Agenda and minutes

The Members had before them:

A.        The Agenda papers (previously circulated)

B.        Eleven questions submitted to the Head of Legal and Democratic Services (previously circulated); and

C.        The Minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 15 January 2015 (previously circulated).

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

Apologies for absence were received from Mr C B Taylor and Mr T A L Wells.

Four declarations of Other Disclosable Interests were made:

Mr A T Amos – Items 7, 8 and 9 – Member of the Advisory Council of ASH.

Mr P Grove – Item 7 – Member of Malvern Hills District Council.

Mr L C R Mallett – Items 7 and 8 Employee of the British Heart Foundation.

Prof. J W Raine – Item 7, Notice of Motion 1 – Member of Malvern Hills District Council.

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, 11 February 2015). Further details are available on the Council’s website. Enquiries can also be made through the telephone number/e-mail address listed below.

One member of the public participated at the meeting.  Ms Ruth Forecast spoke to Agenda item 7, Notice of Motion 1 – Humanitarian Relief and gave members of the Council information and comments on the plight of Syrian refugees.

To approve as a correct record and authorise the signing of the Minutes of the meeting held on 15 January 2015 (previously circulated electronically).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 15 January 2015 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements to be made by the Chairman.

The Chairman referred members to the printed announcements circulated at the meeting.

To consider the reports of the Cabinet and to receive answers to any questions asked on those reports.  Matters which require a decision by Council are on yellow pages (to follow after the meeting of the Cabinet scheduled for 5 February 2015). Matters upon which decisions have been taken by the Cabinet are on white pages (to follow after the meeting of the Cabinet scheduled for 5 February 2015).

All members have received, or will receive, the Budget portion of the Cabinet agenda. Members are reminded to bring that paperwork with them to this meeting where final approval of the Budget for 2015/16 will be sought.

The Council had before it a detailed report on the Budget for 2015 – 2016 which the Cabinet had considered on 5 February 2015 and which the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet were recommending formally for adoption by the Council.

All Councillors had received a copy of the full report and Appendices considered by the Cabinet on 5 February 2015 and had been requested to bring those to the meeting to allow full consideration of all the issues.  Members were reminded that the Appendices referred to were those presented to 5 February Cabinet, except updates to Appendices 4(a), 8 and 14 which were attached to the report to Council.

2015/16 Local Government Finance Settlement

The report set out that the final figures for the 2015/16 Local Government Finance Settlement were unknown at the time the 5 February 2015 Budget report to Cabinet was drafted. The Government had since confirmed the final Local Government Finance Settlement and this was reported at the Cabinet meeting.  There was one change to the information contained in the provisional settlement that was included in 5 February 2015 Cabinet report. This related to an additional £0.502 million added to the Council's un-ring-fenced Revenue Support Grant and the Government had indicated this recognised that councils had asked for additional support, including to help them respond to welfare needs and to improve social care provision.

The 5 February 2015 Cabinet Budget Report had already included a proposal to allocate up to £0.4 million to support the continuation of funding for one year (2015/16) to District Councils in respect of the valued Local Welfare Assistance schemes. This allocation would only be made on the basis that the funding was matched by each District Council and could be combined with any underspends in 2013/14 and 2014/15.

The report also contained a proposal that the new additional funding of £0.502 million was also allocated to support Local Welfare Assistance Schemes for one year only, 2015/16.  District Councils would be able to use this funding across more than one financial year and would be able to consider this as a non-recurrent fund.

This was consistent with the approved recommendation from the October 2014 Cabinet Resources Report which was to delegate authority to the Chief Financial Officer, in consultation with the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Finance, to agree arrangements with District Councils should the Government provide grant funding, and including transitional arrangements in relation to grant money unspent at 31 March 2015. This delegation continued.

The report set out that additional funding had therefore updated the cash limits that were reported in the 5 February 2015 Cabinet Budget Report as follows:

·                An increase of £501,723 to the total funding received from Revenue Support Grant for 2015/16

·                An increase of £502,000 in the cash limit for Commercial and Change / Finance budget in respect of Welfare Assistance Schemes for one year only, 2015/16

·                A decrease of £277 in the amount to transfer to Earmarked Reserves

The report clarified that the changes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1646.

To consider the reports of the Cabinet and to receive answers to any questions asked on those reports.  Matters which require a decision by Council are on yellow pages (to follow after the meeting of the Cabinet scheduled for 5 February 2015). Matters upon which decisions have been taken by the Cabinet are on white pages (to follow after the meeting of the Cabinet scheduled for 5 February 2015).

The Leader of the Council reported the following topics and answered questions in relation to them:

·         Implementation of the Care Act 2014

·         Superfast Extension Programme - Appointing a Preferred Supplier for a County-wide Broadband Infrastructure Partner

·         Increasing the Number of School Places available in Malvern

·         Scrutiny Report:  Digital Inclusion

To consider a report on the future arrangements and structures for Pension Fund Governance (yellow pages).

