the committee should be provided with updates in this regard in future reports.

In respect of the reclaimed City Deal of ?141,122, the Leader indicated that under the terms of the City Deal, the Council received an annual sum of ?492,000 to carry out projects for community provision. The total money reclaimed was through certain projects/schemes some of these being St Catherine?s Park (?117,817), vintage tractor (?4,097) and the Bamber Bridge improvements (?19,209). The Leader explained the way in which projects were agreed/determined.

The Director added that through the model for the City Deal, it was money that the council put into the pot some of these being from Business Rates uplift, New Homes Bonus and Community Infrastructure Levy. The funding was only payable by the Council as and when the monies had been received. Under the terms of the City Deal, the Council would receive ?4.92m from the City Deal fund for community provision and to mitigate any potential financial risk. This amount was paid over a 10 years? period which was ?492,000 per year.

In response to the Masterplans for Penwortham, Leyland and Lostock Hall, the Director explained that the procurement exercise for the proposed schemes had been approved by Cabinet. It was currently in process and it was envisaged that this would be completed in the next few months. The Director added that details of the timescales for the delivery of the schemes (Leyland, Penwortham, Lostock Hall and Bamber Bridge) were within the City Deal Infrastructure Business Plan (public document). The Director confirmed that previous Masterplans would be built/integrated into the new Masterplans and there would be a consultation process for members and residents to comment on what they would like to see in the new plans.

In welcoming the progress of the Masterplans, the committee commented that in respect of the performance report it should concentrate on the last 6 months and provide clearer timescales. The Leader noted the comments made.

In response to the ?600,000 savings in respect of the Waste and Recycling Service, the Leader confirmed that this amount was for the life of the contract.

In relation to the 20 years? Vision Plan for Worden Park, the Leader indicated that this was a vision for the next 20 years. Although a lot of work had been carried out on the park within the last few years, the Council continued to look ahead. The Leader explained that it was very difficult for the Council to set timescales because of what monies were available at the time. The Leader added that the park still needed a lot of work doing and money spent on it. In respect of a subsequent question regarding this matter, the Leader confirmed that there was a working document/plan for Worden Park and he was happy to let the committee look at it.

In respect of parks/open spaces investment, the Leader felt that it was value for money as the Council provided good quality services. The purpose of the extra ?100,000 investment was put forward for repair works in parks/open spaces some of these being drainage systems and resurfacing of paths etc. The committee commented that future reports should include a breakdown of what had been invested in parks/open spaces in the last 6 months. The Leader noted the comments made.

In relation to environmental enforcement, the Leader explained that there were lots of things the Council could do to put pressure on residents in relation to the prevention of their dog fouling. In most cases the Council would rely on residents (like recycling) to do the right thing. The Leader felt that it was important that the Council continued to educate residents. The Leader added that it would be difficult to enforce and issue fixed penalties to residents for not carrying dog waste bags unless they were caught in the act that their dog was fouling. Although the Council had increased the number of staff to issue fixed penalty notices unfortunately it did not have enough staff to patrol 24/7 and culprits were difficult to track down. The Leader referred to the spray can scheme where councillors used the cans to highlight their own problem areas and went on to explain that DNAs of dogs was another scheme the Council looked at to tackle dog fouling. However this would take some time to collect DNAs of all dogs. The Leader confirmed that the use of mobile handsets to deliver job requests had been introduced and was being used by Neighbourhood Services. The purpose of this was to speed up the delivery of enforcement notices and reduce reaction times due to the reduction of paper processes. In respect of 85 caution letters issued, the Leader stated that this would almost certainly be that the Council did not have enough evidence for fixed penalties to be issued.

The committee commended the Council for the capital project in respect of the wildflower areas which the Council was still receiving positive feedback from residents. The committee also commended the excellent work the Council had undertaken to interconnect the pathways and the new footbridge at St Catherine?s Park (known locally as Dandy Brook Park). The Leader was pleased to note the comments made by the committee.

