Agenda and minutes

The Minutes of the meeting held on 8 September 2011 were taken as read and signed as a correct record.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Communities, on the introduction of a Shadow Health and Wellbeing Board.

            The Board was reminded that at its meeting on 3 March 2011, it considered a report outlining the NHS Reforms and approved  the application for Halton to become a Health and Wellbeing  Early Implementer. The Government proposed that statutory Health and Wellbeing Boards (HWB) be established in shadow form by April 2012 with full implementation anticipated in April 2013. The HWB would have the following main functions:-

·        To assess the needs of the local population and lead statutory Joint Strategic Needs Assessments. 

·        Promote integration and partnership across areas including through promoting joined up commissioning plans across the NHS, Social Care and Public Health and to publish a Joint Health and Well-being Strategy.

·        To support joint commissioning and pooled budget arrangements where all parties agree this makes sense.

The Board noted that the Shadow HWB in Halton would be responsible for guiding and overseeing the implementation of the ambitions outlined in the Health White Paper, “Healthy Lives, Healthy People”, as well as providing the strategic direction for the Health priority in Halton. However, formal decision-making responsibility would continue to rest with the Council’s Executive and the relevant governance bodies of the local health services until new legislation was enacted. In addition, Overview and Scrutiny issues would remain an integral arrangement within the Health Policy and Performance Board.

It was further noted that the Shadow HWB would be established in November 2011 with a review undertaken 12 months after its commencement, and a further report presented to the Executive Board on its progress. The draft terms of reference for the Shadow HWB  in Halton were attached at Appendix 1 for Members’ consideration.

            RESOLVED: That the implementation of the Shadow Health and Wellbeing Board as set out in the report be approved.

            The Board considered a report of the Chief Executive which set out draft proposals for consultation on the future of public health and health improvement in Halton.

            In 2010, the Government published proposals on the future of Public Health in the White Paper: “Healthy Lives, Healthy People”. The White Paper placed new public health responsibilities and resources in local government, and committed to tackling health inequalities and establishes an integrated new service in Public Health England (PHE).

            The report informed Members of the mandatory services the Local Authority would provide which included:

·        Tobacco control

·        Alcohol and drug misuse services

·        Obesity and community nutrition initiatives

·        Public mental health services

·        Dental public health services

·        Supporting, reviewing and challenging delivery of key public health funded and NHS delivered services

·        Local initiatives to reduce excess winter deaths

A ring fenced grant would be transferred to the Council in 2013 to enable service provision. It was noted that Health Visiting and Child Development 0-5 years services would be transferred to the Local Authority in 2015.

            The White Paper stated that local authorities would be co-terminus with their GP Commissioning Consortia and that a dedicated Director of Public Health should be the principal advisor on public health and be responsible for delivering the key new public health functions, including the production of an annual Public Health report. In addition, the Director of Public Health would be a member of the Health and Wellbeing Board, the Clinical Commissioning Senate, GP Boards and strategy groups.

            The Board noted that a proposed integrated approach for Halton (Option 2) would be based upon a Council wide approach with its own Director of Public Health and Health Improvement Services. Details of a proposed structure were attached at Appendix 2. An outline of the proposed model of provision which would incorporate a locality approach to the provision of public health and well being services within Halton was attached at Appendix 3.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 Option 2 contained in Section 5.0 of the report be approved; and

2)                 in conjunction with the NHS, the Chief Executive be authorised to take steps to recruit a dedicated Director of Public Health for Halton.

The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Communities on Rough Sleeping.

            Rough Sleepers were defined as those who were roofless, sleeping on the streets or bedded down in open areas or other places that were not designated for human habitation.

The Board was advised that Halton had taken part in a City Region Task Group, comprising Knowsley, Liverpool, Sefton, St Helens and Wirral, working to reduce the incidents of rough sleeping across the region, with a view to eradicate rough sleeping by 2012. Halton’s Rough Sleeper figure, as submitted to the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG) for 2010/11 was two.

            The City Region Task Group had developed a draft City Region Protocol (attached at Appendix A), which had the following vision:

“By the end of 2012, no one will live on the streets of Liverpool City Region and no individual arriving on the streets for the first time will sleep out for more than one night.”

            It was further noted that discussions were already underway with Liverpool’s main provider of services to rough sleepers, the Whitechapel Centre, to identify services to support rough sleepers in each local authority area. The key points of the Protocol were detailed in the report; these ensured that appropriate services were available across the whole of the City region and one point of contact (phone number /email address) be made available.

