Apologies were received from Councillors PGH Cutter, MAF Hubbard, R Preece, and PJ Watts.  Apologies were also received from Miss E Lowenstein and Mr P Sell.

To receive details of any Member nominated to attend the meeting in place of a Member of the Committee.

Councillor AJ Hempton-Smith substituted for Councillor MAF Hubbard.

There were none.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 17 October 2011.

RESOLVED:              that the Minutes of the meeting held on 17 October 2011 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To consider suggestions from members of the public on issues the Committee could scrutinise in the future.

(There will be no discussion of the issue at the time when the matter is raised.  Consideration will be given to whether it should form part of the Committee’s work programme when compared with other competing priorities.)

A suggestion was received requesting the Committee to consider the future of the libraries programme for the County.

To note questions received from the public and the items to which they relate.

(Questions are welcomed for consideration at a Scrutiny Committee meeting so long as the question is directly related to an item listed on the agenda.  If you have a question you would like to ask then please submit it no later than two working days before the meeting to the Committee Officer.  This will help to ensure that an answer can be provided at the meeting). 

There were none.

To receive a presentation on the preparation of the 2012/13 budget and the Executive’s view on emerging options.

The Committee received a presentation on the preparation of the 2012/13 budget and the Executive’s view on emerging options.

The Leader of the Council highlighted the following points:

·         That the financial outlook remained extremely difficult.  The Executive had formed the view that top slicing of budgets was neither sustainable nor appropriate. The administration proposed to adopt a zero based budgeting approach for the remainder of its term in office.

·         The Executive did intend to take up the Government’s offer of a one year grant of 2.5% of the Council tax base equivalent to £2.2m, in exchange for not increasing the Council Tax for 2012/13.  This was a voluntary scheme and some Councils had indicated that they would not participate in it.  Unlike in 2011/12 the grant was for one year only and would not be added to the base budget.  This had implications for funding in future years.  Because it was a one off sum it was proposed to use the grant to fund transition in 2012/13 as zero based budgeting was introduced.  He said that he would welcome the Committee’s assistance with this transition process.

·         Additional challenges that lay ahead for 2012/13 included localisation of the Council Tax Benefits and Business Rates and the transfer of responsibility for Public Health to local authorities.

The Chief Officer – Finance and Commercial then gave a presentation. This covered:

·         Future Strategy: future vision as a Council; priorities for the next few years; and what needed to done to deliver the vision and priorities.

·         Budget 2012/13: and future years outlining the challenges and future strategy for 2013/14 and 2014/15.

Future Strategy

Key themes in the future vision included: community leadership; the relationship with residents; commissioning of services and the implications of more outsourcing; localism - the future role of town and parish councils and other local community groups; partnerships - the role of the Herefordshire Partnership, collaboration and cross border working; and development of workforce skills and capabilities.

In terms of future priorities he suggested there was a need to be clear about the long term priorities given the financial challenge and to have a better understanding of the impact the Council would get for the money it spent: for example: where would it invest, protect, or reduce spend? How would it deal with the challenge of an aging population -a step change in early intervention and prevention/increased (or matched) funding for the third sector and community action?

To ensure delivery early action was required to achieve fundamental change.  This involved pump prime funding for change; and a programme of “root and branch” reviews including value for money benchmarking and recommissioning/market testing; and changing eligibility criteria.  The Council needed to consider whether there were areas to which it could shift resources to fund priorities, whether to explore community budgets and the scope for pooling more budgets. Other issues included developing a closer link between funding services and outcomes; increasing income/trading and reducing public subsidy; Options for cost reduction included posts, suppliers, property; and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 36.

To receive a presentation on the Youth Services Review.

The Committee received a presentation on the Youth Services Review.

The Cabinet Member – Health and Wellbeing emphasised that the proposals would be subject to consultation. 

The Head of 11-19 Integrated Services gave a presentation.

He reported that the Purpose of the Review was to identify ways in which the vision for young people’s services could be achieved; address how youth work could be directed more toward targeted intervention, and to ensure the needs of the most vulnerable were met, utilising youth work skills; establish how communities and the voluntary sector could be better engaged in improving universal provision, making it more locally relevant and available; and identify how reductions to the current youth service budget could be achieved.

The guiding principles were: partnership work to provide universal services; the role of Herefordshire Public Services is to be a community leader and funder of activities, not necessarily a provider; there will be an increased focus on the most vulnerable young people; an increased proportion of the total spend on youth activities to be on targeted support; there will be a mix of providers delivering youth services; contestability will be built into the commissioning and procurement processes; all organisations will engage with the multi-agency group processes in localities; and youth work will be delivered in new and innovative ways which should facilitate the reduction of capital assets in line with the Corporate Asset Plan or ensure that community and corporate use of assets is maximised.

The youth service currently delivered five service functions: Positive Activities; Outdoor Education; Youth Involvement – Unaffected; Student Information Services – Unaffected; and Targeted Youth Support

The proposals envisaged a budget of £766k in 2012/13 a reduction of £191.1k from 2011/12. 

In terms of youth service provision in the County as a whole it was noted that Herefordshire Public Services (HPS) Youth Services were not the only provider (25.3% of 13-19 population access HPS provision) but there was no complete measurement of whole provision

The Current HPS contract was worth £75k for the 3rd Sector.  There was excellent provision in pockets but incomplete coverage and a large range of preparedness for commissioning.

The proposals represented a significant change of approach.  The likely recommendations included: targeted youth support including development of a 1to1 casework service for vulnerable young people with a preventative approach (est £400k); a change to outdoor education provision, which HPS could not continue to fund at the current level, involving further work to explore whether the facilities could be either cost neutral – or deliver a profit; continued funding for positive activities including investing in community engagement and allocating the remainder on a formula basis using the resource allocation tool.  This would mean the Council would spend funding on a community engagement and facilitation route rather than through the direct provision of community youth clubs and the staff to operate them.

Examples were given of a range of approaches being adopted across the Country: West Sussex: Manchester: Warwickshire: Gloucestershire: Worcestershire: whose approach was to transfer  ...  view the full minutes text for item 37.

To consider the Committee’s Work Programme.

The Committee considered its work programme.

In opening the meeting the Chairman, it being the first meeting since his appointment by the Council in November, had indicated his intention to focus the Committee’s work on the statutory role in relation to Community Safety and Health.

The Vice-Chairman – Health and Wellbeing expressed concerns that the current work programme did not give sufficient weight to the Committee’s responsibilities for Health Scrutiny.

A Member reiterated a concern expressed in September 2011 about scrutiny of the work of Directorates and the Council’s performance.

It was agreed that the Chairman and Vice-Chairmen would review the work programme putting forward priorities for their respective areas of responsibility and seeking to identify relevant timelines within the programme to ensure that the various elements were joined up in a logical way.