Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors M Brookes, P M Dilks, C E H Marfleet, Mrs C A Talbot and Added Members Mrs P J Barnett, Mr P Thompson and Dr E van der Zee.

No interests were declared.

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting held on 29 September 2016 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

The Chairman advised that he had attended the last meeting of the Executive on 4 October 2016. The Executive had considered two reports which had been subjected to pre-decision scrutiny including the Future of the Heritage Service; and the Revenue and Capital Budget Monitoring Report 2016/17.  The Chairman had presented the comments of the relevant scrutiny committees.

The Chairman provided Members with an update on Devolution.  It was noted that out of the ten authorities, eight had voted in favour and two against.  The Leader was due to make his final decision before the end of November 2016.

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

No Call-Ins had been received.

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

No proposals for Scrutiny Reviews had been received.

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

No Councillor Calls for Action had been received.

(To receive a presentation from Steve Brookes (Lincolnshire Broadband Programme Manager), which provides an update on the implementation of the Lincolnshire Broadband Programme)

The Committee received a presentation from Steve Brookes (Lincolnshire Broadband Programme Manager), which provided a status update on the broadband programme since the last update received on 26 November 2015.

The presentation outlined the current status of the Lincolnshire Broadband Programme.  It detailed the number of premises enabled, the number of structures completed, the levels of coverage achieved and the latest financial position.  The presentation also outlined the current status of the Phase 2 contract, which aimed to take Superfast broadband coverage to 95% of all UK premises by the end of 2017.  The objectives for Phase 3 were currently being developed.

During the presentation, the following points were noted:

·         150,775 homes as of 31 March 2016 had been provided with fibre broadband, against a target of 148,334 as part of Phase 1 of the contract;

·         Anticipated Superfast coverage in the Intervention Area was quoted at 76.1% by BT in their original Invitation to Tender response.  When added to existing commercial coverage, BT had expected to hit 90% Superfast coverage across the County.  The project was currently running at 82% Superfast coverage in the Intervention Area, therefore 5.9% above the target of 76.1%;

·         Latest analysis from BDUK had shown a per premises cost of £142 against a projected £242, and a Superfast per premises cost of £178 against a projected £293;

·         The total underspend on Phase 1 was circa £12 million;

·         The possibility of utilising wireless broadband was discussed and in particular, it was queried whether church spires could be used to affix wireless masts;

·         As part of Phase 2 of the contract BT would deliver an additional 4,801 Superfast premises by the end of 2017.  As of 31 March 2016, BT had completed 3,582 premises and therefore was currently on target;

·         The programme of work for Phase 3 was currently being drawn up.  Phase 3 would be funded by a combination of underspending and clawback agreements from contracts 1 and 2;

·         A Member suggested that some of the underspending was used to hold a seminar on internet security;

·         Any new development with 30 or more dwellings would have BT fibre broadband installed.  Planning authorities had been made aware of this ruling;

·         It was noted that the district of Lincoln was the fifth fastest district in the Country for broadband speeds;

·         The longer the length of copper wire, the slower the broadband would be. Therefore, the closer a premises was to a cabinet, the faster the broadband.  It was also noted that the cost of laying down fibre infrastructure in rural areas did not make providing superfast broadband to rural areas cost effective, compared to larger cities such as London and Manchester;

·         Further to the above, a Member raised concerns regarding the maximum Superfast broadband speeds in Lincolnshire and it was felt that this issue should be highlighted to the Executive and Management Board;

NOTE: At this stage in proceedings, the meeting was adjourned from 11.00am to 11.15am.

·         A Member commented that the residents of Lincolnshire should be able  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

(To receive a report by Miriam Binsztok (Senior Commissioning Officer), which provides an update on the development of a common approach (EduLincs) to the recovery of costs where schools, academies and other education organisations in Lincolnshire can access services delivered by Lincolnshire County Council)

Consideration was given to a report which provided an update on the development of a common approach (EduLincs) to the recovery of costs where schools, academies and other education organisations in Lincolnshire could access services delivered by Lincolnshire County Council since its last update on 30 June 2016.

Members were reminded that a toolkit had been devised to help services calculate the cost of providing their services.  The toolkit ensured a consistent approach across the Council that aimed to recover the full cost of services.  The toolkit had included direct staffing costs plus an element of overhead costs such as accommodation, insurances, information, management, HR and payroll and financial services.  Members were advised that costs could be calculated on a daily, half-daily or hourly basis.  Appendix A of the report provided information on individual service charges and service uptake.

It was noted that the 'EduLincs' webpage and brochure were now available for schools, academies and other educational organisations, and the online ordering system was now being used. A copy of the brochure was circulated at the meeting.

Individual members of the Committee also raised the following additional comments. 

