Meeting documents

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors?Bird, Suthers, Watkinson, Wharton and Mrs Woollard.

There were no?declarations of interest.

That the minutes of the meetings held on 31 January?and 16 February 2017 be approved as a correct record and signed by the chairman.

The Chairman welcomed to the meeting, Peter Dodd (Chairman, South Ribble Leisure Trust), Mark Snaylam (Contract Manager, Serco), Councillor P Smith (Cabinet Member for Regeneration and Leisure) and Mark Hodges (Partnership Development Manager).

The chairman also thanked them for the opportunity given to the committee to visit the leisure facilities which had been interesting.

The chairman of the South Ribble Leisure Trust addressed the meeting. He indicated that it was always a pleasure to be given an opportunity to address the committee. The chairman of the South Ribble Leisure Trust provided an overview of the performance/headlines within the report. He explained that the partnership started in 2005 and since then there had been over 2.7m swimming visits. He was pleased to report that there were 48 primary schools using the facilities and the SWIMLIFE Programme had continued to grow. The chairman of the South Ribble Leisure Trust added that the fitness suites had been used by over 6m people since 2005 and the tennis centres continued to be ?one of our jewels? in the North West.

The chairman of the South Ribble Leisure Trust thanked the staff and team at the leisure centres (together with the team at Serco) as it had been challenging times in leisure in general across the country. There had been lots of other gyms/private facilities that continued to grow in South Ribble, Preston and Chorley however in the last 18 months the trend in terms of gym usage had started to reverse. The development of the new pitch at Penwortham Leisure Centre/new tennis court facility had gone from strength to strength. The chairman of the South Ribble Leisure Trust felt that they were doing a good job and they aim to strive and get better each year.

In respect of a question regarding the customer satisfaction assessment, the Contract Manager for Serco Leisure explained that there were manual forms at leisure centres where staff would speak to the customers and this year an email (containing a questionnaire) were sent to an extensive amount of members/users asking what they would like to see; what the level of satisfaction was; what was important; how they would like to be communicated etc. The overall customer satisfaction level was 80% and members?/users? suggestions were taken on board.

In respect of whether there could be more joint working and activities, the Contract Manager for Serco Leisure explained that they had been working with the Council?s Sports Development Team in respect of gymnastics/tennis. The Trust had also engaged directly/assisted schools in South Ribble/national governing bodies in particular with Lancashire indoor cricket tournaments. There was always potential in supporting other sporting activities/events and the Trust would continue to look at term time during the schools? curriculum period and if an event was arranged by Sports Development for a period of time the Trust would try and provide them with that continuity.

In respect of the vision to enhance facility provision (improve facilities and operations), the committee noted that the Trust/Serco continue to work with academics at Lancaster/Liverpool John Moores Universities to complete the review to identify ?Barriers to Accessing Local Authority Leisure Facilities Provision?.

The committee thanked the chairman of the South Ribble Leisure Trust, the Contract Manager for Serco Leisure, the Cabinet Member and the Partnership Development Manager for attending.

RESOLVED (unanimously) that ?

1. the committee commends the Leisure Trust and Serco for the achievements identified in the report.

2. further consideration be given to more joint working with the Council?s Sports Development Team.

3. the committee congratulates the Trust and Serco for achieving 80% customer satisfaction level.

The Chairman welcomed to the meeting, Andy Webster (Deputy Chairman of the Lancashire Safeguarding Children Board), Vanessa Wilson (Chairman of the Lancashire Safeguarding Board?s Quality and Performance Sub Group), Councillor Mullineaux (Leader) and Denise Johnson (Director of Development, Enterprise & Communities).

The Chairman of the Lancashire Safeguarding Board?s Quality and Performance Sub Group (Vanessa Wilson) explained that the role of this Sub Group was to hold members of the LSCB to account and monitor/scrutinise Section 11 Self-Assessments.

The Director added that the duty of the Council under Section 11 of the Children Act 2004 was to make arrangements to ensure that its functions were discharged in respect of safeguarding. As the designated Lead Officer for this, the Director commented on how she worked across service areas to get the assessment together to send to the Board on an annual basis. The Council worked closely with the Board and with other safeguarding partners through a thorough process.

The Leader presented the report submitted.

In respect of a question, the Director stated that to help the Scrutiny Committee going forward she was happy to provide the committee with a progress report in six months? time on the Action Plan from the Self-Assessment (following any recommendations from this committee/Cabinet). The committee noted that the self-assessment challenge sessions were much more formalised and robust than it was in 2014.

With regard to mandatory training for all members in safeguarding, both the Leader and the Director supported the suggestion made and that they would investigate the matter. The Leader added that this would be an additional way to tighten safeguarding and he was happy to move forward with this.

In response to reporting any matters in the absence of the Designated Lead Officer, the Director explained that there were a number of Safeguarding Champions and the names were on the Council?s internal website.

Responding to the feasibility of making Safeguarding Training (through MILO) available to Parish/Town Councils, the Leader indicated that he would investigate the matter.

