Agendas, Meetings and Minutes - Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: County Hall, Worcester

Contact: John Higginbotham  Committee and Appellate Officer

Media

Items
No. Item

1870.

Apologies and Declaration of Interests

To receive apologies and invite any Councillor to declare any interest in any of the items on this agenda.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Mr S C Cross and Prof J W Raine.

 

Mr M L Bayliss declared a general interest as a member of his wider family worked for Children, Families and Communities within the County Council.

 

Mr L C R Mallett declared an interest in Agenda item 6, Notice of Motion 2 as he did some work for a charity which recycled furniture but it was not within Worcestershire.

1871.

Public Participation

To allow a member of the public to present a petition, or ask a question relating to the functions of the Council, or to make a comment on any matter on the agenda.

 

Members of the public wishing to take part should notify the Head of Legal and Democratic Services in writing or by e-mail indicating both the nature and content of their proposed participation no later than 9.00am on the working day before the meeting (in this case Wednesday, 8 February 2017). Further details are available on the Council’s website. Enquiries can also be made through the telephone number/e-mail address listed below.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Mrs L R Duffy presented a petition on behalf of Mr and Mrs Finch with regard to the A38 between Copcutt Island and Berryhill Island.

1872.

Minutes

To approve as a correct record and authorise the signing of the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2017 (previously circulated electronically).

Additional documents:

Minutes:

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 January 2017 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

1873.

Chairman's Announcements

To receive any announcements to be made by the Chairman.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Chairman drew members' attention to the printed announcements and particularly thanked Revd Phillip Jones whose was attending his final Council meeting before moving to a new ministry in Stoke-on-Trent. The Chairman presented a gift as a token of appreciation from Members and Officers.

 

Then Chairman also mentioned that he had attended the Staff Awards and he extended a thank you to the hard work of County Council staff.

1874.

Reports of Cabinet - Matters which require a decision by Council - 2017-18 Budget and Council Tax pdf icon PDF 192 KB

To consider a report on decisions required by Council (yellow pages) and on decisions taken by the Cabinet (white pages).

 

All Councillors will have a copy of the full Budget and Council Tax report and Appendices considered by the Cabinet on 2 February 2017 and are requested to bring it to Council.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council had before it a detailed report on the Budget for 2017-18, which the Cabinet had considered on 2 February 2017 and which the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet were recommending for adoption by the Council.

 

All Councillors had received or had access to a copy of the full report and Appendices considered by the Cabinet on 2 February 2017 and had been requested to bring those to the meeting to allow full consideration of all the issues.

 

The Leader introduced the budget and moved the recommendation as set out in paragraph 1 of the report; this was seconded by Mr A N Blagg. The Leader explaining that the proposed budget as presented was a result of a year's work. It worked to minimise the effect on the frontline and invest in the plan for Worcestershire. It was based on residents' views of what was important to them based on Viewpoint surveys, roadshows, a survey of businesses and budget consultation meetings.  It was a 'People's budget' based around their priorities of

·       Protecting vulnerable children

·       Working with vulnerable older people and

·       Maintaining highways – especially tackling congestion and road and pavement improvements.

 

More than 60% of the budget would be aimed at the 'People' part of the budget. £1.5m would be spent ongoing with an additional £1m for 2017/18 and £1m for 2018/19 as a one off, also a one off £1m for capital investment and £1.5 being spent on SEN.

 

To help adults the County Council would work alongside the NHS to deal with the demand-led service. They would invest £9m in adult social care paid for in part by the proposed increase in the precept, but the Government also needed to recognise the pressures caused by social care.

 

The 'Place' part of the budget addressed the desire to aspire to the best quality roads and pavements. £6m was to be added to the on-going amount of £2m for pavements, there would be a £1m base budget increase year on year for roads and £2m was allocated for town centres.

 

Congestion needed to be tackled to ensure that the positives of the County being in the top three for economic growth did not cause a negative effect with increased congestion.  The A38 southern link road was progressing, as were projects for Bromsgrove station, the Parkway and Broadband.

 

The Leader paid tribute to Scrutiny members who had looked at the draft budget and reported their findings.

 

The Leader and Cabinet were proposing a precept increase of 2.94%.  This meant that the Council Tax was still one of the lowest in the country.

 

The seconder stated that they would continue to lobby Government for fairer funding. The Business Rates Retention Scheme would provide £60m of funding in 2017/18 and 100% would be retained by 2020 but with extra money would come increased responsibility. Money would also be gained from various grants such as the Public Health Ring Fenced Grant (£29.9m) the ILF (around £3m), highways (13.3m) and potholes (£1.169m).  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1874.

1875.

