Agenda and minutes

The Members had before them:

A.         The Agenda papers (previously circulated).

B.         14 questions submitted to the Head of Legal and Democratic Services (previously circulated).

c.         The Minutes of the Council held on 12 May 2016 (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 S C Cross, Mr W P Gretton, Ms R E Jenkins and Mr P A Tuthill.

Interests were declared by:

Mr M L Bayliss as his daughter was employed by the County Council.

Mr J P Campion declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in Agenda Item 6(4) and left the meeting during consideration of that item.

Mrs L R Duffy – Item 7 Paragraph 38 – runs an organisation which is part of the projects set out in that agenda item.

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

Mr P Denham presented a petition on behalf of residents in his division.  The petition related to a request for a one-way traffic system in Vauxhall Street and Church Road.

Mr J Baker read a letter from a family in Redditch which had been affected directly by a suicide from the Musketts Way footbridge over the A448.

The Chairman thanked both for their contribution and the above family for attending and said the relevant Cabinet Member with Responsibility would respond in writing in due course.

To approve as a correct record and authorise the signing of the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 May 2016 (circulated previously electronically).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the annual meeting held on 12 May 2016 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements to be made by the Chairman.

The Council stood for a minute's silence in memory of Mr M H Broomfield and Jo Cox MP.

The Chairman congratulated Mrs E A Eyre who had received a BEM in the Queen's Birthday Honours List.  Mr T A L Wells was welcomed back after his recent accident.

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 detailed report on the funding for the Worcestershire Parkway Regional Interchange.  The report reminded members that the Council had in January 2015 committed to the delivery of a Parkway Railway Station in the triangle of land formed by the intersection of the Worcester-Paddington (Cotswolds) and Birmingham-Bristol railway lines and the B4084 near Norton.

The scheme had been approved in principle by Cabinet and was progressing through Network Rail's Governance for Railways Investment Process. 

A full detailed Planning Application had been agreed in August 2015 subject to the satisfactory completion of relevant Conditions, the majority of which would be met by the Principal Contractor as part of the Detailed Design process.

The members of the Council had been sent an Exempt Finance Report detailing that the final cost of the scheme would be higher than the estimate reported to Cabinet in December 2014.  This was mainly due to higher land and utility costs and increasing the construction cost estimate to reflect current construction market prices and a proportionately higher contingency sum.  The details of this Appendix were not referred to openly because the financial details remained commercially confidential as the Council was currently in commercial negotiations with potential contractors and were accordingly exempt at this stage from public disclosure.

The report set out details of proposed virement and that a key finance principle was that the cost of building and operating Worcestershire Parkway did not require additional revenue funding from the Council during the 25 year borrowing period or beyond.  The Cabinet had approved the finance required to deliver the scheme and was now recommending that the Council should agree that the Capital Programme be adjusted accordingly.

A discussion ensued during which there was widespread support for the Parkway project and for the method of funding the Council's elements of the costs.  Members did ask that once the financial package was agreed and the exempt information could be made public it be circulated accordingly, together with confirmation to members of the source of the virement authorised by Cabinet.

RESOLVED that the addition to the Capital Programme set out in the Exempt Finance Report (the Appendix to the report circulated to members of the Council only) be approved and the capital cash limits be updated accordingly.

The Council had before it a report on the need to make additions to the Capital Programme.  The additions were required as a result of grants received by the Council and funding received as a result of Section 106 funding from planning notifications in relation to housing developments across parts of the county.

RESOLVED that:

(a)     (i)      an increase of £0.9 million for the Pothole Action Fund and £0.8 million for Highways Maintenance schemes following receipt of increased capital grant income; and

(ii)     an increase of £0.7 million school improvements funded by Section 106 funding receipts;

          be approved as detailed in paragraphs 12 to 14 of the report,  and that the Capital Programme cash limits are updated accordingly;

(b)     subject to the satisfactory receipt of future expected Section 106 funding, an increase of £0.7 million for school improvements as detailed in paragraph 15 of the report be approved, and that the Capital Programme cash limits be updated accordingly.

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

·         Scrutiny Report:  Increasing Physical Activity

·         The provision of effective presentation services for Children and Young People including optimising the use of Children's Centre buildings

·         Resources Report

-   Provisional Financial Results for the year ending 31 March 2016

-   Future Fit Programme Update

-   Capital Investment

-   Pension Fund Update

-   Proposed Earmarked Reserves, New Investments and General Balances

-   Public Health Ring-Fenced Grant (PHRFG)

-   Borrowing and Lending Transactions 2015/16.

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 July 2016.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mrs F M Oborski, Mrs E B Tucker, Mr M E Jenkins and Mrs S Askin.

