To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors PE Crockett, RL Mayo and PD Price.

Agenda item 8 – Youth Justice Plan

Councillors BA Durkin and RJ Phillips declared non-pecuniary interests as Magistrates.

Agenda item 11 – Leader’s Report

Councillor LC Tawn declared a non-pecuniary interest as a Director of the Old Market.

Agenda item 12 – Annual Report of Hereford and Worcester Fire Authority

Councillors BC Baker, KS Guthrie, RI Matthews, RJ Phillips, and SD Williams declared non-pecuniary interests as Council appointees to the Fire Authority.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 17 July 2015.

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting held on 17 July 2015  be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive the Chairman's announcements and petitions from members of the public.

Council noted the Chairman’s announcements as printed in the agenda papers.

The Chairman provided further information with regard to the walk with the wounded on 1 October.

He formally announced that his Chairman’s charity for the year was “The Haven” - a local cancer charity providing treatment and support to cancer victims, particularly breast cancer, as well as supporting their close families.

The Chairman also reported the receipt of four petitions relating to:

-       No 1 Ledbury Road

-       Leominster Library

-       Belmont Library. 

-       a forthcoming planning application for a new single carriageway (Southern Link Road) and associated works.

To receive questions from members of the public.

A copy of the public questions and written answers, together with supplementary questions asked at the meeting and their answers, is attached to the Minutes at Appendix 1.

To consider the following motions:

-  No 1 Ledbury Road – short breaks and respite care

-  Chinese Lanterns

Notice of Motion 1 – No 1 Ledbury Road, short breaks and respite care

Councillor Lloyd Hayes proposed the motion.  She made the following principal points:

·         She expressed concern that parents and carers had heard of service changes through rumour.  This had created general fear and insecurity. Some parents had recently been refused provision at Ledbury Road. 

·         She was concerned that Wye Valley Trust, the Herefordshire Clinical Commissioning Group and Social Services were closing the facility.  One way of closing a service was by running it down.  This created a situation where staff were encouraged to seek other jobs.  She noted that the chef at Ledbury road had been redeployed and not replaced.

·         The Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Task and Finish Group had already gathered useful evidence and would bring forward some useful recommendations.  She questioned whether it was in accordance with the Constitution for any decisions to be taken on Ledbury Road before the Task and Finish Group had reported.

·         There had been a lack of strategic planning and no consultation with regard to changes to the service at Ledbury road and no contingency plan.  The Council was not fulfilling its duty of care.

·         There were many opportunities to increase use of the facility and generate income, for example offering day care there, that had not been adequately explored.

·         The facility was an excellent resource and there was no alternative in the City.  She commented on a number of providers that it had been suggested to her could provide an alternative, asserting that they could not provide an adequate replacement for the current provision at Ledbury Road.

Recommendation (a) in the Notice of Motion requested the executive to commit to the retention of the option for families and young people to access professionally staffed respite care in Herefordshire.  Councillor Lloyd-Hayes indicated that she was willing to add the words “and beyond” to the end of that request.

Councillor Lester, cabinet member – young people and children’s wellbeing, explained that this amendment would permit use of respite carers just across the county’s border.

Some concern was expressed that the wording of the amendment to read “Herefordshire and beyond” was too wide and did not reflect the qualification offered by the cabinet member.

A motion that recommendation (a) be amended was carried with 43 votes in favour, 3 against and 2 abstentions.

Councillor Harvey seconded the motion.  She highlighted the specialist nature of respite care, and its importance to families.  She considered that there had been insufficient communication between the partner organisations themselves, and between the partner organisations and the parents, to ensure that respite care remained available at Ledbury Road while a broader range of other options were being developed. 

Ledbury Road remained the only option for a number of families.  There was an impression that the service was being dismantled.  The council needed to bear in mind that if families fell apart as a consequence of the withdrawal of the service at Ledbury Road the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

To approve the Children and Young People’s Plan 2015-2018.

Council was invited to approve the Children and Young People’s Plan.