In response to hot spot fly tipping, the Leader explained that these were areas that the Council had received calls that fly tipping had taken place on a regular basis. The Council was currently monitoring the situation. In respect of the number of spot fines for fly tipping in the last 6 months, the Leader informed the meeting that he would investigate the matter.

In respect of the query as to whether the number of fixed penalty notices issued reflected the corporate plan action on proactive enforcement, the Leader felt that the training provided to Neighbourhood Officers to carry out enforcement allowed them to be more versatile to deal with different aspects of their job (indoor and outdoor if required).

In response to My Neighbourhood and the definition of projects being developed, the Leader felt that this was the terminology used to show that the projects were being progressed and some were near to completion. The committee felt that the information was misleading and that the details should be based on the progress of the projects in the last 6 months. The Leader noted the comments made by the committee.

In relation to matters regarding Gateway, the Leader indicated that he was not aware that front line staff encountered any significant problems. The Leader added that he was aware that front line staff have gone through the training process and he recognised that they would face difficult characters. As far as the Leader was concerned front line staff were fully trained to handle difficult situations and he would consider extra training/support if this was required. The Director confirmed that she was not aware of any issues in respect of front line staff/Gateway Services. The Director went on to explain the measures/channels the Council had in place if staff had concerns. The Council was continuing to closely monitor any malicious/vexatious complaints.

In respect of Customer Service Excellence accreditation, the Director explained that this was an overall award for the Council for meeting customer service expectation and the way in which it responded to customers. The award took into account the Council?s achievement in gaining the Investors in People Gold Standard and how well employees and members worked together in providing a good service to the public. The Council was a learning organisation and it would continue to explore pockets of best practice. The committee was pleased to note this and congratulated employees on the Customer Service Excellence and Investor in People Gold Accreditations.

In relation to staff morale, the Director explained the remit of the Health and Safety Welfare Committee which was one vehicle which the Council measured staff morale. The Director added that a traditional full corporate survey for all staff would take place every two years. An interim?staff survey would be carried out shortly to gain current views from employees. This would then be a benchmark for the medium future to move forward from. The Council had an open door policy and if there were any concerns staff could take these forward to their managers. The Council continue to monitor this. The Council also have health, safety and welfare days/weeks.

In response to Welfare Reform changes and what impact there was on residents, the Director indicated that although it was not her area of responsibility she explained that there would be different impacts and the Council was currently looking at a number of approaches some of these being through benefits, homelessness or housing support. Further details would be provided to the committee on this matter. The committee suggested that more information be provided in respect of Welfare Reform some of these being what was the impact and references to the impact.

In respect of business support, the Leader explained the Boost Programme for Businesses and that at present the Council was looking at over ?500,000 being spent with a number of businesses within South Ribble. The Director added that a Learning Hour on Economic Development would take place in January 2017. This would provide practical examples and outcomes of the wider economic development work of the Council. One of the key things the Council was doing was looking at support for businesses. The Director went on to explain that this was not just financial support but to work with businesses and to link them with colleges and universities in the area. The Enterprise Team was highly involved in the work of the City Deal construction club. With all the work generated from the City Deal, the team looked at how local residents and local firms could be involved in construction jobs in respect of buildings/roads etc. Further information would be provided at the Learning Hour in January 2017 some of these being; talking to businesses; looking at skills; place promotion, the competitive field, how to get businesses in the local area, how to get businesses to stay; how to get talent to the area; how to get the right businesses; where to market; how to market, who to talk to; what facilities; what land etc. The committee looked forward to the Economic Development Learning Hour demonstrating the outcomes from the council?s investment in the Enterprise Team.

In response to what involvement the Council had in the Leyland Festival in the last 6 months, the Director stated that the Council was an integral part of the Leyland Festival Committee. There were officers and members from this Council on the committee providing a wide range of support. The festival would take months to plan and on the day of the event the Council was heavily involved in the operation, marshalling, stalls, feedback etc.

