To receive a report from the Leader on the activities of Cabinet since the meeting of Council in December and for the period of the administration.

The Leader presented his report on the activities of Cabinet since the meeting of Council in December 2014 and for the period of the administration.

He added the following comments:

·         The overall borrowing figure was £170m to date.  Some 88% of this sum was financing invest to save projects including road maintenance, sports facilities operated by HALO Leisure, and the Rotherwas industrial estate.   The borrowing was to the benefit of all residents and cost effective.  Interest rates were low and at fixed rates.  If interest rates were to rise the borrowing strategy would be reviewed.

·         In relation to the Hereford football club talks with the Phoenix Group were progressing and they had indicated they would have the necessary funds available to proceed.  He wished the Club every success.

·         Discussions were taking place about expansion of the Courtyard Centre for the Arts and he would keep Members informed.

·         In conclusion he thanked all Members for their contribution to the Council’s work.  He considered that there had been many achievements whilst acknowledging that many things remained to be done.  In particular he noted that a funding gap of £50m had been bridged at a time of rising costs and reduced income, with the Adult Social Care budget also expected to be within budget at the end of the financial year. The general reserve had also been replenished and Council tax increases kept at less than 2%, whilst maintaining essential services.  He also noted the successful relocation of the council’s head office, the fact that the Core Strategy was almost completed, and the improvement in Children’s Safeguarding.

In discussion the following principal points were made:

·         A number of comments were made in relation to the finance section of the report.

Clarification was sought on how the Council had failed on two grounds in a contractual dispute because papers had not been served correctly.  The Leader undertook to provide a briefing note to all Members.

It was questioned why no provision had been made in the Council’s budget set  in February 2015 to meet the potential cost of an award against the Council in its dispute with a former contractor and whether the absence of such provision made the budget invalid.  The Chief Financial Officer replied that the budget approved by Council in February had been based on the position as it was understood.  There had been no expectation of additional revenue or capital expenditure beyond that set out in the report.  As S151 officer he had a statutory responsibility to certify the robustness of the estimates and risks contained within the budget and he had done so.  The budget did not set out in detail every potential risk but quantified overall risk.  In the instance referred to, the potential cost of losing the dispute with the contractor had been high but the risk of losing it had been low.

Concern was expressed about the state of repair of road signage within the County.  It was suggested that removal of damaged signs was preferable to them being left in a poor state.  The Cabinet Member - Transport and Roads acknowledged that mischievous vandalism and defacement of signs was a concern and there was scope for improvement.  He encouraged all Members to report matters to the locality stewards in the first instance.

·         (Paragraph 7 of the report)  It was suggested that whilst staff should be congratulated on the improvements in Children’s Safeguarding there was no room for complacency.   The Cabinet Member – Young People and Children’s Wellbeing commented that it was expected that the Department for Education would shortly confirm that it was taking the Council out of intervention measures. It was recognised that service improvement remained a longer term goal with a view to the service being rated “good" by the end of 2016/17.

He thanked Councillor JA Hyde – Cabinet Support Member, noting that the areas of adoption and fostering that she oversaw had consistently been rated good.

The Leader complimented Councillor CNH Attwood for his work as Chairman of the Health and Social Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and as a fellow ward Councillor, and reiterated his thanks to all Chairmen and members of Committees,

·         (Paragraph 11) – In relation to Colwall Primary School the Leader commented that the investigation of the reasons for the problems affecting the school site had been inconclusive.  The suggestion was that the water table was rising.  A technical study was being undertaken to consider whether a new school could be constructed on the existing site or if relocation would be a better option.

·         (Paragraph 15) A Member expressed concern about the quality of training home care providers gave to staff mindful of the implementation of the provisions in the Care Act.  The Cabinet Member – Health and Wellbeing commented that care homes were subject to quality standards and external inspection.  He requested that if any Member had a specific concern at any time that this should be brought to his attention or that of the Director immediately.

·         (Paragraphs 17/18) -  The Leader acknowledged the importance of the Butter Market Development and its role in linking High Town, Hereford with the Old Market Development.  The tendering process for the development was underway and he therefore could not comment further at this stage. However, he was able to confirm that the developer of the Old Market site was not on the short list of tenderers.

The Leader added that evidence of the effect of the Old Market Development on trade in High Town was anecdotal but it appeared to have been beneficial.  He wanted to see the whole of the City flourish.

·      (Paragraph 19) -  The Leader acknowledged that the environmental and social aspects of development formed part of the Core Strategy in addition to the economic aspect mentioned in his report.

It was questioned what implications the latest population figures released by the Government would have on the Core Strategy noting that they suggested a lower population increase than that projected by the Herefordshire Information and Research Network.  The Cabinet Member - Infrastructure commented that the latest figures, which related to population growth not housing demand, would be taken into account in responding to the modifications requested by the Inspector following the examination in public of the Core Strategy.  It was expected that all the required modifications would be completed within some 3 weeks and a 6 week consultation period would then follow.

He added that delay in adopting the Core Strategy would present a risk, inhibiting the County’s ability to manage development.

Some concern was expressed about the appropriateness of undertaking this consultation exercise during the election period.  The Assistant Director, Governance commented that the consultation exercise had been required by the Planning Inspector as part of a statutory process.  He did not consider that the exercise infringed the guidance issued in relation to the pre-election period.

·         (Paragraph 20) The development of the County’s economy, the Enterprise Zone, the need for the provision of well paid jobs in the County and the need for investment from companies outside the County was raised.  The Leader commented that infrastructure was being provided at the Enterprise Zone that would attract companies.  However, the aim was not solely to attract businesses from outside the County but also to provide the opportunity for existing companies to expand.  He undertook to recirculate a recent report submitted to the Marches Local Enterprise Board which outlined progress in developing the Enterprise Zone. 

·         (Paragraph 25/26) – The Cabinet Member – Contracts and Assets confirmed that the projected reduced costs of £41m over the life of the energy to waste plant compared to doing nothing related solely to Herefordshire.

It was asked when the Council’s external auditors would sign off the Council’s 2013/14 accounts noting that they had not done so pending the outcome of a value for money investigation into the energy from waste contract.  The Leader stated that a written response would be sent to all Members.

It was questioned whether there was sufficient healthcare infrastructure within the County to meet the need that would arise from the projected healthcare growth.  The Leader commented that this issue was not within the Council’s control.  However, as a general point the Council was working with health partners.

It was requested that consideration should be given to the provision of dedicated accommodation for key workers such as medical staff.

·         Councillor Powers, speaking as It’s Our County Group Leader, thanked the Leader and officers for their work during a difficult period, which he noted was not at an end.  He acknowledged that the Leader’s report was not intended to be comprehensive.  However, he suggested there were a number of issues identified in the key issues and long term challenges section of the publication “Understanding Herefordshire” where further action was clearly needed.   The economic masterplan to which reference was made at paragraph 19 did not exist.  There was also no reference to the development of the Business Improvement District.  In relation to the Core Strategy he asserted that at the public examination it had been demonstrated that the Council’s evidence base was not up to date in many aspects.

The Leader reiterated that his report was not intended to be comprehensive.  He again acknowledged that many issues remained to be addressed, whilst noting the difficult financial constraints within which the administration had had to operate.

·         Councillor Norman, speaking as Green Group Leader, thanked officers for their work.  She expressed concerns about the Core Strategy including the planned consultation exercise during the pre-election period and about progress in developing the Enterprise Zone and Broadband provision.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted.