Agenda and minutes

The members had before them:

A.    The Agenda papers (previously circulated);

B.    7 questions submitted to the Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager (previously circulated); and

C.   The Minutes of the meeting held on 8 September 2022 (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 Cllrs Alastair Adams, Salman Akbar, Laura Gretton, Bill Hopkins, Aled Luckman, and Jack Satterthwaite.

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 Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager 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, 9 November 2022). Further details are available on the Council’s website. Enquiries can also be made through the telephone number/e-mail address listed in this agenda and on the website.

Hannah Cooper presented a petition requesting a city-wide 20mph limit for the residential streets of Worcester city.

The Chairman thanked Ms Cooper for her contributions and said she 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 8 September 2022 (previously circulated electronically).

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 8 September 2022 be confirmed as correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any announcements to be made by the Chairman.

Noted.

To consider the annual report of the Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Authority to be presented by Cllr Kit Taylor, Chairman and to receive answers to any questions asked about this report. It is planned that the Chief Fire Officer will attend the meeting.

The Chairman welcomed Jonathon Pryce, the Chief Fire Officer, to the meeting. The Chairman of the Hereford and Worcester Fire and Rescue Authority, Cllr Kit Taylor, presented his report to the Council and he and Mr Pryce answered questions asked by members of the Council.

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

a)    Reports of Cabinet – Matters which require a decision; and

b)    Report of Cabinet – Summary of decisions taken.

Council considered the Resources Report - Revenue Budget Monitoring - Month 4 (31 July) 2022/23.

The Leader of the Council introduced the report and set out the details of a number of additions to the capital programme, in particular he welcomed one of the largest investment awards received by the Council from the Government for the A38 improvement scheme in Bromsgrove.

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         Although the size of the capital funding for the A38 was significant, it would not resolve the highways issues experienced in Bromsgrove. The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills responded that the modelling of the A38 scheme had indicated that journey times would be improved

·         The additional funding for schools was welcomed but in real terms, school budgets had been reduced especially with funding pressures related to increased staff salaries. Could anything be done to persuade the Government to increase funding for schools? The Leader of the Council confirmed that the Council had been and would continue lobbying for further Government funding for schools and education through whatever means possible including the Schools Forum and local MPs

·         The addition of new lanes to the highway was only a short-term fix to resolve traffic congestion and future bids should look at moving away from vehicular transport and consider other forms of transport. The Leader of the Council responded that Active Travel had been an integral part of the funding bid to Government

·         The Leader of the Council emphasised that there would be opportunities to discuss the details of these schemes as they progressed. He welcomed all Government funding that improved the highway network. He considered that the additional funding would make a difference to the A38 as part of the strategic road network. This scheme was one of only four schemes of its type approved by the Government nationally

·         Although the additional Government capital funding was welcomed, this Council needed much greater levels of Government support.

RESOLVED that the variations to the Capital Programme be approved as detailed relating to:

a)    The receipt of external funding for infrastructure schemes including Local Transport Capital and Major Road Network Fund for the A38 Improvement Scheme in Bromsgrove; 

b)   An increase in the Basic Needs Grant and other education and schools’ grants; and

c)    Potential costs associated with a legal adjudication.

Council considered the Kepax Bridge - Award of Construction Contract.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills introduced the report and commented that the construction of the Kepax Bridge was an important part of the Council’s Active Travel plans. The cost of the scheme had increased significantly due to delays in planning, increased steel prices, increased labour costs, and red diesel being replaced by white diesel. However, the scheme represented good value for money for council taxpayers. History had shown the success of similar schemes in the city of Worcester. 

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         There was another similar type of bridge within a short distance of this proposal and it would be more beneficial to use this funding for schemes in other areas of the county in greater need

·         In response to a request, the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills undertook to provide details of the final total cost of the Diglis Bridge, Worcester to a local councillor

·         In response to a query, the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills explained that the original cost of the Kepax Bridge was approximately £9m but this had increased to £15.9m which included an element of contingency funding. He was confident that the Bridge would be completed within that budget.

RESOLVED that amendments to the Capital Programme be approved necessary to progress the Kepax Bridge scheme, including the virement of funds previously allocated as part of the approved Capital Programme along with additional sources of funding from Worcester City Council and the Towns Fund.

Council considered the Worcestershire Children and Young People's Plan.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Children and Families introduced the report and commented that the Worcestershire Children and Young People's Plan needed to be viewed in the context of the integrated care system and the governance arrangements. The Plan aimed to ensure that the voice of children was not lost in the system. The KPIs set out in the Plan ensured that the Council was held to account for the action it took to address targets. It was intended to make the Plan a very simple and easily accessed document. He thanked the Director of Children’s Social Care and Safeguarding Services and her team for their work in producing the Plan and noted the important contribution from scrutiny.

