To receive any apologies for absence.

None.

None.

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 3 November 2016.

Resolved:       That the Minutes of the meeting held on 3 November 2016 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To recommend the Youth Justice Plan 2016/17 for approval by Council.

The cabinet member for young people and children’s wellbeing introduced the report. He noted that very few children in Herefordshire were involved in youth offending and that the general picture was encouraging. The levels of both offending and reoffending in Herefordshire had decreased.

The head of west mercia youth offending service outlined the purpose of the youth justice plan and the information it contained.

The cabinet member for health and wellbeing noted that the clinical commission groups (CCGs) across the west mercia area were not represented on the youth justice service management board and had not signed the plan. She asked whether the youth offending service was receiving the necessary support and commitment from health bodies. The head of west merica youth offending service responded that the west mercia area covered 7 CCGs and that they all made a resource contribution. In Herefordshire for example a post was seconded from CAMHS to provide mental health support. He reported that a representative from Shropshire CCG had recently agreed to join the board and would act as a conduit for the other CCGs in the west mercia area.

A group leader noted that the second highest number of offences in Herefordshire had been for drug related offences and asked what was being done to address this. The head of the youth offending service stated that drug offences were generally the second or third most common offence in all the areas the service worked across and that specialist support was in place.

A group leader asked how many of the young offenders in the report were looked after children. The head of the youth offending service reported that 12 of the 65 young people recorded were looked after by Herefordshire Council and that a further 13 were looked after by other authorities.

A cabinet support member noted the potential for work with parish councils on reparation projects and asked how the service was reaching out to parish councils. The head of the youth offending service responded that the example set out in the youth justice plan had been circulated through the parish council network. He asked that councillors raise awareness of such projects with their parishes.

A scrutiny chair asked if the youth offending service had known about the looked after children in Herefordshire placed by other authorities. The head of the youth offending service confirmed that they had known as the home authority of the young person would have had to refer them to the service in Herefordshire. He also stated that children’s homes were required to notify the authority in which the young person was resident as well as the authority providing care when dealing with young offenders. 

Resolved that:

a)    the Youth Justice Plan be recommended to Council for approval.

To review the effectiveness of the adoption service and to approve the adoption service statement of purpose. 

The cabinet member for young people and children’s wellbeing introduced the report. He noted that the adoption service was performing well and had been judged as good at its most recent inspection by Ofsted. A total of 29 children were adopted in 2015/16 which was an unprecedented number. The cabinet member stated that the council should be proud of the reputation of its adoption service but that it should not be complacent. He noted that the work of the service supported objectives in the children and young people’s plan and reduced costs to the council.

The adoption service manager outlined the adoption process. She explained the stages each child would go through and noted that adoption would only proceed if it was demonstrably in the best interests of the child. Court proceedings were sometimes lengthy and it could take time to find suitable adopters, especially when the child had complex needs. As a result the manager noted that the figures in the report represented a snapshot of the point children had reached in the process. Some of the children who had adoption orders granted in 2015/16 would have first been considered for adoption in previous years.

The adoption service manager reported that overall there had been a national downturn in the number of children approved for adoption by the courts but that Herefordshire had seen an increase over the same period. The number of people coming forward as potential adopters had decreased both nationally and locally.

The cabinet member for health and wellbeing welcomed the report and congratulated the service on their performance. She noted the positive benefits for the children concerned and for the council in terms of lower draw on resources. She encouraged officers to continue working towards an outstanding rating in future inspections.

A group leader asked which agencies were responsible for cases failing to meet the target for stage 1 of the process and what the reasons were. The adoption service manager explained that at stage 1 the council would request information on potential adopters which included criminal records checks from relevant police forces, medical reports and references from a range of different sources. She stated that as stage 1 was adopter led the onus was on the potential adopter to provide the information requested. She reported that in general checks with the local police force were completed promptly but that where a potential adopter had lived outside the area or abroad this could take much longer.

A group leader asked how many cases that reached court were refused. The head of looked after children replied that although precise details were not at hand the numbers were very small as it was usual to reach that stage in the process without having explored all other avenues.

The cabinet member for infrastructure asked if cases of siblings needing adoption presented a particular problem and what the impact could be if placements broke down. The head of looked after children responded that it was sometimes difficult to find  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To recommend the proposed capital budget for 2017/18 onwards to Council.

The leader expressed his thanks to all those who had contributed to the formation of the capital budget report. The contents of the report being self-explanatory he asked for feedback from the meeting.

A group leader noted that Herefordshire Council had higher debt as a percentage of net revenue budget than all other unitary authorities. He asked if this was being carefully monitored. The head of corporate finance responded that the borrowing included investment in schemes such as the energy from waste plant which were expected to generate returns for the council in the future. Total borrowing was below the council’s threshold and officers were comfortable that the borrowing was affordable.

A group leader asked if a final cost package for the city link road could be provided when the scheme was complete and whether the recommendations made by the external auditor in relation to accounting had been noted. The head of corporate finance responded that monthly updates on the city centre transport package were provided to the Local Enterprise Partnership and that this information could be shared. She confirmed that the recommendations of the external auditor had been noted.

A group leader asked that in future the spend on packages be separated out into the constituent elements and profiled separately. The wording and bundling of the packages needed to be consistent to allow comparison. The head of corporate finance replied that the next capital budget monitoring report would include the requested level of detail.

Resolved that:

a)    the schemes detailed in Appendix 2 be recommended to Council for inclusion in the capital budget.

To consider and agree the draft economic development strategy for recommendation to Council.

The cabinet member for economy and corporate services introduced the report. He thanked all who had contributed and given feedback on the strategy. He reported that consultation had taken place in all the market towns apart from Kington and with key local partners. The general overview and scrutiny committee had commented on the strategy and a summary of its recommendations was included as an appendix to the report. The cabinet member stressed that engagement with partners would continue after the adoption of the strategy.

The cabinet member explained that the strategy was composed of two parts, the economic vision and the pitchbook. He stated that the strategy was deliberately aspirational and recognised the need to attract private sector investment.

The chief executive reported that he had regular meetings with major employers in the county. He stated that during a recent meeting with one such company the desire for a clear vision for Herefordshire had been clearly expressed. Companies wanted to see opportunities for investment identified and schemes promoted to attract people to live and work in Herefordshire.

The cabinet member for economy and corporate services highlighted a number of projects that the council had already supported and the impact they had had. He stated that the list of projects in the strategy would change and develop over time. The strategy was aspirational and it had to be recognised that some projects might not ultimately be delivered.

The economic development manager explained that the proposed strategy had built on the previous iteration covering the period 2011 to 2016, with a shift to looking at opportunities for private sector investment. The new strategy would help the council to share and promote its priorities to key partners. There would be ongoing engagement with investors and the community. The economic development manager stated that all specific council funding referred to in the strategy had previously been before cabinet or full council.

A scrutiny chair commented that the council appeared to have largely withdrawn from the tourism sector in the county, leaving other agencies to take the lead. The economic development manager stated that the council continued to work with partners on developing the tourism sector, particularly on securing investment to deliver new elements.

A scrutiny chair asked what options were being considered for development of rail travel in the county, highlighting the level of service at Leominster station. The economic development manager stated that the council was working with partner agencies to deliver improvements to rail services such as investment in the car parking provision at Leominster station.

A scrutiny chair asked what would happen if the government did not deliver the required funding for the university project. The economic development manager responded that contingencies were being put in place. The chief executive added that he expected the position on the university to become clear in the near future and remained optimistic that the government funding would be secured.

A group leader stated that the council should give support to start-ups and small  ...  view the full minutes text for item 66.