            CLG had awarded Liverpool an additional £120k in funding to lead on the project across the City Region to address single homelessness and reduce rough sleeping. The funding was in addition to the Preventing Homelessness Grant awarded annually by CLG to Halton and required no additional funding by the Council.

            RESOLVED: That the ‘No Second Night Out’ Protocol be approved.

            The Board received a report of the Chief Executive, which updated Members on the Government proposals to establish Police and Crime Commissioners for all English Police Authority Areas.

            The Police and Social reform Bill if enacted, would introduce directly elected Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) across England and Wales from May 2012. Since the report was written, it had been decided that the first PCC elections would take place in November 2012, with boundaries based on the 41 Police Force areas in England and Wales. The Board noted that a Police Area Returning Officer (PARO) would be required for each area, responsible for the overall conduct of the election in their area.

            The Home Office invited applications for the role of PARO. With the agreement of the Chief Executives of Warrington, Cheshire East, Cheshire West and Chester, the Police Authority and the Cheshire and Warrington Leadership Board, the Chief Executive of Halton successfully submitted his application, and had been appointed PARO for the Cheshire Police Force Area, should the elections proceed.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the contents of the report be noted; and

2)                 Council be asked to note and support the appointment of the Chief Executive as the Police Area Returning Officer (PARO) for the Cheshire Police Force Area for the proposed Police and Crime Commissioner Elections in November 2012 (should these elections proceed).

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Enterprise on progress on the development and roll-out of the Department for Work and Pensions / European Social Fund (DWP/ESF) programme.

            The Board was advised that the DWP, as an approved co-financer, had been delivered ESF provision since 2007. Current contracts finished in Summer 2011 and the second phase of funding now available to the DWP, should be used to support workless households, and in particular, families with multiple problems. Details of the DWP/ESF process and how funding would be targeted were outlined in the report.

            It was noted that the second phase of ESF provision would be developed alongside the national roll-out of Community Budgets for families with multiple problems. Contracts for this provision would be let through the Department’s Framework for Employment Related Services. The DWP’s approach involved Local Authorities being the prime means of identifying those families/households that would benefit from the additional support. To this end, the DWP would expect providers to work closely with Local Authorities to explore local opportunities and ensure that their proposals were appropriate for the area.

Reason for Decision

To support the actions and progress to date.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

The authority could choose not to support bids by providers.  This option was rejected as providers would still be working with Halton Families even if Halton did not participate in the scheme.  By supporting and agreeing to work with providers the Authority could better join up support to families, provide support and influence the project.

Implementation Date

It is anticipated that provision would start in late Autumn 2011 or early Spring 2012.

            RESOLVED: That the Board endorse and support the actions to date.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources which informed Members of the results of the formal Polling District, Places and Stations Review.

            The Board was reminded that the Electoral Administration Act 2006 required Councils to carry out a review of its polling stations every four years. The main purpose of this was to ensure that all residents had reasonable facilities for voting.

            As part of the review process, electors, Councillors and other interested parties had to be consulted. Responses to the consultation exercise were considered by the cross-party Polling Station Review Working Party on 18 August 2011, and their recommendations were attached at Appendix 1.

            RESOLVED: That Council be recommended to adopt the amendments to the scheme as detailed in Appendix 1 attached to the report, for the period 2011-2014.

            The Board considered a report of the Operational Director, Finance which summarised the overall revenue and capital spending position as at 30 June 2011. The report had been considered by the Executive Board Sub Committee at its meeting on 8 September 2011.

            In overall terms, revenue expenditure was marginally below the budget profile, however, this was only a guide to eventual spending. It was noted that spending on employees was above the budget profile; this was primarily due to:

·        the delay in negotiating new premium pay arrangements with the Unions;

·        staff turnover was much reduced and lower than assumed in the budget; and

·        spending on agency staff, overtime, casual staff and consultancy costs.

It was reported that steps had been taken to control spending in these areas. In addition, certain budgets savings approved for 2011/12 had yet to be achieved, premium/overtime (£750,000), street lighting on rural roads (£40,000) and running costs associated with asset disposals (£250,000).

Members were advised that the economic downturn was affecting income. A number of income budgets were below their profile including market rents, industrial estates rents, land charges, social care charges and licence fees. These budgets would be closely monitored during the year to ensure the overall budget was balanced.

With regard to capital spending, it was reported that spending to the 30^th June 2011 totalled £7.5m, which was 75% of the planned spending of £9.9m at this stage. However, this only represented 12% of the total capital programme of £64.1m (which assumed a 20% slippage between years). Members were advised that the main areas of programme slippage to date were in respect of Castlefields Regeneration and the Local Transport Plan schemes.

