Agenda and minutes

The members had before them

A.    The Agenda papers (previously circulated);

B.    4 questions submitted to the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance (previously circulated); and

C.   The Minutes of the meeting held on 12 November 2020 (previously circulated).

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

Apologies for absence were received from Mr R M Bennett, Mr A Fry and Mr R P Tomlinson.

Declarations of interest were received in relation to Agenda item 10 – Notice of Motion 3 - as members or retired members of trade unions from Mr L C R Mallett, Ms P Agar, Mr R M Udall, Mr R C Lunn, Mr J H Smith, Mrs R Vale, Mrs J A Brunner, Mrs F M Oborski, Mr K D Daisley, Mr B Clayton, Dr C Hotham, Dr K A Pollock, Mrs M A Rayner, Mr R J Morris, Mr P Denham, Mr A I Hardman, Mr P M McDonald, Prof J W Raine and Mr A P Miller.

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 Assistant Director for Legal and Governance in writing or by e-mail indicating both the nature and content of their proposed participation no later than 9.00am on the Monday before the meeting (in this case, 11 January). Further details are available on the Council’s website. Enquiries can also be made through the telephone number/e-mail address listed below.

Dr J Birks asked a question about Active Travel.

Ms R Wormington asked a question about environmental sustainability and the climate and ecological emergency.

Mr A Lyon asked questions about zero carbon transport.

Mr A Spencer asked a question about net zero carbon emissions.

Ms C Screen asked a question about greenhouse gas emissions.

Mr P Oliver asked a question about thermal efficiency of the Energy from Waste plant at Hartlebury.

Mr D Whiting made a comment about climate change and flooding.

Ms L Winterbourn asked a question about divestment from fossil fuels.

Ms P McCarthy asked questions about the net Zero Carbon Plan

The Chairman thanked all the public participants for their contribution and said they would receive a written response from the relevant Cabinet Member.

To approve as a correct record and authorise the signing of the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 November 2020 (previously circulated electronically).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 12 November 2020 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements to be made by the Chairman.

Noted.

A Minute’s silence was held in memory of Ms P A Hill who had sadly passed away.

To consider the reports of the Cabinet – Summary of decisions taken and to receive answers to any questions asked on it.

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

·         Land Acquisition

·         Revenue Budget Monitoring – Month 6 (30 September) 2020/21

·         Wheels to Work

·         Fair Funding for Schools 2021-22 – National and Local Funding Arrangements for Schools.

To receive this report and to receive answers to any questions on it.

The Leader of the Council presented his report.

The Leader then answered a broad range of questions from members.

The Chairman thanked the Leader for his report.

The report was noted.

To receive the report of the Chief Executive and any answers to questions on it.

The Chief Executive presented his report to Council which covered various topics.

The Chief Executive answered a broad range of questions from members.

The Chief Executive expressed particular thanks to the Local Outbreak Response Team for their work during the pandemic and to staff involved in Financial Control for the improvements in the financial management of the Council.

The Chairman thanked the Chief Executive for his report.

To receive the report of the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Adult Social Care on current issues and proposed developments within his area of responsibility and to receive answers to any questions on the report.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Adult Social Care presented his report to Council which covered various topics.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Adult Social Care answered a broad range of questions from members.

Members offered their congratulations to Mr Hardman who had recently become a grandfather for the first time.

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

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

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Performance Board (OSPB) introduced the report. He indicated that the Covid 19 pandemic had delayed and then dominated the scrutiny programme and as a result, a backlog of work had been created. He thanked the Leader and the Chief Executive for their support in reporting to scrutiny in respect of Covid 19. He thanked the outgoing Chairman of the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Panel, Mrs F M Oborski for her work and welcomed the incoming Chairman Mr T A L Wells. He thanked the Vice-Chairman of the OSPB, Mrs E A Eyre and the members of the Board and Scrutiny Panels as well as officers for their contribution to the scrutiny process over the year.

The Vice-Chairman of the Board added her thanks to the Chairman for his contribution since becoming Chairman.

The Chairman of the Board undertook to look into the possibility of arranging for Professor Dawn Brooker from the University of Worcester, who is a leading expert on Dementia, to present to the OSPB.

The report was noted.

To receive the report of the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance on any Notices of Motion received by him.