In relation to whether the Council contributed towards the ?4.5m improvement works at Leyland Railway Station, the Director indicated that any work on any railway station/rail track would take many years. Although the Council did not provide financial assistance however this project could not have been achieved without the very close partnership work with Lancashire County Council, Network Rail and Northern Rail. The Council had to apply pressure and make a case for the improvements to the station by working with disability/community groups to raise the profile. This had been worked on for a number of years through the Access for All Programme which was around accessibility at the station. This was also supported by the strategy of the City Deal that took into account new homes across Preston and South Ribble and the potential footfall for stations in that area. Together with the business plan the improvements work to the station had eventually happened. The committee commended the former Leader for her work on improvements to Leyland Railway Station and that of other partners.

In respect of Wesley Street Mill, the Leader explained that the planning application had been received however the project had stalled at present because the owner of the land was currently waiting for the developer to commence development. The Director added that the Council was very keen to see the site coming forward however there would be challenges along the way. She hoped that there would be movement within the not too distant future and an update would then be provided to the committee.

In response to the Housing Framework, the Director referred to the committee?s comments earlier in the meeting regarding targets and explained that 435 which equated to 0.89% showed that this was far lower than the national average of 1.9% of empty properties. To help reduce the number of empty properties, the Council had committed from its Capital programme to address empty homes. The Council would write to owners of empty homes about the scheme. If they were interested in leasing/releasing the empty property they would be given a recoverable grant to make improvements to the property. Properties would then be leased to Methodist Action (a local charity). They would then rent the properties out to households in housing need (at rent in line with the Local Housing Allowance). The Director confirmed that this had been considered by the Cabinet and she was happy to provide the committee with further information on this matter.

In respect of the 65 housing completions, the Director confirmed that this figure was within the last 6 months. She explained the aim of the Council?s Housing Framework and how this would help to ensure that there were high quality homes across the borough to meet the needs and aspirations of residents. The framework also identified the need for affordable housing for residents who could not access market housing. The Director added that there was a Learning Hour held recently informing members of the Council?s approach to help bring sites forward in the housing market that remained very volatile. There were a lot of planning applications received for major sites in the borough however the Council?s approved Local Plan would provide developers with further details and help to bring sites forward and get the houses built.

In relation to the Health and Wellbeing Partnership, the Director explained that health and wellbeing needs were moving forward in lots of different ways. The programme would look at how effective health and care were moving forward and it would also examine the different lines of work. The Director indicated that the business plan was now more structured. It was hoped that a discussion would take place shortly on how to take the Health and Wellbeing agenda forward and to establish what health services would be provided in the borough. The committee suggested that greater communication on the work and outcomes of the Health and Wellbeing Partnership be provided to members.

In respect of Bikeability, the Leader indicated that to his knowledge the number of schools involved in the scheme were in the last 6 months. The Council would continue to increase users/performance by involving more schools. The committee commended the Sports Development Team for their work with schools.

In relation to external auditors giving the Council a qualified audit opinion, the Leader explained that from a point of view of moving forward the Council had to put certain things in place. The new Interim Chief Executive would now be working closely with the external auditors. The Interim Chief Executive (in the audience) commented that she?had a positive meeting with the external auditors earlier on in the day on the improvement plan. The Interim Chief Executive added that she would discuss this with Group Leaders/members shortly regarding some of the actions involved and subject to progress being made she envisaged that the accounts would be cleared and signed off by the Governance Committee by the end of November 2016.

In respect of the financial picture and the reasons why the Council had not achieved the budget efficiencies to date (?326,000), the Director explained that this was reported at a recent meeting of the Governance Committee. It was going to be a challenge for the Council this year in respect of this however there would further reports on the way forward. As part of the annual governance statement, the Council would need to look at the business transformation programme again and service reviews as reported earlier in the meeting. This would be all linked into the improvement plans.

In respect of the financial picture and the reasons why Building Control?s income targets were not on target, the Director indicated that the service was down on a member of staff. This position had now been filled. As part of business transformation, the Council was currently looking at strengthening the marketing service and linking it strongly with planning. This would provide more details to the public/private sector on how Building Control could assist in providing a service from start to finish. The Director added that one of the key things that the Council looked to take forward was enforcement. This was not a term that was used often in building control but it was something that the Council did not carry out. This would also provide support and guidance to people on whether home/building improvements were carried out correctly.