·         It was important that the information available on services to schools be of high quality, particularly as other local authorities and providers issued brochures of the services offered;

·         It was also important to prioritise the proposed e-commerce arrangements, so that schools could easily opt into the services;

·         In the case of very small schools or other appropriate instances, the model could include the waiver of charges in specially defined circumstances;

·         It was quite likely that some of the services offered, which were non-essential, would not be bought by schools, and there was a risk that these services could as a result be discontinued.  This would be reviewed on an annual basis to ensure the services being offered were cost effective and in use;

·         The purpose of the programme was to recover the costs of services from schools.  It was not possible for the Council to make a surplus on any charges to schools.  The provision of services on a commercial basis could only be achieved by the creation of a commercial entity and there was no intention to create one as part of this programme;

·         Schools receive pupil premium funding directly from Government through a grant;

·         Suggestions were made that it should be made clear on the website which services were free to schools; a weblink to the ESPO website should be available on 'EduLincs'; the Road Safety Partnership's 'Too Fast, Too Soon' performance should be promoted through the website.

The officers present were thanked for their detailed update.

RESOLVED

            That the report and comments be noted.

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

The Committee received a verbal update on the Review of Scrutiny Working Group from Nigel West (Head of Democratic Services and Statutory Scrutiny Officer).

The scrutiny structure had been the main topic at recent meetings and the Working Group would be considering options based on the 5+1 model recommended by Dr Stuart Young, East Midlands Council, in his report to Council in December 2015. The next meeting of the Working Group was scheduled for the afternoon of 27 October 2016, where further consideration would be given to how scrutiny review activity would be undertaken within the proposed new structure.

The next step for the Working Group was to take a report to Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee on 24 November 2016.  The Committee would then make recommendations to Full Council on 16 December, with a view to a new structure being in place after the 2017 county council elections.

RESOLVED

          That the verbal update be noted.

(To receive a report by Nigel West (Head of Democratic Services and Statutory Scrutiny Officer), which informs the Committee of a request from Group Leaders for a working group to be set up to consider the effects of the Brexit Vote on Lincolnshire)

Consideration was given to a report by Nigel West (Head of Democratic Services and Statutory Scrutiny Officer), which informed the Committee of a request from Group Leaders for a working group to be set up to consider the effects of the Brexit Vote on Lincolnshire.

Councillors Mrs M J Overton MBE, R B Parker, Mrs A M Newton, A J Jesson, A Bridges, R L Foulkes and Added Member: Mr Rudman all volunteered to sit on the working group.

RESOLVED

That a cross-party working group be established to consider the effects of the Brexit Vote on Lincolnshire comprising Councillors Mrs M J Overton MBE, R B Parker, Mrs A M Newton, A J Jesson, A Bridges, R L Foulkes and Added Member: Mr Rudman.

(To receive 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 programme of the Council's other overview and 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 2016/17.

Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee

Further to Minute 53 – 'Broadband Update', a further update would be added to the work programme for consideration at a future meeting.

It was suggested that the Committee had sight of the Council's proposed Councillor Induction Programme at either the meeting in February or March 2017, prior to the Council's Elections in May 2017.

It was noted that each scrutiny committee would hold an informal budget workshop in November 2016, as part of the budget planning process.

Adults Scrutiny Committee

There were no changes to the published work programme.

Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee

At the last meeting of the Committee on 21 October 2016, Members had received the Council's draft response to the new Government consultation Schools that work for everyone, which would close on 12 December 2016.  The final response would be presented to the Committee at its meeting on 25 November 2016, for its endorsement.

At the meeting scheduled for 20 January 2017, the Committee would receive two additional reports: an update onthe School Improvement Sector Led Model and an update on the Joint Targeted Area Inspection on Domestic Abuse.

Community and Public Safety Scrutiny Committee

There were no changes to the published work programme.

It was noted that a 'Meet and Greet' Session with the new supplier of the Community Substance Misuse Treatment Service was to be arranged to follow on from the meeting of the Committee on 25 January 2017.

To be included on the work programme for 2017 was an update on Lincolnshire Policing from the Police and Crime Commissioner for Lincolnshire and the Chief Constable of Lincolnshire Police; and an update on HMP Lincoln from the newly appoint Governor of HMP Lincoln.

Economic Scrutiny Committee

The item on the Impact of Transformation on Maximising Economic Growth (ITMEG) scheduled for 29 November 2016 had been removed. 

It was noted that the last update on this topic was received at the Committee's meeting in July 2016, where it was reported that progress had been made against all the key recommendations and therefore there was no longer a need to continue monitoring the recommendations. However, the Committee would instead receive reports on the individual issues as and when required.

It was queried whether the Committee would be considering the impact of the County Council's vote against the Devolution proposals, in particular those aspects of the bid which covered economic development and transport.  Further to this, the Committee was reminded that the decision had not yet been taken as this was within the remit of the Leader of the Council.  The decision by the Leader would be taken before the end of November 2016, and until that time the Committee would not be a position to give consideration to this issue.

Environmental Scrutiny Committee / Flood and Drainage Management Committee

There  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.