Councillors are asked to note that any Notices of Motion must be received by the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance no later than noon on Tuesday, 5 January 2021.

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

The motion was moved by Mr R M Udall and seconded by Mrs C M Stalker who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

The following amendment was moved by Mr A R Roberts and accepted as an alteration by the mover and seconder of the motion which therefore became the substantive motion:

“Council recognises the important contribution from kinship carers in the county within the scope of ‘Friends Family and Connected Persons’. However, some kinship carers especially grandparents and older siblings can face unexpected hardship, stress and anxiety. Council asks the Cabinet Member responsible to see that the findings of the review of provision that has been undertaken, which considers what further support and assistance could be provided to help and support kinship carers in Worcestershire, is brought before the Cabinet.”

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         Complaints had been received from kinship carers about a lack of assistance and difficulties in their views being heard. Kinship carers often had to support family members at short notice which was stressful and impacted on their mental and financial well-being. Emotional and financial hardship was the reality for many kinship carers. It was important to express the council’s thanks for their efforts but also investigate how they could be better supported by the system. A review of the kinship care system should be undertaken which also sought the views of kinship carers and their representative bodies

·         Kinship care provided the vitally needed element of stability which improved the well-being and educational development of children who otherwise would enter social care. In the long term, kinship care helped to reduce homelessness, crime, anti-social behaviour and improved health, as well as providing substantial cost savings to the state. Many kinship carers had been asked to provide support by the Council but did not feel supported in their role

·         The Cabinet Member for Children and Families responded on behalf of the Conservative Group. He explained that the role kinship carers related to family members who took on the care of children who were not looked after and had been assessed by the Foster Carers Panel, acting on behalf of the Council. The kinship carer role did not relate to any informal arrangements between family members. A draft review of kinship care had been drafted and circulated for pre-Cabinet consultation. The intention was to present the review to the meeting of Cabinet in June as part of the Placement Proficiency report. The initial findings of the review indicated that kinship carers did have the appropriate level of training to undertake their role. Following approval by the Foster Carers Panel, kinship carers were provided with the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2247.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Mr R C Lunn, Ms C M Stalker, and Ms P Agar.

The motion was moved by Mr R C Lunn and seconded by Mr L C R Mallett who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         The motion provided an opportunity for the Council to express its gratitude for the work undertaken by library staff to keep the service functioning during the pandemic and to reimagine how the service could operate post pandemic. Libraries had always been and must remain a safe place for children and adults to visit which was why there should always be a member on staff available on the premises. The library service should retain its core statutory functions but also recognise the importance of enhancing its community service function as a public leisure hub. This approach would help to keep smaller libraries in the county in operation. In the future, libraries could act as virtual hubs for home-working. Consideration might need to be given to undertaking a review of opening hours post pandemic, perhaps extending to opening hours to the weekend

·         Libraries made a huge economic contribution to communities in the county. Libraries helped children and young people with their education and personal development. Libraries facilitated adult education and improved skills which led to greater employability. They benefited users socially, mentally and increased digital inclusion

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Communities commented on behalf of the Conservative Group that libraries were thriving community facilities with a wide-range of service provision. A 24 hour digital service had been made available to all residents on line. It was hoped to reintroduce the mobile library service soon. She acknowledged the support provided by parish council and district council colleagues, particularly for libraries in St John’s, Warndon and Bromsgrove. A key function of the service was adult learning whether in person or on line. The Hive acted as a business and property centre and it was intended to roll out this service to all libraries. Libraries had remained open during the pandemic and provided particular support through IT and digital services. She thanked all the library staff for their work, particularly through the ‘Here to Help’ initiative

·         The library service should remain publicly owned, staffed by qualified librarians with strong links to the community. The move to self-service libraries should be resisted

·         It was appropriate that library premises were shared with commercial operators and to review opening times

·         Libraries provided a lifeline for people living alone

·         Research had demonstrated that in the long-term, library provision delivered a high rate of economic return on the initial investment

·         A new asset-based approach to library provision that aimed to prevent social isolation, improve health and equality and reduce the demands on the social care system was being rolled out in Bromsgrove.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2248.

This Motion was withdrawn by the mover and seconder.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Mr M E Jenkins, Dr C Hotham, Dr J W Raine, Mrs M A Rayner and Mr T A L Wells.