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mrs F M Oborski and seconded by Prof J W Raine.

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

General support was expressed for the Motion.

On being put to the meeting RESOLVED that:

"We are proud to live in a diverse and tolerant society.  Racism, xenophobia and hate crimes have no place in our country. We at Worcestershire County Council condemn racism, xenophobia and hate crimes unequivocally. We will not allow hate to become acceptable.

Worcestershire County Council will work to ensure local bodies and programmes have support and resources needed to fight racism and xenophobia.

We reassure all people living in Worcestershire that they are valued members of our community."

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr J Baker, Mr P M McDonald, Mr R M Udall and Mr R C Lunn.

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

The Council was advised by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services that the Motion related to an Executive function and although the matter could be debated by Council it would stand referred to Cabinet for a decision.

Upon being duly moved and seconded the Motion stood referred to Cabinet for a decision.

With the consent of the signatories present at the meeting the Notice of Motion as printed in the agenda papers was withdrawn.

Mr J Campion had declared a DPI as Police and Crime Commissioner and withdrew from the meeting during the consideration of this item.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mrs E B Tucker, Mrs F M Oborski, Mr M E Jenkins and Mrs S Askin.

The Motion was moved by Mrs E B Tucker and seconded by Professor J W Raine who both spoke in favour of it.

The Council agreed to deal with this matter on the day.

An amendment was moved by Mr P M McDonald and seconded by Mr L C R Mallett that the final sentence of the Motion be replaced with "we call upon the Police and Crime Commissioner to resign his position as a County Councillor in order to prevent any possible risk of a conflict of interest".

The Head of Legal and Democratic Services advised that the amendment was procedurally valid.  Council then debated the amendment and the with the agreement of the signatories present this amendment was incorporated into the Motion as an addition, the altered Motion becoming the substantive Motion and reading:

"This Council notes with concern that the newly-elected Police and Crime Commissioner continues to occupy seats both on this Council and Wyre Forest District Council, thus making it difficult to fulfil the ability of the County and District Councillors on the Police and Crime Panel to hold the Police and Crime Commissioner to account.

We call upon the Police and Crime Commissioner to explain to this Council how we can hold him to account whilst he is still a member.

We call upon the Police and Crime Commissioner to resign his position as a County Councillor in order to prevent any possible risk of conflict of interest."

A debate ensued during which the following principal points were made.  Those speaking in favour of the Motion:

• suggested there was a very clear conflict of interest and the PCC should have resigned his County Councillor seat at the same time he resigned from the Cabinet

• believed it was not possible to carry out this high profile role and still serve the people in his electoral division

• made clear that the costs of any by-election were offset by the need to maintain the integrity of politicians and the democratic process

• Mr Campion's absence from the Chamber was a clear indication of the conflict of interest which existed and which he clearly acknowledged

·         it was surprising that the law did not disqualify a PCC from being a councillor.

Those speaking against the Motion:

• suggested that this was political posturing and the reality was the electors had voted for Mr Campion as their PCC and also as their local councillor

• many councillors were dual-hatted and it was hypocritical to suggest this situation was somehow different or special

• potentially a stand-alone by-election would cost £20,000 and seemed unnecessary as the PCC said he was not standing at the next County Council elections in May 2017  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1806.

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

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

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

During the course of the debate the following principal points were made:

• that this issue was important as events in other areas could impinge on the provision of education within the county.  Indeed schools within the county might struggle and cause a 'ripple effect' within specific towns or areas

• planning of school provision was essential but was becoming more problematic as Academy schools created a more dynamic market place environment for school places and provision

• that expertise existed within the Council to deal with a range of planning issues and should an Academy close there would be contingency planning in place to address that

• the Cabinet Member with Responsibility agreed to circulate a briefing note to all members on the Council's capacity to meet the needs of pupils should an Academy close.

On being put to the meeting RESOLVED that:

"In light of the worrying news that a number of Academy schools are set to close on the Birmingham/Worcestershire border and their potential effect on  Worcestershire based schools, could the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Children and Families tell this Council what plans he has put in place should any Academy Schools fail in Worcestershire?"

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion standing in the names of Mr J Baker, Mr R C Lunn, Mr P M McDonald and Mr R M Udall.

The Notice of Motion was moved by Mr J Baker 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.

With the agreement of the signatories present the Notice of Motion was withdrawn on reassurance from the Leader of the Council and the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways that a small, multi-agency working group including the Cabinet Members with Responsibility would be set up to look at all options to reduce the risk to the public using the Musketts Way footbridge over the A448.

To receive the reports of the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Adult Social Care and the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Skills and Infrastructure on current issues and proposed developments within their areas of responsibility and to receive answers to any questions on the reports (green pages).