The cabinet member – young people and children’s wellbeing presented the report.

In discussion the following principal points were made:

·         The cabinet member acknowledged that in the light of a government announcement permitting children with birthdays between April and August to start reception at age of five, rather than four, references to early years being 0-5 might need amendment.

·         In relation to page 50 of the agenda papers section 3 bullet point 2 it was asked what measures were envisaged to improve professionals’ knowledge in relation to mental health.   The cabinet member replied that professionals would be made aware of expectations regarding their training and the matter would be considered again when the plan was reviewed.

·         It would be essential to monitor and review the Plan’s effectiveness.

·         It was requested that regard be had to provision for children who suffered bereavemen,t noting the effect on mental health and wellbeing.  The cabinet member acknowledged this point.

·         The cabinet member – health and wellbeing commented that the Plan had been considered and approved by the Health and Wellbeing Board and she looked forward to the outcomes.

·         In relation to the aim of reducing the educational achievement gap between children in receipt of free school meals and other children to 5% it was noted that the current gap was 25%.  It was asked what the implications would be if free school meals were withdrawn following the Government’s spending review.  The cabinet member commented that a collaborative approach was needed with partners to meet funding challenges.  It was still possible to track children who met the specific criteria for free school meals eligibility.

·         The ability to fund the strategy given the funding gaps in the County was of key importance.

·         Assurance was sought that the Plan was joined up with the public health agenda, The cabinet member – young people and children’s wellbeing confirmed that public health along with other organisations needed to commit to the plan.

·         It was asked how the workforce strategy referred to at section 8.7 of the report would be monitored and reported on.  The cabinet member acknowledged the importance of securing the appropriate workforce.

·         With reference to section 8.8 of the report on community engagement it was suggested that reference should be made to the need to involve Parish Councils and the voluntary sector.  The cabinet member acknowledged this point.

·         The Plan involved co-ordinating some 20 different stakeholder groups.  It was important to ensure that the Plan was achievable.

·         There was already a projected overspend on the Children’s Services budget of over £1m.  `

·         In relation to respite care services, the cabinet member commented that short break provision depended on the needs of the child and family.  If the core assessment identified the need for respite care that would be provided.

·         The cabinet member agreed to make clear that one of the aims of the plan was to identify mental health problems early in life.

RESOLVED:  That the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

To approve the Youth Justice Plan.

Council was invited to approve the Youth Justice Plan.

The cabinet member – young people and children’s wellbeing presented the report.

In the course of discussion the following principal points were made:

·         It was observed that 37% of young people receiving outcomes that required youth offending service interventions were children in care. The cabinet support member commented that looked after children were very vulnerable and whereas in a number of households minor infringements would be dealt with within a family, looked after children were more vulnerable to being recorded as offenders.

·         It was noted that one of the key actions to improve service provision in 2015/16 was to re-establish the Worcester Junior Attendance Centre (JAC) and develop the programme for the Telford JAC.  It was asked whether consideration had been given to providing a dedicated JAC in Hereford.  The cabinet member – young people and children’s wellbeing agreed to seek clarification.

·         Disappointment was expressed that some of the national figures used in the report were two years old.  The cabinet member – economy and corporate services speaking as chairman of the Community Safety Partnership commented that the timeliness and quality of statistical information was to be reviewed and improved.

·         It was asked whether there was any information showing offences were seasonal and whether long summer school holidays were a factor in offending.  The cabinet member agreed to clarify this point.

RESOLVED:  That the Youth justice Plan as appended to the report be approved.

To consider making provision in the capital programme for additional capital funding to support the relocation of Broadlands primary school and children’s centre onto the Aylestone Business and Enterprise College Site.

Council was asked to approve that provision be made in the capital programme for  additional  capital funding to support the relocation of Broadlands primary school and children’s centre onto the Aylestone Business and Enterprise College (ABEC) site.

The cabinet member – young people and children’s wellbeing presented the report.

A Member commented that it was to be hoped that lessons about estimating costs could be learned from the project to avoid a similar situation happening in the future.  The leader commented that, whilst care would continue to be exercised, increases in the estimates of future projects could not be ruled out.