The Council’s Balance Sheet was monitored regularly in accordance with the Reserves and Balances Strategy which formed part of the Medium Term Financial Strategy. The key reserves and balances had been reviewed and were considered prudent and appropriate at this stage in the financial year.

The report also outlined the impact of the significant number of equal pay claims which had been lodged with the Council as part of the national single status agreement. A reserve had been established over recent years, which was now considered sufficient to meet the future cost of such claims.

RESOLVED: That

1)                 the action plan be approved; and

2)                 future monitoring reports be made quarterly to the Executive Board.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources on the new Draft Halton Corporate Plan (the Plan) 2011- 2016.

            The Plan set out the goals the Council wanted to achieve to help build a better future for Halton; it redefined priorities and explained how resources would be deployed. The Plan also presented the Council’s contribution to the delivery of the Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) 2011-26, and concentrated on the challenge, priorities and achievements planned over the next five years.

The Board noted that the Plan would guide development of more detailed strategy and actions to be undertaken by the Council, and explained the steps the Council would take to deliver on both the Vision and the strategic priorities and key themes set out in the SCS. These themes were set out as:-

·              A Healthy Halton

·              Employment, Learning and Skills in Halton

·              A Safer Halton

·              Halton’s Children and Young People

·              Environment and Regeneration in Halton

An additional priority to the five contained in the SCS had been added:-

·              Corporate Effectiveness and Efficient Service Delivery

This related specifically to the delivery of Council service delivery as distinct from the partnership objectives of the SCS.

RESOLVED: That

1)                       the Draft Plan be discussed in terms of the suggested areas of focus and activities under each thematic area; and

2)                       subject to any amendments required, Council be recommended to adopt the Draft Corporate Plan 2011-2026.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources on the revision of the Performance Management Framework.

            The Board was advised that changes to the National Performance Frameworks, such as the abolition of the National Indicator Set, the Local Area Agreement and the Comprehensive Area Assessments, had afforded the Council some degree of flexibility concerning the development of its future performance management arrangements. This reflected a transition away from performance management by central government toward the authority being held account at a local level through the transparent provision of accessible performance data.

            The consideration of future performance management and monitoring arrangements had run in tandem with the development of the revised Sustainable Community Strategy and Delivery Plan and the Corporate Plan for the period 2011-2016. These plans identified local priorities at a partnership and organisational level respectively, and worked to identify key performance measures and targets for each of the priority areas, now at an advanced stage.

            The Board noted that a review of existing arrangements was undertaken which involved:

·         Capturing the views of Lead and Senior Officers and Elected Members in a number of forums.

·         A review of adopted practice elsewhere e.g. in other neighbouring Councils, Primary Care trusts and best practice in Local Government and the Private sector.

·         Consideration of the potential requirements and expectations of local authority self-regulation.

·         The ongoing need to ensure that available resources are being deployed to best effect in addressing strategic priorities of the Council.

The primary findings of the review and the future reporting arrangements were detailed in the report for Members’ consideration.

RESOLVED: That the revised Performance Management Framework be approved as follows:

1)         the development and use of a priority based performance report (as shown in the example) for each of the Council’s six corporate priorities in 2012/13 for each Policy & Performance Board,

2)         the presentation of Directorate Overview Reports on a quarterly basis and progress against the Corporate Plan on a six monthly basis for 2012/13; and

3)         existing departmentally focused performance reports, developed for operational management purposes, continue to be made available to Members via the Council intranet, as advertised in the Members bulletin.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources, on the Merseyside and Halton Joint Waste Development Plan - Publication and Submission Stages document (Waste DPD).

            The Board was reminded that the 6 week consultation period on the Preferred Options 2 (New Sites) Consultation ended on 20 June 2011. The scope of the consultation was limited to only four new sites proposed for allocation for waste management use. Detailed feedback was contained in Appendix 1 which highlighted key issues raised against each of the sites.

            As a result of the consultation, all four sites would be included within the publication of the Waste DPD, alongside those moving forward from Preferred Options 1 stage. This would give a total of six sub-regional sites, 13 local sites proposed as allocations, and 2 inert landfill sites. 

            The Board was advised that the Publication Stage of the Waste DPD would be the final 6-week consultation stage whereby the consultees could submit comments based on “soundness matters”, which related to technical content or procedural matters. Publication Consultation was planned to start in November 2011, followed by submission of the Waste DPD to the Secretary of State for formal examination.