The Council had before it a report which set out that the Council was the Administering Authority for the Worcestershire County Council Pension Fund which was the Local Government Pension Scheme for its own employees and those of over 140 other Scheme Employers in the administrative area of Herefordshire and Worcestershire.  The Scheme had 20,000 contributing members, 14,100 pensioners and beneficiaries and a further 14,200 deferred pensioners.

In May 2013, the Council had agreed to establish a Shadow Pension Board in anticipation of Regulations requiring this under the Public Service Pensions Act 2013. 

The long-awaited Local Government Pension Scheme (Amendment) (Governance) Regulations were laid before Parliament on 28 January 2015.  They were not yet law but it was stated that they would come into force after the meeting of Council but by 1 April 2015 (subject to the Parliamentary process).

These Regulations required an Administering Authority to establish a local Pension Board by 1 April 2015.  That Board would be responsible for:

·         assisting the Council to comply with legal obligations relating to the Scheme and any requirements imposed by the Pensions Regulator

·         assisting the Council to ensure the effective and efficient governance and administration of the scheme.

This was an oversight role and the new local Pension Board would not be responsible for decision-making in relation to the management of the Scheme or the discharge of the Council's functions.

The report set out that the Scheme decision-making and management role was currently undertaken by the Chief Financial Officer, supported by the Shadow Pension Board.  Although it was not required as part of the imminent change in governance arrangements, it was recommending that formal decision-making be carried out by a Pensions Committee. This would be a formal committee of the Council, subject to the usual rules of political balance and access to information.   The detailed arrangements were set out in the Appendices to the report.

Other Regulations provided the statutory framework from which the Administering Authority was required to prepare a Fund Governance Policy Statement.  The proposed Statement was set out in the Appendices for approval.  The report made clear that given the final legislation was not yet in force, the recommendations included retaining some flexibility in settling the final arrangements.

In formulating the documents forthe creation and operation of the Local Pension Board the Chief Financial Officer had followed the guidance issued by the Shadow Scheme Advisory Board.

The appendices attached to the report set out the proposed terms of reference and governance arrangements by which the Administering Authority would carry out the functions. Appendix 1 was a Governance Policy Statement. Particular reference was made in Appendix 2 to the Local Pension Board and its proposed Terms of Reference.

The Leader of the Council referred to the recommendation as printed in the agenda papers and moved an alteration.  This was seconded by Mr S E Geraghty.

RESOLVED that:

(a)        a Pensions Committee be established to discharge the responsibilities of the Council as Administering Authority of the Pension Scheme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1648.

To receive the report of the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Health and Well-being on current issues and proposed developments within his area of responsibility and to receive answers to any question on them (green pages).

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Prof J W Raine, Mrs E B Tucker, Mrs S Askin, Mrs F M Oborski and Mr M E Jenkins as set out in the agenda papers.

The Motion was moved by Prof J W Raine and seconded by Mrs F M Oborski who both spoke in favour of it.

The Council was asked if it would wish to deal with the Motion on the day.  It was suggested that the matter stand referred to the Cabinet to consider in June or July before returning to Council.

RESOLVED that the Motion stand referred to Cabinet for advice.

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 9 February 2015  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).

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mrs E B Tucker, Prof J W Raine, Mrs S Askin, Mr M E Jenkins and Mrs F M Oborski as set out in the agenda papers.

The Motion was moved by Mrs E B Tucker and seconded by Mrs S Askin who both spoke in favour of it.

The Council then agreed to consider and deal with the Motion on the day.

The Motion was debated during which the following principal points were made:

·         carers deserved recognition for the job they did part of which was monetary recognition

·         nothing precipitate was being proposed  by the Motion and hence the request for a scrutiny

·         proper training and pay should be enshrined in all contracts the Council commissioned

·         that only by detailed scrutiny could the Council be assured that the commissioning process was not exploiting carers and their clients.

Members also spoke against the Motion.

·         the Council had a good record in this area and there was no indication that the Council should carry out the proposed scrutiny

·         there were national reports covering the concerns and giving a great deal of background that movers of the Motion could refer to

·         the Council should not dictate what work programme OSPB adopted in an arbitrary and piecemeal manner.

On being put to the meeting the Motion was lost.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr P M McDonald, Mr L C R Mallett, Ms P A Hill, Mr R C Lunn, Ms P Agar, Mr C J Bloore and Mr G J Vickery as set out in the agenda papers.

The Motion was moved by Mr P M McDonald and seconded by Mr L C R Mallett who both spoke in favour of it.

The Council then agreed to consider and deal with the Motion on the day.

A debate ensued during which the following principal points were made:

·         it made sense to ensure all routes to schools were added to the Primary Gritting routes both from the point of view of the pupils' continued education but also of their parents' contribution to the county and wider economy

·         the Council would be failing in its duty of care if it did not make every effort to ensure the safety of school children

·         schools in un-parished areas were at a disadvantage as the green grit bin system was not based on an equitable regime

·         the current policy was adequate and could be extended at the request of individual schools

·         there was a false impression that this problem was widespread - it was limited and the Council reviewed gritting routes regularly, especially in the light of representations about individual problem areas.