In respect of sharing appropriate information, the Director explained the process, some of these being the gathering of soft intelligence with the police and Environmental Health?s Powers of Entry. In response to an additional query, the Director was happy to provide the committee with anonymised case studies of where sharing of information protocols have been used.

Responding to a question, the Director stated that staff employees/members? have a Code of Conduct in place however volunteers have a protocol. Some of the things included within the volunteers? training package included health and safety/safeguarding etc. The Council did not take on volunteers without the necessary checks.

In response to the awareness of how to escalate an issue, the Director explained the referral pathway/process within the policy. The Director acknowledged that this had not happened in the past (in the light of recent surveys) however she stated that the awareness was far greater now than it was before. The Director added that the referral process was in the policy and she was happy for the committee to have a look at that and suggest how to strengthen/make the process clearer.

In respect of contact details of the Designated/Deputy Designated Safeguarding Officer, the Director indicated that there were a number of Safeguarding Champions to cover all service areas in the absence of Lead Officers. These contact details would be made available to members.

The Chairman of the Lancashire Safeguarding Board?s Quality and Performance Sub Group felt that overall the Board had seen a massive increase in the focus of safeguarding within South Ribble. The Board had definitely been reassured that things were in place in terms of the amount of contact and involvement the Council had to seek advice/support. South Ribble was one of a few places the Board had seen where there was a robust Action Plan on the back of the Section 11 Self-Assessment. This had been very positive and the Board welcomed the proper robust procedure in place whereas the information was reported back to this committee/Board to monitor any gaps. The Deputy Chair of the LSCB added that the Action Plan was very clear and focused.

The committee thanked the Deputy Chairman of the Lancashire Safeguarding Children Board, Chairman of the Lancashire Safeguarding Board?s Quality and Performance Sub Group, Leader and Director of Development, Enterprise & Communities for attending.

RESOLVED (unanimously) that ?

1. the report and self-assessment being presented to the Scrutiny Committee be welcomed.

2. Safeguarding Training be made mandatory for elected members.

3. the Council be asked to look into making Safeguarding Training via MILO available to Parish and Town Councils.

4. the committee be provided with anonymised case studies of where sharing of information protocols have been used.

5. the Members? Code of Conduct is reviewed to ensure safeguarding is effectively included.

6. details of the Council?s Employee Safeguarding Champions be made available to members.

7. the committee welcomes the reassurance provided by the Lancashire Safeguarding Children Board on the Council?s safeguarding arrangements.

8. the committee reviews the safeguarding referral process.

9. six months review of progress be presented to the Scrutiny Committee.

10. Safeguarding Training takes place on an annual basis.

The Chairman welcomed to the meeting, Councillor Mullineaux (Leader), Joanne Platt (Corporate Improvement Manager) and Caroline Taylor (Senior Communications Officer).

The Leader presented the Communications Strategy 2017/18.

In respect of how the strategy had been developed, the Corporate Improvement Manager indicated that the Council had external support from a Communications consultant commissioned by the Local Government Association (LGA). The consultant worked alongside the Council?s Communications Team in terms of communication objectives and priorities for improvement. This also took into account the Scrutiny Committee?s Review of external communications undertaken in 2012 in developing this strategy. The Corporate Improvement Manager added that one of key actions was to establish a members? panel to evaluate the impact of things. The action plan was developed to underpin the strategy that set out actions to be delivered in the short, medium and long term actions to take the Council through the next 6/12 months. The committee noted that many of the short term actions were already underway.

Responding to ending the production of Forward, the Leader explained that from a communications point of view, digital communications appeared to be key to the effective communications in comparison to the ?old paper going around? however the Leader felt that Forward was still invaluable. The Leader acknowledged that twitter, internet and emails etc were slicker and quicker to obtain information but he also noted that some residents would still benefit from Forward. In response to the number of circulations, the committee noted that the Council had reduced the number of copies of Forward per year. The Leader assured the committee that the Council?s intention was not to take this away with immediate effect. The comment in the report to end the production was incorrect and the matter would be looked at further.

The Corporate Improvement Manager commented that a residents? survey had been undertaken and the Council was awaiting the results of this survey. This had been undertaken by a professional company commissioned by the LGA and the sample of the survey was appropriate to the make-up and the demographic of the borough. The Senior Communications Officer added that the problem with Forward newspaper was that it could not ?break news? because social media was so quick to provide the information on anything. Accordingly, it was important that Staff did not wait/sit on a piece of news until the next edition of Forward. In respect of a subsequent question, the Corporate Improvement Manager explained that the plan was very flexible and if things did not have the impact we wanted it could easily be flexed. This was a dynamic policy that provided a framework and clear actions. The Corporate Improvement Manager stated that she was aware that not everyone had IT skills/access to IT equipment however the Council would use a range of communication tools to get that balance right for modern day communities.

In response to whether there was enough capacity to deliver the strategy, the Corporate Improvement Manager believed that the Council had enough capacity because the Action Plan was well structured. The idea was that this would help to prioritise the Communications Team?s work programme and as reported earlier in the meeting most of the short term actions were already underway.

