To receive the Leader’s report, which provides an overview of the Executive’s activity since the last Council meeting, and also contains the annual report from the executive including any executive decisions taken under urgency provisions.

The Leader presented his report on the activities of Cabinet since the meeting of Council in March 2014 and an overview of key activity in 2013/14.

The Leader highlighted the following matters:

·         A recent Ofsted inspection had confirmed there had been progress in delivering the children’s safeguarding improvement plan, with adoption services rated as good.   He thanked all those staff involved for their work.

·         There had been a rise in the DfE funding of Herefordshire’s pupil premium for 2014/15, although it was to be noted that the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) per pupil in Herefordshire remained 5% below the average for education authorities.

·         The development of the old livestock market had been a success and in relation to the effect on High Town, whilst it was still early in the life of the development to draw conclusions, he had not received any complaints.

·         He highlighted progress in increasing access to broadband across the county and thanked the team involved in the project.

·         The Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) through the strategic economic plan it had submitted to Government had secured some £43m to support economic growth in the County. The bid had been for £47m.  He believed it was the best per capita allocation in the Country.  The significance of the allocation could not be overstated.  He congratulated the Council and LEP teams involved in developing the bid including Councillor RJ Phillips who supported this aspect of the Leader’s portfolio.

The following principal points were made during discussion of the report (references in brackets are to the relevant page (and paragraph number) of the published agenda papers):

·         (p67 (20)) – The current operation of the Council’s two scrutiny committees was questioned.  The Leader commented that he had held discussions with the new Chairmen of the two Committees.  The scrutiny committees continued to have a full role to discharge and this would include discussions on policy.  .

·         (p67 (13)) – In response to a question about a recruitment exercise by the LEP the Leader emphasised the importance of the LEP’s role and for it to have the resources required to support its work.  Councillor RJ Phillips emphasised the need to ensure appropriate staff were in post to account for the money allocated by Government and deliver the projects to which it had been allocated.  He noted that economic development teams within the LEP area were working with the LEP to avoid duplication of effort.

·         A Member questioned the link between  the road and transport schemes and job creation outlined in paragraph 13 of the report, including an A49/A456 link road, to which it was proposed to allocate funding secured via the LEP.  He also questioned the degree to which the funding was provisional.  The Leader stated that the proposed infrastructure was necessary to release the potential of the Enterprise Zone.  The funding was provisional in the sense that it would be made available as the Council met various Government requirements, and submitted its detailed plans, as was normal practice.  

Councillor Phillips commented that the funding had been allocated on the basis of the strategic economic plan submitted by the LEP.  If a future Council were to seek to change that plan re-negotiations would have to take place.  

The Chairman suggested that the Member discussed the matter further with the Leader and Councillor Phillips.

·         (p65 (11/12)) – It was asked whether the Council’s new delivery partner, Balfour Beatty Living Places (BBLP), had the capacity to deliver the work programme expected of it.  The Cabinet Member – Transport and Roads commented that he believed this was the case.  He acknowledged BBLP had drawn on staff and contractors from outside the County to meet the grass cutting demand.  Sub-contractors within the County had been fully committed.

·         A request was made that consideration should be given to the requirement to repair certain potholes within 24 hours, suggesting that this should be changed to 3 days to allow a better planned maintenance programme.

·         A question was asked about ICT support for Members.  The importance of having a resilient and secure system was noted.  It was intended to implement new and improved arrangements for Members after May 2015.

·         (P64 (5)) – In response to a comment on the importance of maintaining the focus on delivering the Children’s safeguarding improvement plan, the Cabinet Member – Young People and Children’s Wellbeing indicated that he was content for the Health Overview and Social Care Scrutiny Committee to support that process as it saw fit.

·         (P65 (12)) Further information was requested on how local councils, community groups and individuals were working together.  The Cabinet Member - Corporate Services agreed to provide a written answer.

·         (P 64 (9)) The local ward member sounded a note of caution over the impact of the development of the old livestock market on High Town.  He suggested there was no strategy for supporting the historic core of the City and in support of this view referred to a number of issues within the historic core that required resolution.  The Leader commented that the administration considered the development of the City as a whole.  He would respond in writing to the points of detail that had been raised.

·         (P66 (14))            In response to comment about the importance of supporting the Market Towns including ensuring broadband provision, the Leader stated that the significance of the Market Towns was recognised in the planning for the County’s future.  The commercial roll-out of broadband was complete in Hereford, Leominster and Ledbury.  The Leominster Enterprise Park was privately owned but the Council, working with BT, had ensured provision of broadband for some businesses and work was ongoing.  The broadband project was progressing well. 

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.