Agenda and minutes

The Members had before them:

A.         The Agenda papers (previously circulated).

B.         9 questions submitted to the Head of Legal and Democratic Services (previously circulated).

C.        The Minutes of the Council held on 12 November 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 M H Broomfield, Mr S J M Clee, Mr P Denham and Mr T A L Wells.

Mr Muir was welcomed to the Council.

Mr S E Geraghty declared an interest in Agenda item 6(a) being the County Council's representative on the Malvern Hills Science Park Board.

Mr P A Tuthill declared an interest in Agenda item 10 as a member of Malvern Town Council and item number 6(b) as a member of the Cotswold Line Promotion Group.

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,13  January 2016). Further details are available on the Council’s website. Enquiries can also be made through the telephone number/e-mail address listed below.

There was no public participation.

To approve as a correct record and authorise the signing of the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 November 2015 (circulated previously electronically).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 November 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 generally to the printed announcements and drew particular attention to county residents who had been recognised in the New Year's Honours List.

To consider a report on various constitutional matters (yellow pages – to follow).

RESOLVED that Mr S E Geraghty be elected Leader of the Council.

The Council had before it a report on alterations to the political balance consequent upon the results of the Stourport-on-Severn by-election.

RESOLVED that political balance on committees in the light of the recent Stourport-on-Severn by-election be as set out in the Appendix to the report.

The Council had before it a report setting out the requirement to designate one of its officers as the Statutory Scrutiny Officer.  The report described in light of structural changes that the post of Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager was recommended to be so designated.

RESOLVED that the post of Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager be designated as the Council's Statutory Scrutiny Manager.

To consider the reports of the Cabinet and to receive answers to any questions asked on the reports. Matters which require a decision by the Council are on yellow pages. Matters where decisions have already been taken are on white pages.

The Council had before it a report on how new technologies were becoming available that could improve people's experience of care and help them to retain their independence. In addition, there was a saving on staff time, thereby helping to ease the difficulties providers were experiencing in recruiting and retaining their workforce.

The Cabinet wished to make use of these new technologies – including completely new systems as well as new applications of existing technologies. The last few years had seen a surge in development of such systems. These included:

·           Assistive technologies that monitored people's environment and condition

·           Self-care applications, and

·           Robotic aids

The Council had already been promoting the use of assistive technologies to meet low level needs for a number of years. The next phase of the introduction of new technologies would focus on systems that could meet established care needs.

All new technologies would be developed with the full involvement of service users and their families. In some cases, systems would be customised specifically to their needs.

The report confirmed that the Project would make a major contribution to achieving savings of £3.4 million annually related to developing and sustaining the market for adult social care, which were already included in the Medium Term Financial Plan. It would also play a vital role in mitigating cost pressures of £1.8 million annually arising from rising demand and the costs of older people in nursing, residential and home care.

The Cabinet had therefore agreed to set aside £2 million one-off monies from Directorate reserves to invest in the development of new technologies on the basis of business cases from Innovation Partners that can demonstrate clear benefits. The Council would also apply for additional funding from the European Union, which was available to support innovation in care.

RESOLVED that an addition of £2 million of Adult Services and Health Reserves to the Capital Programme be approved to invest in the development of new technologies in care.

The Council had before it a report on a Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) policy for long-term borrowing before 1 April 2008.

The report set out the County Council was required, under the Local Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008, to make a Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) charge to the revenue account in relation to capital expenditure financed from borrowing or credit arrangements.  The report explained that this was the annual amount charged to the budget each year to repay the principal element of long-term borrowing and was based on a system of self-regulation informed by the Council's professional judgement of 'prudent provision'.

The Guidance stated that "the broad aim of prudent provision was to ensure that debt was repaid over a period that was reasonably commensurate with that over which the capital expenditure provides benefits".

The report also set out that the Council used long-term borrowing as part of an overall financing strategy to fund long-term capital investment in projects such as road construction and school improvements and it was sensible to ensure assets were paid for over their useful life.  Approval of a change to the existing MRP policy was being sought that would match debt financing to the useful life of the assets being financed and achieve cost reductions over the medium term.

The report set out that the current regulations were implemented in 2007 and allowed for different treatment of long-term borrowing incurred pre and post 2008.  The regulations required regular review of the policy and the opportunity was being taken to better align debt repayments to the asset lives and ensure the policy is prudent without being overly prudent.

The financial climate over recent years had prompted a number of local authorities to review their own MRP policies to ensure the best method for repaying long-term borrowing is being applied.

The MRP charge for pre-2008 long-term borrowing currently resulted in a payment that was much higher than an average payment based on actual asset lives would suggest.  The Council was therefore currently paying off debt faster than it received the benefits.