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Adult Social Care presented her report which concerned a number of overarching issues:

·         Adult Social Care - Population and Demographic context

·         Assessment

·         Technology

·         Care Act

·         Domiciliary Care and Home Care Market

·         Supported Living and extra care

·         Supported Groups and Carers

·         Day services and employment

·         working with partners and external providers - health

·         staffing

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

·         the possibility of renegotiation of contracts to ensure most beneficial outcome for service users and the Council.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility gave details of a 'Dynamic Purchasing System' which funded services on outcomes for clients

·         the Council had spent capital in some cases and had to receive benefits for service users in any subsequent contract arrangements

·         Council ownership of care homes.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility gave details of some of the homes where the Council still owned the freehold and plans for their future

·         the viability and future for smaller homes.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility acknowledged that small homes could be more customer friendly, but finely balanced finances in a competitive market meant futures were less assured and residents faced more uncertainty.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility confirmed that eight homes had ceased trading in the past year

·         market polarisation and the increasing focus on 'self-funders'.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility gave a brief description of the options open to older people purchasing their own care and suggested better information sharing was essential for service users to find the best 'match' for their individual needs

·         the UK's decision to leave the EU and the effects of the minimum wage on recruitment of care staff in the future.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility said there would be changes but it was too early to quantify these

·         the changing nature of care markets and how the Council was reacting.  A particular question was asked about the potential for a care village in Worcestershire and the timescale for any project.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility spoke generally about purchasing of care and more specifically about the Council's aspirations to facilitate the provision of the widest possible choice including the care village model of provision.

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

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Skills and Infrastructure presented his report which covered a number of overarching issues:

·         Economic growth and investment

·         Key programmes including:

-   Worcestershire Innovation (WINN)

-   Worcestershire Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP)

-   Worcestershire Growth Fund

·         Business Support Programmes

·         LEADER programme

·         National Cyber Skills Centre (NCSC)

·         EU Funding Programme 2014-2020

·         Worcestershire Business Central

·         Worcestershire Local Transport Body

·         Worcestershire Local Transport Plan

·         Connecting Schools and Business

·         Careers and Enterprise Company

·         University Technical College

·         Worcestershire Apprentices Clearing House

·         Young people not in education, employment or training (NEETS)

·         Rail strategy

·         Midlands Connect

·         Kidderminster Rail Station

·         Worcestershire Parkway

·         Worcester Southern Link Road

·         Other major projects in the course of delivery

·         Emerging infrastructure projects

·         Strategic planning, development central and waste and minerals plans

The Council Member with Responsibility answered questions about his report which included:

·         loss of EU funding following the referendum result to leave the EU and the UK's final withdrawal.  Also whether the decision to leave the EU would mean local businesses seeking to relocate.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility gave a brief outline of how cost pressures might affect local business but said it was too early to give a comprehensive assessment either about that or other financial support

·         the local economy and the extent of devolution to the county.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility re-stated the County Council's current views about devolution and confirmed that Bromsgrove District Council had taken the decision not to join the West Midlands Combined Authority.  The Council Member with Responsibility referred to other "groupings" which sought to further economic advancement

·         whether the various growth funds and other initiatives yielded value for money in the terms of the number of jobs they created

·         NEETS and whether providers of home tuition were properly regulated and checked

·         the Cabinet Member with Responsibility accepted an invitation to visit the various locations where intended infrastructure improvements in Pershore were to take place

·         in response to a specific question about promoting the co-operative and third sector the Cabinet Member with Responsibility confirmed that all business sectors would be included when offering support and advice

·         the future of both Foregate Street station and Shrub Hill station once the Parkway Regional Interchange became operational.  The Cabinet Member with Responsibility set out his understanding of the situation and the current views of various train operating companies

·         road infrastructure improvements in Bromsgrove and when these might be expected given the planned housing developments in the town

·         the planning and timing of the development of the eastern gateway in Redditch

·         rural broadband availability, take-up and speeds.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility promised written answers as follows:

·         a question asked on paragraph 46 on proportion of spend funded by the EU and the value to this Council of such financial assistance

·         a question asked on paragraph 53 about the £5m given out in grants to support business growth and business start-ups, how this was monitored and the results including failing businesses.

·         paragraph 61 – about whether the Cabinet Member with Responsibility attends monthly  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1810.

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 July 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.)

Fourteen questions had been received by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services and had been circulated before the meeting.  Eight were asked at the meeting during the thirty minutes allocated and one was withdrawn.  (All answers are enclosed within these Minutes.)

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

The Council received the report of the Planning and Regulatory Committee containing a summary of decisions taken.