In the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Education commented that the plan was short, easy to read, and had buy-in from partner organisations. It encompassed the necessary basic elements for example, ensuring children were at the expected level of development by the time they attended school, a focus on children’s mental health, increasing the number of children with EHCPs being educated in mainstream schools so children were educated in the right type of school, and safeguarding 

·         It was requested that the Plan focused on the target for children with SEN or a disability that required much greater support to ensure that these children were also educated in the most appropriate school to address their needs. The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Education responded that more work was needed with parents and schools to improve the Council’s inclusion rates

·         The inclusion of the Get Safe initiative as a priority in the Plan was welcomed. It was essential that awareness of the impact of this issue on the lives of children was raised so that parents were able to identify the ‘tell-tale’ signs of their children becoming involved. Children were an easy target for drug dealers and it was important that this issue continued to be a priority and that councillors were aware of issues that arose in their division

·         In response to a concern about the lack of reference in the all age disabilities initiative to young people between 18-25 years of age, the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Children and Families commented that the KPIs for all age disabilities 0-25 initiative set out in the Plan were at a high level. There was a set of targets beneath these which included KPIs for the age range between 18-25.

RESOLVED that the Children and Young People’s Plan be adopted by the Council.

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

·         Open for Business

·         DfE Multiply Programme

·         Major Road Network Scheme Update

·         Resources Report – Revenue Budget Monitoring – Month 4 (31 July) 2022/23

·         Relocation of Redditch Library

·         Worcestershire Joint Local Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2022-2032

·         Report of Pershore Area Review Consultation Findings and Recommendations

·         Redditch Railway Station

·         Treasury Management Mid-Year Update to 30 September 2022.

To receive the report of the Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager on any Notices of Motion received by her.

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, 1 November 2022.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Cllr Martin Allen, Cllr Matt Jenkins, Cllr Richard Udall, Cllr Beverley Nielsen Cllr Matt Jenkins, and Cllr Natalie McVey.

The motion was moved by Cllr Martin Allen and seconded by Cllr Tom Wells 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 made:

·         The free bus pass scheme would work in a similar way to the pensioners bus pass scheme. It would benefit those younger veterans who were suffering from PTSD or physical injuries. Supporting this motion would show all veterans how much the Council cared for them. It was easy to check whether a bus pass was being used fraudulently, especially with the roll out of the veteran ID scheme. This motion provided an opportunity for the Council to take a lead on this matter

·         The cost of introducing the scheme would be minimal but it would mean so much to the veterans of the county

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Communities affirmed the Council’s commitment to veterans past and present in the county. Of the circa 20k veterans in the county, a large majority would already be eligible for a free bus pass as a pensioner. He welcomed the opportunity to work with the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways and Transport to work out how such a scheme would operate in time for inclusion in the budget for 2024/25. It was difficult to assess the level of take-up at this stage and therefore cost of the scheme. It was important to show that the Council as a community leader supported veterans

·         The Worcestershire’s armed forces champion welcomed and supported the motion. The county had one of the most effective armed forces covenants in the country and local armed forces charities would be able to provide support for this initiative.

On being put to the vote, the motion was agreed unanimously.

RESOLVED “In the fortieth anniversary year of the Falklands Conflict, this Council seeks to do more than provide tacit support for Veterans and Service Personnel in this County, by taking steps actively to help them and make a positive difference to their lives in recognition of their service contributions. Accordingly, this Council calls on the Cabinet member to bring forward proposals for consideration as part of the 2024/25 draft budget process to provide a free bus pass to all Veterans and Service Personnel living within Worcestershire, based on the principles of the existing scheme for pensioners in the County (i.e. free travel on production of a valid identity card).”

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Cllr Mel Allcott, Cllr Richard Udall, Cllr Luke Mallett, Cllr Dan Boatright, Cllr Lynn Denham, Cllr Josh Robinson, and Cllr Andy Fry.

The motion was moved by Cllr Mel Allcott and seconded by Cllr Lynn Denham who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

The following amendment was moved by Cllr Adam Kent and seconded by Cllr Andy Roberts:

“Council acknowledges the cost-of-living pressure on Worcestershire residents and businesses. It calls upon the Leader of the Council to give responsibility to a member of the Cabinet to coordinate the Council’s response, to enable the authority to continue to help provide support to Worcestershire residents and businesses.”