Following in-depth work across the Council's fixed assets the average life had been professionally assessed as being 43 years.  The report concluded that it was important to underline that the total debt repayment under this proposal would still remain the same.

RESOLVED that the Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP) policy for long-term borrowing pre-1 April 2008 to be based on matching the debt repayments to the average asset lives being 43 years be approved.

The Council had before it a report which set out support for the development of Malvern Hills Science Park Phase 5 with an additional investment of £4 million for demolition, site clearance of existing building and subsequent construction of Phase 5.  As a Game Changer site, the development of Malvern Hills Science Park (MHSP) was a strategic priority identified through the Strategic Economic Plan and Corporate Plan.  The project had been promoted in partnership with MHSP Ltd and Worcestershire Local Enterprise Partnership (WLEP) and would be fully funded by the WLEP Growth Deal grant allocation with no impact on the Council's long-term borrowing.  The Council was being asked to add the scheme to the Capital Programme and that the cash limits be updated accordingly.

RESOLVED that a £4 million addition to the Capital Programme for Malvern Hills Science Park Phase 5 be approved, to be fully funded by the Worcestershire Local Enterprise Partnership Growth Deal grant allocation, and that the cash limits be updated accordingly.

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

·           Delivering the Corporate Plan – FutureFit Update

·           Demand Management, Prevention Policy and 0-19 Services Commissioning Plan

·           West Midlands Rail Devolution

·           Future Arrangements for Worcestershire Shared Services Joint Committee and County Regulatory Services (Trading Standards and Animal Health Services)

·           Worcestershire County Council Renewable Energy Strategy and Renewable Energy Research Paper

·           2016-17 Budget and Council Tax

·           Resources Report

·           Balanced Scorecard – Future Fit Performance and Corporate Risk Update

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, 7 January 2016.

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

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mrs E B Tucker and seconded by Mrs F M Oborski who both spoke in favour of it.

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

An amendment was then moved by Mr C J Bloore and seconded by Mr P M McDonald to add:

"Council recommends that in the spirit of localism the £2millon set aside for footpath maintenance is then devolved to elected members so they can work with local residents to ensure money is spent where it is needed the most".

The mover and seconder of the original motion agreed to the addition of this wording and so the motion as altered became the substantive motion.

An amendment was then moved by Mr J H Smith and seconded by Mr S E Geraghty to replace the substantive motion with:

"Council requests that Cabinet gives careful consideration in its preparation of a draft Budget and Capital Programme to recommending that a proportion of spend of the proposed £12m "Driving Home" highway infrastructure improvement programme be invested in maintaining and improving public footways across the county".

In response to a procedural query the Head of Legal and Democratic Services gave advice on the validity of the amendment stating that it did not negate the original motion as altered but was a valid amendment.

The Council then debated the amendment during which the following principal points were made:

·           the heart of the argument was that a significant sum should be made available for footway maintenance to deal with much urgent and necessary work.  The proposal was not specific to an amount only that it should be significant and realistic

·           that a good standard of footways was essential if the Council was to achieve its health promotion aims for overall fitness.  Moreover a number of user groups relied on well-maintained footways, not least people with a disability, a visual impairment or the elderly infirm

·           that local members had an important role to play in ensuring efficient and effective use of resources.  The amendment now before Council sought to reduce this role and was indicative of how the local member was perceived generally

·           the subject needed serious consideration and should not be dismissed lightly

·           the request would be considered as part of the budget-setting process but it would be imprudent at such an early stage to suggest a definitive figure

·           a scrutiny exercise was currently being undertaken in this area and it would be premature to talk about specifics before that evidence had been considered

·           the amendment was not dismissive of the important role of the local member but professional expertise of officers was impartial and that specific mechanisms were in place for local members to influence maintenance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1747.

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

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

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

It was then moved by Mr M L Bayliss, seconded by Mr C B Taylor that the word relevant be added to the motion as printed so as to read:

"This Council notes that the UK Government has taken steps to tackle the issue of tax abuse by companies seeking to secure Government contracts for the supply of goods and services and has issued Policy Note 03/14: promoting tax compliance.

Subject to Worcestershire County Council officers reviewing the practical implementation issues, we request that the Cabinet Member with Responsibility considers incorporating Procurement Policy Note 03/14 into all relevant procurement procedures, including tenders, also this motion calls for the Cabinet Member with Responsibility to consider Council's procurement policies to be amended to ensure that all bidders for Council contracts self-certify that they are fully tax compliant in line with central Government practice."

The amendment was then debated.

On being put to the meeting the amendment was carried and became the substantive motion.