Responding to how the Council ensured that services did not work in silos, the Corporate Improvement Manager indicated that the Council had Communications Champions that was identified in the strategy and this would be coordinated through those communication channels.

In respect of allowing staff unrestricted access to social media, the Senior Communications Officer explained that Connect had been redesigned to include the twitter feed on the front page (for view only) and social media training had been provided to officers to allow a number of them to use twitter accounts professionally. This social media training would also include all members of the Council. The committee noted that there had been massive security issues in the past in relation to IT safeguard/potential weaknesses in the system and wondered whether these matters had been resolved. It was reported that the matter would be investigated.

Councillor Bennett in the audience referred to ST4 in the strategy and indicated that he would like to see a member survey on communications and wider issues be undertaken.
Councillor Bennett then expressed his concern that the Council?s website was still not interactive enough and although he felt that it had improved significantly the recommendation should contain ratings as in the past whereas the Council?s website had to be scored/assessed.

The committee thanked the Leader, Corporate Improvement Manager and Senior Communications Officer for attending.

RESOLVED (unanimously) that ?

1. the committee welcomes the draft strategy and that the Scrutiny Committee?s previous review has been included in the strategy.

2. a rigorous and evidence-based review of the Forward newspaper be carried out.

3. the committee looks forward to the resident?survey results being made available to members.

4. the committee welcomes the reassurance that there is sufficient capacity/resources to deliver the strategy.

5. clarification be provided on the action around allowing employees to access social media at work.

6. a member survey on communications and wider issues be undertaken.

7. an improved website that meets the Society of IT Managers? ratings be prioritised higher on the action plan.

8. six months progress reports be provided to the committee.

The Chairman welcomed to the meeting, Councillor Mullineaux (Leader) and Joanne Platt (Corporate Improvement Manager).

The Corporate Improvement Manager presented the report.

In response to the capacity and resources to be assessed for the strategy, the Corporate Improvement Manager felt that it was important to take time over this and she added that a progress report would be presented to the committee meeting on 22 June 2017. This would then be developed into a strategy with key actions and identify what resources there were for delivering the actions.

The Corporate Improvement Manager commented that this was a key vehicle to address some of the issues of the staff survey and there was an action in there about the introduction of a Members? Survey (which Councillor Bennett alluded to earlier in the meeting). The Corporate Improvement Manager added that the Leader, Councillors Mrs Snape and Ms Bell (Member Development Champions) discussed this recently about how we could get more member input over member development and she was aware that the actions had been taken away by the Member Champions to discuss this with their groups on the feasibility of introducing two way communication.

The committee thanked the Leader and Corporate Improvement Manager for attending.

RESOLVED (unanimously) that the committee ?

1. welcomes the development of the Organisational Development Strategy, particularly the development and support for the members? section.

2. looks forward to the strategy being presented to the committee in June.

The Chairman welcomed to the meeting Caroline Elwood (Corporate Governance Manager).

In respect of the role of full Council and Scrutiny Reviews, the Corporate Governance Manager explained that she understood that when Scrutiny recommendations (which was not very often as it was always submitted to Cabinet) were submitted to full Council there was always a vote on it. If the committee required more clarity, the Corporate Governance Manager indicated that she was happy to add this in the procedural rules.

In respect of the size of Task Groups, the Governance Manager said that she was happy to amend the size of Task Groups to be a minimum of 4.

Councillor Clark in the audience referred to Appendix B1 and commented that Scrutiny Reviews be more explicit in Section 1 of the Procedural Rules outlining the role of Scrutiny. The Corporate Governance Manager indicated that this was meant to include both development of policy and reviews and she was happy to clarify this in Section 1 of the Procedural Rules.

The committee thanked the Corporate Governance Manager for attending.

RESOLVED (YES: 5, ABSTAINED: 2, NO: 0) that ?

1. the committee welcomes the updated Procedure Rules and appreciates the new style and plain English approach.

2. the section on the role of full Council with Scrutiny Reviews be clarified further with regards to voting.

3. the size of Task Groups to be a minimum of 4.

4. Scrutiny Reviews be more explicit in Section 1 of the Procedure Rules outlining the role of Scrutiny.

a) Scrutiny Task Groups ? Update

Councillor Martin reported that the Scrutiny Review of the Banqueting Suite Task Group was meeting on 22 March 2017.

The chairman informed the meeting that a Task Group would be set up to look at the Wesley Street Mill. The membership of the Task Group would comprise of Councillors Titherington, Martin, Mrs Jones, Mrs Walton and 2 members from the My Neighbourhood (Eastern) one from each group.

b) Verbal update on Lancashire County Council's Health Scrutiny Committee

The chairman provided a verbal update and reported that he had also attended a session in relation to the STP Workforce Arrangements. The minutes of those meetings would be circulated to all members

c) Member feedback on meeting(s) and training attended on behalf of the committee

The chairman reported that he had attended the North West Strategic Scrutiny Network and that the presentation from the meeting would be circulated to members of the committee for information.

d) Cabinet and Scrutiny Forward Plans

The plans were noted.