The mover and seconder of the motion accepted the amendment and the motion as amended became the substantive motion. Members spoke in favour of the motion with the following points being made:

·         With people unable to pay their bills as a result of increased energy costs and rising inflation, targeted support was required through a One Worcestershire approach for those people in need. There was no reference on the Council’s web site to a cost-of-living crisis and no signposts to support services. The Council should declare a cost-of-living crisis and treat it as a priority

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Corporate Services and Communication commented that there was cost-of-living advice provided under the Here-to-Help section on the Council’s website. The Government had provided huge amounts of support to residents and businesses over the last couple of years in response to covid and now in response to the huge increases in energy prices. The cost-of-living issues in the county were being acknowledged and addressed. The Council was providing support with partner district councils through a number of initiatives including the distribution of the Household Support Grant for free school meals in school holidays, walm homes via Age UK, oil fuel vouchers, walm boxes, act on energy support and Here-to-Help etc. Councillors had a role to play in helping local residents in need to access these support services. He would ensure that pathways to support services were highlighted in the media

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Children and Families indicated that the amendment called for a co-ordination of the Council’s response to the cost-of-living pressures. This was a less bureaucratic approach than the proposals set out in the original motion. Children, especially the most vulnerable (including unaccompanied asylum seekers) would suffer the greatest hardship during this difficult financial period. Putting children first was a key strategy for the Council and children-in-need, particularly children leaving care, were at the core of this work

·         It was disappointing that the amendment did not recognise the cost-of-living crisis because it was a crisis not a pressure. The key issue was the action to be taken to address the myriad of issues

·         It was disappointing that this issue had not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2400.

The Council had before it a Notice of Motion set out in the agenda papers standing in the names of Cllr Matt Jenkins, Cllr Beverley Nielsen, Cllr Natalie McVey, Cllr Martin Allen, Cllr Tom Wells, and Cllr Richard Udall.

The motion was moved by Cllr Matt Jenkins and seconded by Cllr Beverley Nielsen who both spoke in favour of it, and Council agreed to deal with it on the day.

The following amendment was moved by Cllr Marc Bayliss and seconded by Cllr Mike Rouse:

“Maintaining good air quality is important for Worcestershire and as the Highways Authority the County Council has an important part to play in delivering good air quality for residents.  This is why strategic infrastructure schemes such as the dualling of the Southern Link Road, building Worcestershire Parkway station and the new Hoobrook Island were all important in reducing congestion and improving the air quality of the County.

With this in mind, Council calls upon the Cabinet to:

1.    Continue to work collaboratively with district councils, Worcestershire Regulatory Services and other partners to look at further ways in which air quality can be improved.

2.    Continue to support the lead work of district councils in addressing air quality issue hotspots where they exist.”

Those in favour of the amendment made the following comments:

·         The Cabinet Member for Economy, Infrastructure and Skills commented that the amendment provided a more balanced picture of the situation in Worcestershire setting out the importance of and progress made addressing the issue of air quality. The responsibility for air quality primarily rested with district and unitary councils who were required to regularly review air quality in their area. This Council recognised its roles and responsibilities to assist district councils as the county highways authority

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Highways and Transport recognised that transport was a large contributor to emissions which was why the Government would be banning the production of diesel and petrol vehicles from 2030. More work was required to address poor air quality hotspots in the county for example, through the introduction of Lowesmoor bus enforcement cameras. He was happy to review this measure as long as any relaxation of these measures did not impact on air quality in Lowesmoor. It was important to retain the flexibility to take action whilst recognising and respecting the responsibilities of the district councils

·         Different areas of the county had benefited from the sensible planned actions of this Council to resolve air quality issues caused by high traffic volumes for example, improvements to the sequencing of traffic lights, and improvements to road and rail facilities

·         The 2020 Parliamentary Guidance made it clear that the responsibility for air quality rested with district councils. District councils would consulted county councils on their action plans and taking account of any recommendations. This Council should not interfere with the work of district councils because they had a better understanding of the local issues. 

Those against the amendment made the following comments:

·         The  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2401.

To receive the report of the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Communities 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 Communities presented his report to Council which covered various topics.

The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Communities answered a broad range of questions from members.

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

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 Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager by noon on Tuesday, 1 November 2022 or

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

Seven questions had been received by the Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager 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 Council received the report of the Audit and Governance Committee containing a summary of the decisions taken.

The Chairman of the Committee updated members on the progress of the Statutory Accounts for the County Council and Pension Fund 2021/22. The Council was in an excellent position as there were no outstanding issues. This was in a better position than most other top tier authorities. He expressed his thanks to the Chief Financial Officer and his Finance Team for their work. In normal circumstances, the Accounts would have been signed off by the external auditor in advance of the 30 November deadline. However, there had been a technical change to the accounting arrangements for infrastructure depreciation nationally which impacted on all top tier authorities. The consultation on a statutory override for the infrastructure depreciation arrangements closed this week. It would then be considered by the Parliament before 30 November, followed by a 21-day resting period. It was anticipated that the legislation would come into effect just before Christmas therefore it would be necessary for the Committee at its meeting on 30 November to grant delegated authority to the Chairman of the Committee to sign-off the final accounts.

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

The Chairman emphasised that the Committee recognised that pension fund investment was a long-term activity and would not be taking “knee-jerk” actions in response to current uncertainty in markets. She thanked officers for the tremendous amount of work that had been put into achieve Stewardship Code accreditation for the Fund.

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