Agenda and minutes

The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.

Apologies had been received from Councillors Alastair Adams, Brandon Clayton, Shirley Webb and Richard Udall.

The Interim Democratic Governance and Scrutiny Manager reported that Mark Hughes, Parent Governor Representative, had resigned from the role.

None.

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 working day before the meeting (in this case 25 July 2023).  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.

None.

(previously circulated).

The Minutes of the Meeting held on 26 June 2023 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

The Chairman welcomed the Leader and Chief Executive to the meeting and invited them, with other Senior Officers, to update the Board on progress against the 2022-27 Corporate Plan.  The Leader reminded the Board of his Annual Report to Council on 18 May 2023 and referred to the four key priority areas:

·       Open for Business

·       Children and Families

·       The Environment

·       Health and Wellbeing.

The Chairman invited discussion and across the four pillars, the following points were made.

The Chairman was concerned with the language used for the Children and Families pillar, expressing a view that many residents may not have children nor a family and the focus was perhaps alienating.  In response, the Chief Executive reported that there was only a small proportion of measures in relation to family, yet there was many aspects of childhood which contributed to better life outcomes, such as access to jobs, higher paid employment, requirement for social care and contribution to the economy in general.  It was further suggested that these factors were driven by upbringing, education, lifestyle and good mental health.

As Children and Families was a statutory function of the Council it would not be right to remove the area from the Corporate Plan and by including it, it clearly showed that the Council was meeting its statutory duty.  ‘Family First’ was the Worcestershire Children First (WCF) approach to children at risk of being taken into care.  It was known that outcomes were significantly better if a child remained with their family if safe to do so.  Keeping children safe was a core responsibility and safeguarding was everyone’s responsibility.

The Corporate Plan had been refreshed, not rewritten, however there was acknowledgement that the cross cutting theme of Communities was vital.  The Council had been an enabler and facilitator for a large number of Communities, especially through the Here 2 Help programme, launched during the COVID-19 pandemic.  Furthermore, monies allocated to each Councillor through Worcestershire Councillors’ Divisional Fund (WCDF) were increasingly used to empower communities.

The Chairman of the Corporate and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel thanked Officers for utilising Power BI in producing Panel and OSPB reports, however reported that there was very little in the OSPB Report that was relevant to that Panel. 

The Leader acknowledged that Overview and Scrutiny Panels did not align to the 4 pillars of the Corporate Plan and suggested that the language used in future Corporate Plans could be amended to include more reference to corporate functions rather than the council’s journey, in addition to communities as a cross cutting theme.

When asked whether a satisfaction rate of around 80% in the Worcestershire Viewpoint resident survey was good, it was suggested that it was very difficult to benchmark against other authorities, however, the figures across recent years was following a national trend.

A Member commented that as Worcestershire was a diverse County, the nature of communities would differ from place to place, however, agreed that if communities could get family right, then it would automatically push  ...  view the full minutes text for item 1331.

The Leader, Chief Executive and Chief Finance Officer had been invited to discuss, and agree with the Board, the process for Budget Scrutiny 2024/25.

The Board believed the current scrutiny process was scheduled too late in the year to make a difference and asked how scrutiny could have a more meaningful role.  Members felt that Panels had an in depth knowledge, with one Member highlighting the recent scrutiny contribution to the Cabinet decision on the relocation of Redditch Library. 

Each of the 57 Members currently had a £10,000 allocation (per year) from the Worcestershire Councillors’ Divisional Fund (WCDF) to spend on initiatives in their Division.  In addition, each Member had access to a Highways Fund.  Suggestions were put forward that the WCDF remit could be limited to fund other activity or additional funds could be allocated to individual Members.

The Leader welcomed all suggestions, however, would not want to complicate the WCDF nor the scrutiny of it.  Of more interest was the trends in budget and pressures, particularly in adult social care, children’s social care and home to school transport.  In addition, pay and contract inflation across all service areas.

The Council could broadly budget for project costs, however, could not pre-determine Government funding.  The annual budgeting process was frustrating, however, a three year allocation would result in less flexibility, whereas planning was difficult with the one year settlements.

The Leader believed that resources provided by the Government would be improved, to compensate for pressures, such as inflation and contract costs.

The OSPB Chairman asked whether scrutiny could consider the trends and budget pressures in the areas identified during the Autumn Panel meetings, with the intention to feed in to the budget setting process.  The Leader welcomed the involvement, especially in relation to learning from others and against a national backdrop of challenge.  The Board agreed the approach and further agreed that the usual January draft budget discussions would be ‘light touch’.

The Meeting was adjourned between 12:10 and 12:20pm.

The Scrutiny Panel Chairmen present provided an update on recent Scrutiny meetings and activities.

Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Cllr Steve Mackay)

The Panel had met twice since the last OSPB.  One meeting was held with Members of the Adult Care and Well Being Overview and Scrutiny Panel to look at several all age strategies.  The second meeting considered Quarterly Performance and Year End Budget Monitoring, the Worcestershire Safeguarding Children Partnership Annual Report 2021-22 and Worcestershire Children First and the Independent Care Review.

Corporate and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Cllr Emma Stokes)

The Panel had contributed to the Cabinet discussion on the relocation of Redditch Library by gathering evidence and asking questions prior to any decision being made.

Web Redevelopment and the Power BI project had also been Items of recent scrutiny.  The Chairman acknowledged that recent meetings had been heavily focussed on the communities aspects of the Panel’s remit and wished to change the emphasis for upcoming meetings.

Economy Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Cllr Matt Dormer)

The Panel continued to hold its meetings around the County, hearing from Leaders on their economic challenges.  The most recent meeting was in Worcester City.  Themes were emerging, including transport connectivity and access to broadband.  

Work Programme and Cabinet Forward Plan

It was agreed that relevant Overview and Scrutiny Panels would be asked to consider the proposals put forward by the Leader in their Autumn meetings.

The next OSPB Agenda included the Annual Update from Worcestershire Local Enterprise Partnership (WLEP).  The Chairman explained that as he was a Member of the WLEP, he would ask the Vice Chairman to lead on the discussion.