RESOLVED: That an additional £250k of funding be approved to relocate Broadlands primary school onto the Aylestone Business and Enterprise College site.

To designate a specific post to discharge the functions of Monitoring Officer.

(The deputy solicitor to the council – people and regulatory left the room for the duration of this item.)

Council was asked to designate a specific post to discharge the functions of Monitoring Officer.

A Member commented that it had been requested, in relation to all reorganisations undertaken, that as a responsible employer council was assured that redeployed tasks were capable of being delivered by those to whom they had been assigned and would not overburden them.  The assistant director, governance had been discharging a number of governance functions as monitoring officer that were important to the Council’s operation.  Given the burden on the legal team assurance was sought that there was capacity to deliver these important internal functions.

The director – economy, communities and corporate commented that staff had been consulted on the reorganisation proposals and were satisfied with them.  Additional resources had been provided to the legal team. The right resources would be deployed to deliver the agreed work programme.

Formal thanks were expressed to Mr B Norman, former assistant director governance, for his work.

RESOLVED:  the post of deputy solicitor to the council, people and regulatory, be designated monitoring officer for an interim period of up to nine months from the date of approval whilst a permanent solution is considered and implemented.

To receive the Leader’s report, which provides an overview of the Executive’s activity since the last Council meeting.

The leader presented his report on the activities of Cabinet since the meeting of Council in July.

The leader informed Council that at a recent meeting of the Local Enterprise Partnership  confirmation had been received that a number schemes from Herefordshire could, subject to final business cases, access loan funding. This included feasibility work on the  Leominster southern expansion including potential road infrastructure.

In discussion the following principal points were made:

·         It was asked what the council was doing to respond to the current refugee situation.  The leader responded that the council was part of the West Midlands Strategic Migration Partnership and it was considered that the council would be more likely to help more people via that body.  People could make individual offers of support through established charities.

·         (Paragraph 4 of the report) It was noted that an extraordinary meeting of Council had been called for 16 October to consider the adoption of the Core Strategy.  The timing of this meeting was questioned given that the Inspector’s report was expected to be received on 7 October. A question was also asked about the notice of the forthcoming decision by cabinet on the adoption of the core strategy that had been published. Assurance was sought that given that the inspector’s report had not yet been published the council was complying with all the relevant access to information requirements to meet expectations of transparency and would do so if there were to be any delay in receiving that report.  It was also requested that members of the public should be permitted to submit questions to the extraordinary meeting.

The leader commented that Council would be invited to adopt or reject the adoption of the core strategy.  The detailed content would not be subject to discussion and it was not clear what contribution public questions could add to the consultation that had already taken place.

The deputy solicitor to the council agreed to provide a written response in relation to the decision notice.  She confirmed that it was not intended to permit public questions at the Council meeting.  The Council meeting had been called in accordance with the provisions in the constitution.

Disappointment was expressed that public questions were not to be permitted given that changes had taken place since the examination of the strategy in public.

·         (Paragraphs 5-8)  It was requested that there should be a wider consultation on any submission to be made in response the Government’s invitation to authorities to submit devolution bids.  The leader commented on the areas that it had been considered might form part of a detailed submission.  A consultant had been engaged to co-ordinate the preparation of a submission before Christmas.  He proposed to consult group leaders on that submission.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.

To receive the annual report of Hereford and Worcester Fire Authority.

Council was asked to receive the annual report of the Hereford and Worcester Fire Authority.

Councillor RJ Phillips, Vice-Chairman of the Authority, presented the report.

The proposed new fire station in Hereford was welcomed.  The chief fire officer outlined the planned timetable for development which envisaged planning permission being sought towards the end of 2016.  He agreed to keep the council informed of progress.

RESOLVED:  That the report be received.

To receive any written questions from Councillors.

A copy of the Member questions and written answers, together with supplementary questions asked at the meeting and their answers, is attached to the Minutes at Appendix 2.