Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors A Bridges, M Brookes, R L Foulkes, C E D Mair, C E H Marfleet and Mrs C A Talbot.

Apologies for absence were also received from Church Representative Mr P Thompson and Parent Governor Representatives Mrs P J Barnett and Dr E van der Zee.

It was noted that the Chief Executive having received notice under Regulation 13 of the Local Government (Committees and Political Groups) Regulations 1990, had appointed Councillor M A Whittington as a replacement member of the Committee in place of Councillor A Bridges, for this meeting only.

There were no declarations of interest at this point in the meeting.

RESOLVED

            That the minutes of the meeting held on 28 April 2016 be signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Chairman advised that he had attended the previous meeting of the Executive on 4 May 2016, which had considered the Lincolnshire Minerals and Waste Local Plan: Core Strategy and Development Management Policies.

The Chairman also advised that he, Councillor R Parker, and Daniel Steel, one of the Scrutiny officers would be attending a training event on 27 May 2016 at the University of Birmingham on "Scrutiny in Challenging Times".

(To consider Call-Ins, should any be received)

The Committee was advised that no Call-Ins had been received

(To consider proposals for Scrutiny Reviews, should any be received)

The Committee was advised that no proposals for Scrutiny Reviews had been received.

(To consider Councillor Calls for Action, should any be received)

The Committee was advised that no Councillor Calls for Action had been received.

(To receive a report by Jasmine Sodhi (Performance and Equalities Manager), which presents Quarter 4 performance against the Council Business Plan)

Consideration was given to a report which presented the Quarter 4performance against the Council Business Plan.  The Council's Performance and Equalities Manager provided an online demonstration to the Committee of how members would be able to view the new style of reporting in a secure area on the Lincolnshire Research Observatory (LRO) website.

Members were advised that since Quarter 1, scrutiny committees had been receiving performance reports in the new style infographics, with the exception of the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee and the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee.  It was noted that the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee receive performance indicators in addition to the Council Business Plan which were not available in the new infographic format.  In terms of the Highways and Transport Scrutiny Committee, there were no performance indicators in the Council Business Plan for this Committee, however it did receive project based updates.

Members were provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report, and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         One member commented that they had found the new system very easy to use and move from one piece of information to another.

·         The Committee papers which were currently received only gave an overview of the performance information, but the website would allow members to view more detailed information.

·         It was requested whether everything could be kept as simple to use as possible for those who were not as computer literate as others.

·         The website would display information from the past two years to enable comparisons to be made.  However, information from earlier years would be archived and would still be available.

·         It was commented that the graphics were very useful.

·         Concerns were raised in relation to the Delayed Transfers of Care from Hospital, and members were advised that this was a very complex issue, and delays were only attributable to social care alone in around 14/15% of cases, and around 5-6% were attributable to both the NHS and social care.  The remainder were NHS related.  However, there had been a small increase in the delays attributable to the County Council.  The majority of delays were in simple discharges e.g. delays of a few hours awaiting a prescription.  Members were advised that the Adults Scrutiny Committee would be looking at this in a future meeting.

·         Concerns were also raised regarding the increase in Alcohol related Violent Crime Incidents, and it was queried whether Lincolnshire Police should be making more proactive visits to bars and pubs.  It was confirmed that this issue would be raised with the Assistant Director for Safer Communities.  Councillor R Wootten advised that he would be attending the next meeting of the Police and Crime Panel and he would be putting this question to the new Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC).

·         Clarification was sought regarding the exception reporting, as well as whether there was a need for grading, as under the mixed performance (p.15 of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

(To receive a report by Nigel West (Head of Democratic Services and Statutory Scrutiny Officer), which provides an update on the work of the Review of Scrutiny Working Group)

Consideration was given to a report which updated the Committee on progress with the Review of Scrutiny, following a decision by Council to delegate to the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee the implementation of recommendations in an independent report on scrutiny by Dr Stuart Young of East Midlands Councils.

The Committee was reminded that at its meeting on 28 January 2016, it resolved to set up a working group to investigate three areas which were highlighted for improvement:-

·         Closer working with the executive

·         Cultural change

·         Structural change

The Working Group has so far met three times to discuss the relationship between Executive and Scrutiny, and through these discussions, a scrutiny protocol has been drafted.  There had been input from executive councillors, and it had been circulated to the Corporate Management Board the previous day.  It was also noted that visits to other authorities had taken place, and Councillors A J Jesson and Mrs J Brockway would shortly be visiting the City of Lincoln Council.

The Committee was provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report, and some of the points raised during discussion included the following:

·         Some good work had already taken place in the working group.

·         Boston Borough Council and City of Lincoln Council had received awards for their scrutiny work.

·         It was considered positive that the Council was looking at two authorities within the county which had received praise for their scrutiny work, but it would also be useful to look at authorities outside of the Lincolnshire borders.

·         There was regular reporting of progress through Group Leaders.

·         It was important that workload was considered as a lot of the changes would mean additional work for officers.