On a named vote the Motion was lost.

Those voting in favour were:  Ms P Agar, Mrs S Askin, Mr J Baker, Mr C J Bloore, Mr P J Bridle, Mr S C Cross, Mr P Denham, Mr A Fry, Ms P A Hill, Mr M E Jenkins, Ms R E Jenkins, Mr R C Lunn, Mr L C R Mallett, Mr P M McDonald, Mrs F M Oborski, Mr J Parish, Prof J W Raine, Mrs M A Rayner, Mr J W R Thomas, Mrs E B Tucker, Mr R M Udall and Mr G J Vickery (22).

Those voting against were:  Mrs P E Davey, Mr A A J Adams, Mr R C Adams, Mr A T Amos, Mr R W Banks, Mr M L Bayliss, Mr A N Blagg, Mrs S L Blagg, Mr M H Broomfield, Mr J P Campion, Mr S J M Clee, Mr N Desmond, Mrs L R Duffy, Mrs E A Eyre, Mr S E Geraghty, Mr W P Gretton, Mrs J M L A Griffiths, Mr P Grove, Mr A I Hardman, Mr M J Hart, Mrs A T Hingley, Mrs L C Hodgson, Mr C G Holt, Mr I Hopwood, Mr A P Miller, Dr K A Pollock, Mr D W Prodger, Mr A C Roberts, Mr J H Smith, Mr P A Tuthill and Mr C G Yarranton (31).

Mr S R Peters and Mr R J Sutton abstained (2).

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr G J Vickery, Mr C J Bloore, Mr R C Lunn, Ms P A Hill and Mr P M McDonald as set out in the agenda papers.

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mr G J Vickery and seconded by Mr C J Bloore who both spoke in favour of it.

On a Point of Order raised, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that the Notice of Motion was valid as either relating to the exercise of Council functions (adult social care) or affected the County (welfare of residents).

The Council then agreed to consider and deal with the Motion on the day.

The Motion was debated during which the following principal points were made:

·         it was appropriate that a major cause of premature death should be taxed to support additional care as described in the Motion

·         whilst the critics of the Motion claimed it was unworkable, similar moves had been made in the United States and the additional tax revenue used for early education on health care.  An additional bonus was increasing the price of tobacco also reduced the number of people using it, reducing ill health and premature deaths

·         the thrust of the Notice of Motion chimed with some of the sentiments expressed in Agenda item 8, the Council's ongoing campaign to promote good health

·         this was a pre-election gimmick and did little to address either the damage done by smoking or the spending problems of the NHS

·         the Motion did not make economic sense as the Government took more revenue by way of taxes on tobacco than it spent in dealing with its effects

·         there was inconsistency in the message given out by some political parties and the suggestion was made that vested interests had a disproportionate influence over the tax-setting regime.

On a named vote the Motion was lost.

Those voting in favour were:  Ms P Agar, Mrs S Askin, Mr J Baker, Mr C J Bloore, Mr P J Bridle, Mr S C Cross, Mr P Denham, Mr A Fry, Ms P A Hill, Mr M E Jenkins, Ms R E Jenkins, Mr R C Lunn, Mr L C R Mallett, Mr P M McDonald, Mrs F M Oborski, Mr J Parish, Prof J W Raine, Mrs M A Rayner, Mr R J Sutton, Mr J W R Thomas, Mrs E B Tucker, Mr R M Udall and Mr G J Vickery (23).

Those voting against were:  Mrs P E Davey, Mr A A J Adams, Mr R C Adams, Mr R W Banks, Mr M L Bayliss, Mr A N Blagg, Mrs S L Blagg, Mr M H Broomfield, Mr J-P Campion, Mr S J M Clee, Mr N Desmond, Mrs L R Duffy, Mrs E A Eyre, Mr S E Geraghty, Mr W P Gretton, Mrs J M L A Griffiths, Mr P Grove, Mr A I Hardman, Mr M J Hart, Mrs A T  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1652.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Health and Well-being presented his report which covered a number of overarching issues:

·         Health and Well-being Board

·         Health Improvement Group

·         Health Protection Group

·         Public Health

·         Health and Social Care Integration

·         Better Care Fund

·         Timberdine

·         Acute Hospitals Review.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility answered questions about the report which included:

·         the work of the Health and Well-being Board and its present composition

·         tobacco control and the Council's agreement to sign up to the Local Government Declaration on Tobacco Control.  This was felt to be a sensible and prudent way to address smoking as a cause of ill health and increased mortality

·         the various action plans for better health and how progress was being monitored

·         health inequalities across the county and how these were being addressed.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility also promised:

·         to circulate copies (or links to) all action plans named in the report electronically to all members

·         to write to the Acute Hospital Trust and make representations about the level of car parking charges on hospital sites within the county

·         to address concerns about the removal of funding for a key support post relating to dementia care

Eleven questions had been received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and had been circulated before the meeting.  One question (Question 2) was withdrawn at the meeting; the remaining ten questions were asked (or taken as read).  All answers are enclosed with these Minutes.