Reports of Cabinet - Summary of decisions taken

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Leader of the Council reported the following topics and questions were answered on them:

·       Outcome from the Ofsted Inspection of Services for Children in need of help and protection, children looked after and care leavers

·       Scrutiny Report: Commissioning: Staff Terms and Conditions

·       Scrutiny Report: Effectiveness of the Prevention and Recovery Drug and Alcohol Misuse Service

·       Update Report of the Footways Overview and Scrutiny Taskgroup

·       Pilot Intergenerational Project (Homeshare)

·       A4440 Worcester Southern Link Road Dualling (SLR Dualling) – Final Phases

1876.

Notices of Motion. Notice of Motion 1 - Inquiry into local government overview and scrutiny pdf icon PDF 145 KB

To receive the report of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services on any Notices of Motion received by him (Lilac pages).  Councillors are asked to note that any Notices of Motion must be received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services no later than noon on Thursday, 2 February 2017.

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mrs E B Tucker, Mrs S Askin, Mrs F M Oborski, Mr M E Jenkins, Mr T A L Wells and Prof J W Raine.

 

The motion was moved by Mr T A L Wells and seconded by Mrs E B Tucker who both spoke in favour of it.

 

The Council agreed to deal with the Motion on the day.

 

An amendment was moved by Mr P M McDonald and seconded by Mr R M Udall that the last paragraph regarding holding a whole council workshop to gather members' views be deleted.

 

Those in favour of the amendment stated:

·       they wished for the Labour group to give evidence to the enquiry rather than contribute to a diluted corporate view,

·       that changes were necessary but further training and resources were required

·       that Scrutiny Chairmen should be opposition members and Panels should not just receive reports from CMRs who were defensive about the decisions made.

 

Those against the amendment commented:

·       that Scrutiny should not be about political bandwagons

·       Scrutiny was not effective and changes were needed but that should be done by involving all members

·       CMRs did have a valid input into the Scrutiny process.

 

On being put to the meeting the amendment was lost.

 

The substantive motion was then put to the meeting and was carried and Council RESOLVED: The Communities and Local Government Select Committee has announced a new inquiry into the work of overview and scrutiny in local government and is inviting anyone with an opinion or case studies to provide a written submission before March 10, 2017.

 

The government is interested in a range of issues such as the effectiveness of scrutiny, best practices, procedures for selecting chairs, and support for scrutiny function from leadership among many other topics. We would strongly urge those working in overview and scrutiny to take some time to submit evidence to inquiry.

 

In view of shortcomings of our own scrutiny practice as illustrated by the findings in the Children’s Services’ OFSTED, this Council asks that a whole-council workshop be held to gather members’ views and that evidence be submitted to the Select Committee on the Council’s behalf.

 

 

 

1877.

Notices of Motion. Notice of Motion 2 - Recycling of unwanted furniture by charities

Additional documents:

Minutes:

After confirmation from the Cabinet Member with Responsibility that a new policy was to be introduced in March 2017 to allow Charities to continue to be able to dispose of unsuitable items at the County Landfill Recycling Centres, the Mover and Seconder agreed that the Notice of Motion should be withdrawn.

1878.

Notices of Motion. Notice of Motion 3 - State visit by the President of the United States of America

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr R  M Udall, Mr G J Vickery, Ms P Agar, Mr P Denham and Mr P M McDonald.

 

The motion was moved by Mr R M Udall and seconded by Mr R C Lunn.

 

The Council agreed to deal with the Motion on the day.

 

Those in favour of the motion made the following comments:

·       Donald Trump should not be honoured with a state visit within his first year as President. No other President had been invited on a state visit in the first year. He could be invited for a political visit rather than a state visit. It would be embarrassing for the Queen to have to receive him

·       Morally we as a country should not be supporting someone who appears to make racist, homophobic and bigoted comments

·       It was important to reject the idea that refugees were not welcome, especially in Redditch where the first refugees have recently been welcomed

·       That if President Trump were not told that his actions were not acceptable today he would go on and carry out more misogynistic actions tomorrow

·       As well as the moral arguments there was also the financial cost of policing the visit to contend with

 

Comments made against the motion included:

·       That the morals of the President may not be accepted but that should not mean the visit should be cancelled. He became President following a democratic vote and it was necessary to continue speaking to those you disagree with

·       Local Councillors had not received any communications from people of Worcestershire regarding the State Visit

·       The Queen was used to hosting a range of visitors and it was important to keep a relationship with America.

 

On being put to the meeting the Motion was lost.

 

1879.

Notices of Motion. Notice of Motion 4 - Safeguarding Children

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr P M McDonald, Mr P Denham, Ms P Agar, Mr G J Vickery and Mr R M Udall.

 

The motion was moved by Mr P M McDonald and seconded by Mr P Denham.

 

The Council agreed to deal with the Motion on the day.