·         It was felt that there was a need for scrutiny to be circular, and that members were not just trying to improve scrutiny of the Executive, but also the way that members carried out scrutiny activity.  However, it was also suggested that as the Executive make the decisions the 'buck stops there'.

RESOLVED

            That the comments made in relation to the progress on the Review of         Scrutiny be noted.

(To receive a report by David Coleman (Chief Legal Officer), which invites the Committee to consider a report on the Devolution - Governance Review and Scheme, which is due to be considered by the Leader of the Council on 26 May 2016. The views of the Scrutiny Committee will be reported to the Leader as part of his consideration of this item)

Consideration was given to a report which invited the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee to comment on the Devolution – Governance Review and Scheme which was due to be considered by the Leader of the Council on 27 May 2016.

The report set out the latest position in relation to the implementation of the devolution agreement for Greater Lincolnshire as well as the results of a Governance Review under section 108 of the Local Democracy, Economic Development and Construction Act 2009, and on the basis of that review sought approval for the publication of a Scheme for consultation under section 109 of the Act.

The Committee was provided with the opportunity to ask questions to the officers present in relation to the information contained within the report, and some of the points raised during discussion included the following;

·         One member commented that they had several reservations about this scheme, and were not convinced this was the best model or best deal for the County;

·         There were concerns an elected mayor may work for some areas, but that it might not be suitable for Lincolnshire.  It was believed that other areas had walked away from negotiations, and there was a feeling that a mayor was being forced on the area.  There were also concerns that the amount of money which would come with the elected mayor would not go very far when there were 10 authorities, and it was suggested that it would not be divided equally between the county, and some areas such as the south of the county may not benefit at all.  It was suggested that it was likely that this money would be spent on the South Bank of the Humber as that was where there was a large amount of growth.

·         It was felt that not enough work had been done to ensure that this model was workable in rural areas.  it was queried how this would work for the most rural areas of the county.

·         If the County was going to have devolved powers, then the method to get these powers was through a mayoral combined authority.

·         Members were assured that this was about powers coming down from central government, not powers transferring from local government to the mayor.

·         A report would go back to Council in September 2016, and if Council votes against having a Mayoral Combined Authority, the powers would not be devolved, and would stay with central government.

·         Members were advised that this was the first part of many deals which could be done.  In terms of funding, government tended to work on a per capita basis, and most other areas had populations of around 2 million, whereas the population for the Greater Lincolnshire area was just over 1 million.

·         It was noted that Cambridgeshire had returned to negotiations for an East Anglia deal, and Gateshead were also considering re-entering discussions.

·         Where and how the money would be spent would be decided by the Mayor and the Combined Authority and would be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

(To consider a report by Nigel West (Head of Democratic Services and Statutory Scrutiny Officer), which invites the Committee to consider the content of its work programme and the work programmes of the Council's other scrutiny committees)

Consideration was given to a report which enabled the Committee to consider its own work programme and the work programmes from the scrutiny committees for 2016.

Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee

It was reported that the financial performance would slip into July, however, this would not affect the accounts, and they would still be signed off by the Audit Committee at its meeting in September 2016.

It was highlighted that there was an additional item for the meeting in June on the Commercial Offer for Schools.  This was for pre-decision scrutiny prior to an Executive decision on 5 July 2016.

There had also been a request for a workshop on the impact of budget cuts, and there was a possibility that something could be sorted out for July, which would provide more detail on the cuts and where they would have an impact.

Adults Scrutiny Committee

There was one potential addition to the meeting on 29 June 2016: an item on the Block Purchasing of Residential Beds.  This was prior to a decision by the Executive Councillor for Adult Care, Health and Children's Services.

In response to a query it was confirmed that this would be a contract decision.

It was also clarified that the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report included clarification in relation to the 35% of care homes which were not rated as good or outstanding.

Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee

It was reported that there were no amendments to the work programme and the next meeting of the Committee was the following day, and the agenda was as set out on page 100 of the report.

Community and Public Safety Scrutiny Committee

It was reported that there were two changes to the published work programme which were an update to the meeting on 13 July 2016 to brief the Committee on the outcome of Exercise Barnes Wallis and an item on the Lincolnshire Resilience Forum had been added to the agenda for the meeting on 14 September 2016 to enable Ian Reed, Emergency Planning and Business Continuity Manager to brief the Committee on Exercise Grey Seal which was a major LRF exercise planned to take place in November 2016.

It was also highlighted that an item on Assuring Sustainability of the Lincolnshire Archive and Future of the Heritage Services was due to be considered at the meeting on 1 June 2016.  This was an early engagement item before pre-decision scrutiny in the autumn.

Members were also advised that an additional meeting had been scheduled for the 14 December 2016 where the Committee would hold a 'meet and greet' session with the new supplier of the Community Substance Misuse Treatment Services (Addaction) which would commence on 1 October 2016.

Economic Scrutiny Committee

It was reported that there were no amendments to the work programme and the next meeting was scheduled for 12 July 2016 and the agenda would be as set out on page 104 of the report.

It was highlighted that there may be one potential  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.