The motion was moved by Mr M E Jenkins and seconded by Prof J W Raine who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

The following amendment was moved by Mr A T Amos and seconded by Mr P Middlebrough:

“Requests for more 20mph speed limits, particularly in residential areas and near schools, are often made to councillors. This motion requests that a task group or member advisory group be set up to review how 20mph areas are currently considered and look at the feasibility of creating a process that would allow a 20mph area to be created within a councillor’s division.”

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         A recent trial of 20mph speed limits in Rubery had not shown a reduction in recorded accidents, however it had failed to acknowledge the wider benefits of lowering speeds, increasing walking and cycling, decreased pollution levels as well as the support of national and local health services. The current policy was outdated and did not reflect the increased adoption of such measures across the country. A Department for Transport report in 2018 showed that medium speed limits reduced in areas with 20mph speed limit as faster drivers tended to reduce their speed more. There was a great deal of public support for 20mph speed limits. Lower speed limits made streets safer, more inclusive and attractive for everyone. The motion sought to make the introduction of 20mph speed limits a local issue. The Residents Parking Scheme could be used as a template for its introduction. Many schemes could be introduced at minimal cost requiring little engineering work. The motion would allow councillors to contribute from their Divisional and/or Highways Fund

·         The current 20mph speed limit policy needed to be reviewed to provide greater responsiveness to local resident’s concerns

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways commented on behalf of the Conservative Group that the current policy was working successfully. It had been reviewed on two occasions via the Council’s scrutiny function and had been based on the outcome of a pilot study in Rubery. The Policy allowed 20mph limits outside schools, in accident cluster sites and on new developments. The Police did not and would not enforce these zones and therefore they needed to be self-enforcing. As a result, additional engineering measures were necessary which were prohibitively expensive in terms of technology and officer time. Any review should include an examination of the criteria to determine the introduction of 20mph speed limits, the funding source for the work, and the extent of the consultation process in the local area, bearing in mind the impact on adjoining streets. The availability of staff resources to facilitate such work also needed to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2250.

To receive answers to any questions asked by Councillors.

(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 Assistant Director for Legal and Governance by noon on Tuesday, 5 January 2021 or

·         If it relates to urgent business, the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance is notified at least half an hour before the start of the meeting and the Chairman agrees the matter is urgent’.)

Four questions had been received by the Assistant Director for Legal and Governance and had been circulated in advance of the meeting. The answers to all the questions are attached in the Appendix.

To consider the reports of Committees and to receive answers to any questions asked on those reports as follows:

a)    Audit and Governance Committee;

b)    Pensions Committee; and

c)    Planning and Regulatory Committee.

The Chairman of the Committee introduced the report and thanked his Vice-Chairman and members of the Committee for their commitment and dedication in addressing a number of challenging issues over the last four years.

It was queried how Council debt had been allowed to become outstanding to such an extent, who the debtors were and what the Council was doing to retrieve the outstanding debt. The Chairman of the Committee responded that the Committee had become aware of this issue and requested a breakdown of the outstanding debt in terms of length of time outstanding, quantity and number of debtors. In response to the Committee’s concerns, the Strategic Management Team had introduced procedures to tackle long term debt and two senior management posts within the debt recovery team had been created together with additional legal support to tackle the issue of debt recovery. He hoped to see major changes within the next 6 months.

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

The Chairman of the Committee introduced the report and commented that a working group had been established to review the Fund’s position in relation to climate risk and Environment, Social and Governance issues. He anticipated that the findings of this working group would be reported back to the Pensions Committee at its meeting in March 2021.

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

The Chairman of the Committee introduced the report.

A concern was expressed about the safety and suitability of temporary mobile classrooms. It was queried how many times a temporary classroom would be considered for renewal by the Committee before it was considered that such temporary accommodation should be replaced by permanent accommodation. The Chairman of the Planning and Regulatory Committee responded that the Committee had expressed concerns about the suitability of some older temporary classrooms, particularly from a health and safety perspective and had sent a message requesting that officers find permanent solutions wherever possible. However, each planning application needed to be considered on its merits. 

In response to a query, the Chairman of the Planning and Regulatory Committee confirmed that the conditions associated with the planning permission granted on the site of the Metal and Ores Industrial Estate, Hanbury Road, Stoke Prior would be regularly monitored.

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