 

Comments made in favour of the Motion included:

·       Poor recruitment practice and management had led to the current situation. An apology from the Chief Executive and blaming Scrutiny was not the answer. The Leader was at fault for the Council not having a process in place and it was necessary for portfolio holders to be changed. They had no confidence in the plan and felt intervention by the Secretary of State was necessary. A reversal after failure was possible but not at the same time as cut backs

·       The Cabinet had given the impression that things were improving after the 2010 inspection when they had actually been getting worse

·       Scrutiny had not been aware of the extent of the problem

 

Members also made comments against the Motion:

·       The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Children's Services said that he was sorry and would take his share of responsibility but pointed out that Ofsted had said it had seen improvement and recognised that there was now strong stable management in place

·       Engagement in safeguarding was needed by all Members, but calling in the Secretary of State was not necessary

·       The issue was so important it should transcend party politics.

 

Following the debate the Chairman announced, with the support of a majority of Council, that he would allow the Chief Executive to address Council. Following a point of order the Head of Legal and Democratic Services clarified that although it was convention that Officers did not address Council they could do so if permitted by the Chairman.

 

The Chief Executive clarified that she had taken personal responsibility for the Ofsted report and had said sorry. Ofsted had been clear that the solution to the problems needed to be addressed by cross Council working. [Members of the Labour Group left the Chamber while the Chief Executive spoke.]

 

On a point of order as to whether the absent members could vote upon their return, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services clarified that although in quasi-judicial meetings (eg Planning or personnel decisions) if Members had not been present for the entire discussion they would not be allowed to vote as a matter of natural justice, this was not the case for 'ordinary' decisions such as in the current situation. Members could vote if they were present in the Chamber at the time for their vote.

 

During his right of reply to sum up, the mover of the Motion asked to bring an emergency amendment to his own Motion relating to the Chief Executive but having taken advice from the Head of Legal and Democratic Services the Chairman determined that it was not in order to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1879.

1880.

Notices of Motion. Notice of Motion 5 - Outcome of Ofsted Inspection

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mrs E B Tucker, Mr T A L Wells, Prof J W Raine, Mr M E Jenkins, Mrs F M Oborski and Mrs S Askin.

 

The motion was moved by Mrs F M Oborski and seconded by Mrs S Askin.

 

The Council agreed to deal with the Motion on the day.

 

The mover and seconder spoke in support of the Motion:

·       that every Councillor was a Corporate Parent and they needed to ask the question would this service be good enough for my child – if not it was not good enough

·       the scrutiny function needed to be strengthened

·       the Corporate Parenting Board must take on scrutiny work in partnership with the Children and Young Peoples' Scrutiny Panel and District Councils

·       After the Ofsted report the Council must move forward

 

An amendment was proposed by Mr G Vickery and Seconded by mr L Mallett that the word "mandatory" in paragraph 1 should be removed and replaced with the words "new, enhanced" so the first point should read "to require every future Member of Council to participate in a programme of new, enhanced Corporate Parenting Training". It was clarified that in this context the word meant that Council would still require its Members to undertake training. It was argued that the word mandatory was not needed as the Motion already 'required' Councillors to participate in Corporate Parenting Training. It was more a matter of semantics rather than principle.

 

A number of points were made against the amended Motion including that the amendment could be seen as watering down the intention of the original Motion which was to ensure that all Councillors took their responsibilities seriously.  "Mandatory" was a sign of intent and implied individual and collective responsibility.

 

The amendment was put to the meeting and was lost.

 

The substantive motion received general cross-party support when put to the meeting and was carried (all members in favour with 1 abstention) and Council RESOLVED that "Council recognised that the outcome of the recent OFSTED judgement on this Council's Children's Services performance reflects poorly on the responsibilities of every Member of Council.

 

Council therefore resolves:

 

1       To require every future Member of Council to participate in a programme of mandatory Corporate Parenting Training, which will properly inform them of their roles and responsibilities as Corporate Parents (and as set out in an updated Corporate Parenting Handbook).

 

2       To ensure that the Scrutiny Function is strengthened (with the Children and Young People's Scrutiny Panel having access to professional staff support in the process of holding the Cabinet Member and Administration to account).

 

3       To empower the Corporate Parenting Board to scrutinise such elements of the Council's functions with regard to the services for Looked-After Children as are felt necessary to ensure effective oversight (and with regular reporting back to the Children and Young People's Panel).

 

4       To revise and regularly publish an appropriate framework of Key Performance Indicators  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1880.

1881.

Question Time pdf icon PDF 187 KB

To receive answers to any questions asked by Councillors (Orange pages).

 

(Members are reminded of the timescale adopted by Council for notice of questions. A Councillor may only ask a question if:

 

- It is delivered in writing to the Head of Legal and Democratic Services by noon on Monday 6 February 2017 or

- If it relates to urgent business, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services is notified at least half an hour before the start of the meeting.)

 

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Twelve questions had been received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and had been circulated before the meeting. All twelve were asked at the meeting within the half hour allowed. (All answers are enclosed with these minutes.)