Agenda item

(To receive a report and presentation which provides the Children and Young People Scrutiny Committee with details of potential implications for Children's Services within the Budget Proposals for 2016/17, considered by the Executive on 5 January 2016)

Consideration was given to a report which provided the Committee with information on the Children's Services budgets for 2016/17.  The views of this scrutiny committee would be reported to the Executive prior to finalisation of the 2016/17 budget proposals for the full Council's consideration in February 2016.

The Committee received a presentation in relation to the Budget Proposals for Children's Services which provided detailed information in relation to the following areas:

·         Current Financial Position

·         Savings achieved since the 2010 Comprehensive Spending Review

·         Budget Pressures

·         Commissioning Outcomes for Children's Services

·         Proposals for Revenue Savings – Readiness for School

·         Proposals for Revenue Savings – Learn and Achieve

·         Proposals for Revenue Savings – Readiness for Adult Life

·         Proposals for Revenue Savings – Safe and Healthy

·         Capital Requirements

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

·         It was clarified that there was an increasing budget in relation to Special Guardianship Order Placements.  The executive Director for Children's Services explained the circumstances of Special Guardianship Orders and associated funding implications;

·         There was a proposal to consult on the closure of phase 3 Children's Centres, however, the authority had a sufficiency duty which may be tested during the consultation process, alternative options would also be considered;

·         There were concerns regarding the decommissioning of non-statutory school support services which supported vulnerable young people, and it was queried whether the business sector could be approached to help with education support.  It was clarified that the business sector already provided internships and other work placements for learners with a learning disability;

·         There were also concerns around the decommissioning of the Counselling Service for grief and loss and it was queried whether this could be passed to health or CAMHS.  It was noted that CAMHS was already in a challenging positions with regard to demand management;

·         It was commented that Children's Centres provided advice, guidance and support to families if they felt as though they were reaching crisis point;

·         In terms of post 16 transport, it was queried whether there was any legal obligation to provide transport for those families in poverty;

·         One member commented that they could not support the decommissioning of these services as it would harm communities.  If it was considered a good idea to introduce the services then they should remain.  It was proposed that the Committee vote against the budget proposals and that the Executive be asked to look again at these services to see whether they could continue to be funded;

·         The Executive Councillor for Adult Care and Health Services, Children's Services was in attendance at the meeting and responded to comments made and advised the Committee that the Executive had spent a lot of time since the summer examining budgets to try to find the extra millions that the authority was losing.  However, there was still a gap of £30m.  Government had been lobbied by the Executive for extra funding.  Reducing services was not what the Executive wanted to do, but they needed to look at what was the best way to keep people safe.  These had not been easy decisions to make, and there were reductions in every service.  There was a requirement for the authority to set a balanced budget.  If in 3/4 years' time local government started to receive more funding, then it was possible that some of these services could be reinstated;

·         It was queried whether there was any further information in relation to the alternative operating model for the children's centres;

·         It was acknowledged that the authority was in an incredibly difficult position. 

·         Children's centres provided a lot more help to communities than just help and advice;

·         It was commented that the authority could not afford to continue these services, and had done its best over the last five years to make savings that allowed the authority to balance its books, and there was no alternative but to accept the recommendations;

·         Skills were a big issue, and it was reported that Justin Brown (Enterprise Commissioner) and his team were doing a considerable amount of work on this area.  It was also commented that Councillor C J Davie (Executive Councillor for Economic Development, Environment, Planning and Tourism) was working very hard on the skills agenda;

·         A member commented that they had had considerable concerns the previous year regarding the removal of funding from the Music Service, but she had looked into this further and was convinced that the model which had been presented would become self-sustaining and be viable.  It had continued to deliver the service and children continued to access the service, including those from low income families;

·         It was commented that not all of the Children's Centres were used as much as they could be, and if there was a way of providing the services elsewhere, and not paying for the building, then it should be looked into;

·         In terms of the supported employment team, there was already a link with businesses to identify work experience placements.  The authority had traditionally brokered and provided support for the young person to access that experience.  If this service was decommissioned, colleges would have a role in supporting a young person to transition into work;

·         In relation to the Grief and Loss service, it was acknowledged that this was a highly valued service, however it was not a statutory requirement for the local authority to provide this service.  Members were advised that in response to the publication of the report, an e-mail had been received from the Lincolnshire Centre for Grief and Loss advising that there were many reasons why a young person would be referred to the service, including the preventative nature of the counselling intervention, as well as issues such as low confidence and self-esteem, or self-harming, in those affected by a broad range of causes including bullying, depression and anxiety, family separation and breakdown, physical and sexual abuse and serious family illness;

·         In relation to academies, and the Education Support Grant (ESG), members were advised that there was a per pupil amount provided to the school and the local authority.  When a school converted to an academy, the local authority would lose part of the education support grant.  However, it was noted that there had been a slow down in conversions to academies, but that future consultation on the ESG was expected;;

·         Children's Centres were highly valued, but the least worst options were being considered, as safeguarding was being protected.  A lot of work was being done to ensure that the right families access the children's centres, and approximately 90% of the families in contact with the authority were registered with Centres;

·         The alternative operating model for the Children's Centres would be looking to see whether community delivered services could be provided in other facilities in the community, such as village halls;

·         School improvement was moving towards a sector led approach and the biggest concern was the capacity for schools to be able to support each other.  However, there was a need to change the current model which had expended its ability to move Lincolnshire's schools forward, as nationally schools were progressing much faster than they were in Lincolnshire;

·         The schools budget had not been reduced, as it was protected;

·         In relation to Post-16 transport, the statutory duty was to provide affordable transport, and Lincolnshire was slightly below average in its charges compared to other authorities.  The option of means testing for low income families was explored, but the administration burden of this meant that potential budget savings were reduced;

·         Recommendations from the Grammar School Transport Task and Finish Group would be presented to this Committee.  It was not yet known what the recommendations would be, but they could generate a cost saving or a pressure.  Members were assured that the work being carried out was very robust;

·         In terms of youth centres, the delivery of positive activities was being transferred to the community, but there were still some residual costs from the running of the youth centres, such as maintenance.

It was proposed and seconded that the Committee should not support the recommendations in the report.  Upon being put to the vote this motion was lost.

It was proposed and seconded that the recommendations in the report be supported, and upon being put to the vote this was carried.

RESOLVED

1.    That the contents of the report be noted;

2.    That concerns regarding the potential closure of phase 3 Children's Centres, and the decommissioning of non-statutory services be passed to the Executive.