In relation to the reduced expenditure on premises cost to date of ?41,000, the Director of Neighbourhoods, Asset Management and Environmental Health confirmed that this was from the overall budget on property repairs.

In response to the Council?s commitment to form a combined authority for Lancashire, the Leader explained that at present the Council was part of a shadow combined authority. Discussions were currently ongoing as to how this was to move forward because many authorities did not support the possibility of an elected mayor. The authorities were in shadow form and discussions would continue to move this forward in the near future. It had been a slow process because some authorities did not wish to commit too much but the Leader felt that from a future point of view there could be some big decisions/savings being made.

The committee looked forward to further information being provided on the Risk Register and the potential new income funding streams.

Councillor Wharton in the audience referred to the enforcement of dog fouling within business transformation and asked what plans the Council had to move this forward. The Leader indicated that he had explained this earlier in the meeting that the Council tended to use more on the education side and by encouraging residents of the borough to assist by being eyes and ears. It was not just about catching the number of perpetrators and issuing fixed penalty notices. The Leader felt that by educating people and the use of the new technology would improve the service and save money. The Leader reiterated that the Council would continue to look at opportunities, technologies and other means to tackle instance of fly tipping/dog fouling. The committee felt the Council should continue to explore best practice from other authorities and would like to see some benchmarking information to see what successes had been made.

In respect of the queries raised by Councillor Wharton on the feasibility of a card machine in Gateway and the condition of the furniture in the staff canteen, the chairman felt that these issues were not in the remit of this committee. The Leader added that he was not aware of any problems with the furniture in the staff canteen however he would look into this matter.

Councillor M Nathan in the audience asked whether there was any update on what the Council?s position was with regard to shared services with Chorley Borough Council. He was aware that there was letter from them asking the Council what plans it had regarding the future of its existing shared services.

The Leader explained that he had spoken to the Leader of Chorley Borough Council (Councillor Alistair Bradley) and he assured him that this Council would still want to be involved in any shared services that would benefit this Council and their authority. The Leader added that a meeting had been arranged with Leaders/Chief Executives of both authorities in a few weeks? time. The Leader assured the meeting that there were no problems with the authorities? shared services.

The committee would like to monitor this issue and look at different ways of improving services where shared services could help in this regard/perspective.

RESOLVED (unanimously) that ?

1. the Leader and Director of Development, Enterprise and Communities be thanked for attending and answering questions.

2. the committee welcomes the Leader?s offer to involve the Scrutiny Committee in the development of a SMART Corporate Plan and asks for robust targets to be developed to improve performance and accountability.

3. the committee will closely monitor the council?s efficiency target and asks that updates be provided in future reports, including new funding streams.

4. future performance reports be clearer and concentrate on the period to which the report relates to.

5. a working plan for Worden Park be provided to the committee.

6. the council learns from other councils in tackling litter and dog fouling, including increasing the amount of enforcement and fixed penalty notices issued.

7. the committee congratulates employees on the Customer Service Excellence and Investor in People Gold Accreditations.
8. the committee looks forward to the Economic Development Learning Hour demonstrating the outcomes from the council?s investment in the Enterprise Team.

9. the commends the former leader for her work on improvements to Leyland Railway Station and that of other partners.

10. greater communication on the work and outcomes of the Health and Wellbeing Partnership be provided to members.

11. the committee commends the Sports Development Team for their work with schools.

12. more information be provided in respect of Welfare Reform.

a) Verbal update on Lancashire County Council's Health Scrutiny Committee ? The chairman reported that he had not attended a meeting since the last meeting of the committee on 20 September 2016.

b) Member feedback on meeting and training attended on behalf of the committee ? Councillor Martin reported that he had attended a briefing at the county council on joint strategic assessment needs. He also reported that he had signed up to courses some of these being Neighbourhood Intelligence Forum and the Working Age Health Assessments.

c) Scrutiny Work Programme; and

d) Cabinet and Scrutiny Forward Plans

The committee highlighted the importance of working closely with the Cabinet to develop its and Cabinet?s future forward plans/work programmes.