RESOLVED - this Council notes that the UK Government has taken steps to tackle the issue of tax abuse by companies seeking to secure Government contracts for the supply of goods and services and has issued Policy Note 03/14:  promoting tax compliance.

Subject to Worcestershire County Council officers reviewing the practical implementation issues, we request that the Cabinet Member with Responsibility considers incorporating Procurement Policy Note 03/14 into all relevant procurement procedures, including tenders, also this motion calls for the Cabinet Member with Responsibility to consider Council's procurement policies to be amended to ensure that all bidders for Council contracts self-certify that they are fully tax compliant in line with central Government practice.

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

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mr P M McDonald and seconded by Ms P A Hill who both spoke in favour of it.

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

An amendment was moved by Mr J P Campion and seconded by Mrs E A Eyre.

"Families who foster children whether for the public or private sector have to be applauded for their dedication as they offer young children the opportunity of a sense of belonging within their home environment.

The County Council gives the foster parents money that goes towards taking care of the child and in our case that cost is an average of £430 PW, for in-house placement. The cost to the Council is now over £8m annually and expected to be £10m next year.

With the cost increasing by nearly a million pounds each year the time has come to have this area scrutinised to ensure the extra £370 cost is going towards high quality foster placements delivering the best outcomes for the children in our care.

Thus, the Council to ensure it is receiving value for money calls upon the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Panel to scrutinise such expenditure and to seek reassurance that the Council's current plans to recruit more in-house foster carers is being successfully delivered".

In response to a procedural question, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that it was in order for Council to suggest additions to the work programme of an individual Scrutiny Panel as a committee of the Council.

The mover and seconder of the original motion accepted the amendment as an alteration.

This amendment became the substantive motion which on being put to the meeting was then carried.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr R C Lunn, Mr G J Vickery, Mr L C R Mallett, Mr C J Bloore and Ms P Agar.

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mr R C Lunn and seconded by Ms P Agar 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 widespread frustration was expressed across the chamber at the service being provided by the bus company in question.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility gave Council information about the measures being taken to ensure the public received an acceptable service.

RESOLVED - this Council is concerned about the quality and standard of bus provision provided by the Diamond Bus Company.

Council calls upon the Cabinet Member with Responsibility to consider opening discussions with the Transport Commissioners to achieve real improvements in the reliability, quality and customer satisfaction.  If necessary to consider a revocation of their licence.

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 and Mrs F M Oborski.

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mrs E B Tucker and seconded by Prof J W Raine who both spoke in favour of it, considering that the current use of Council was too restrictive.

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

An amendment was moved by Mr R M Udall and seconded by Mr P M McDonald the effect of which was to delete the first two paragraphs of the printed Notice of Motion and the first word of the third paragraph.

On being put to the meeting this amendment was lost.

On being put to the meeting the Notice of Motion as printed was carried.

To receive the annual report of the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Performance Board and answers to any questions on it (grey pages).

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Performance Board (OSPB) introduced the report.  He thanked participants for their contribution to the scrutiny process over the last year.  The Chairman also thanked Scrutiny Officers, especially Ms Suzanne O'Leary who had now left the Council's employment, for their assistance over the course of the year.

The report was noted.

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

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

·           the work of the Health and Well-being Board

·           improving health and well-being

·           health protection

·           community safety

·           the Council's approach to prevention of ill health

·           Public Health Ring Fenced Grant (PHRFG)

·           Health and social care intervention

·           Future of Acute Hospital Services in Worcestershire.

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

·           the role and scope of preventative services

·           the need for positive, direct action in key areas of health promotion

·           demand management as described within the report

·           the need to ensure advertising campaigns for screening services were targeted effectively

·           resources available to meet communicable disease outbreaks

·           the role of Health and Well-being champions.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility undertook to circulate details of the champions to all members

·           the need to expedite the findings of the Acute Hospital Services Review.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility promised:

·           a written response on the success criteria for drug and alcohol services

·           to look further at the age ranges of people called to screening programmes to see if other vulnerable groups might be included.

The Chairman thanked the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for his report.

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 11 January 2016 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.)

Nine questions had been received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and had been circulated before the meeting.  Eight questions were asked at the meeting and answered.  Question 7 was formally withdrawn.  (All answers are enclosed with these Minutes).

To consider the reports of the Audit and Governance Committee, the Pensions Committee and the Waste Credit Governance Committee (white pages - attached) which summarise the decisions taken by those bodies.

The Council received the report of the Audit and Governance Committee containing a summary of decisions taken.

The Council received the report of the Pensions Committee containing a summary of decisions taken.

The Council received the report of the Waste Credit Governance Committee containing a summary work being undertaken.