Reason(s) for Decision

Government policy (PPS10) required that waste must be dealt with in a sustainable way. The Council was producing a Joint Waste Development Plan Document (DPD) for the Merseyside sub-region. Drafting of the Plan had reached the stage where the policy framework contained in the Waste DPD needed to be subject to public scrutiny.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

The Waste DPD had been prepared through a multi-stage process.  Four previous public consultation stages had been completed and these were detailed in section 5.7.

These reports document the evolution of the Plan and the options for policies and sites that had been considered and rejected. The results of the public consultation, engagement with stakeholders, industry and the Local Authorities and, detailed technical assessments had all been used to inform the preparation of this Report, forming a fifth and final public consultation stage. The Preferred Options stage reports set out the alternative options considered.

Implementation Date

The Joint Merseyside Waste DPD was scheduled to be adopted by all six partner Districts in November 2012.

            RESOLVED: That Council be recommended to

1)                 note the results of consultation (Appendix 1) undertaken between May and June 2011 on the Waste DPD Preferred Options 2 (New Sites) Report;

2)                 approve the Joint Waste DPD Publication Document (Appendix 2) and a final six-week public consultation commencing at the end of 2011;

3)         approve the Submission of the Waste DPD to the Secretary of State in early 2012 and that this approval be subject to the detailed comment in paragraph 3.19;

4)         approve the spatial distribution of one sub-regional site per district (Table 2 and paragraph 4.11); and

5)         give delegated authority to the Operational Director, Policy, Planning and Transportation, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder, Physical Environment, to make any minor drafting amendments to the Waste  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities, on the successful  achievement of a Round 1 Pass from the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) “Parks for People” Programme, for the refurbishment and development of Runcorn Hill and Heath Park.

            The Board was advised that the “Parks for People” programme was a funding stream administered by the HLF, to improve parks and open spaces and support their historic and cultural heritage for the benefit of local communities. The application process consisted of two competitive assessment stages, with Round 1 awarded in February 2011. A Round 2 decision, if successful, would not be known until September 2012.

            A Project Development Group had been set up, which included Ward Councillors, Council Officers and community group representatives. Others consulted on a regular basis included park users, local residents and Friends of Runcorn Hill and Runcorn Model Boat Club, Runcorn Bowling Club, Scout and Youth Group Leaders, the Police and Fire Service.

            The Board noted that a key feature of the “Parks for People” Programme was a five year part time development post, to promote the site heritage, help community involvement in the Park and enable user group activities to improve self sustainability.

            RESOLVED: That delegated authority be given to the Strategic Director, Communities, in consultation with the Executive Board Member for Physical Environment, to progress the project and to prepare and submit all necessary information for a Round 2 submission to Heritage Lottery Fund.

(N.B. Councillor Nelson declared a personal interest in the following item of business as Chair of Governors at The Grange School)

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Enterprise, which provided an update on the Sebastian James Review of Education Capital. The report also outlined the Priority School Building Programme (PSBP).

            The Board was reminded that, following a Government announcement  in July 2010 to end all school capital projects, Sebastian James was commissioned to lead a review of the Educational Capital Build Programmes. The review would identify how to streamline the process and thereby allow more money to be spent on the educational establishments and less on consultants and bureaucracy.

The review was published on 8 April 2011, and made a total of sixteen recommendations, detailed at Appendix A. The Department for Education (DfE) had initiated a twelve week consultation exercise, inviting comment on the review paper prior to the Secretary of State issuing his response.

The report highlighted the key issues and implications for Halton. This included Halton being recognised as the Lead Responsible Body in the Borough and the holder of the Local Investment Plan. Within this role, the authority would need to provide Condition Surveys for all school buildings to

the DfE and be able to articulate the future development plans for all educational buildings in the area.

            The Board noted that the DfE were commencing a privately financed programme to provide Local Authorities with school facilities for those schools in the worst condition. The PSBP would support between 100 and 300 schools with 20% of the programme delivered each year over the next 5 years; the first schools would open in academic year 2014-15. The report detailed the criteria the Local Authority and the school must accept before being considered for inclusion in the project.

Reason for Decision

If the Authority was successful in securing funding this would provide funding to rebuild Halton schools with the worst conditions.

Alternative Options Considered and Rejected

Consideration had been given to the option of not submitting an applications form.  This was rejected as this was the only funding available for the LA to bid for, to rebuild its primary and secondary schools with the worst condition issues.

Implementation Date

Local Authorities must register by 7 October 2011 and complete and submit any application by 12 noon on Friday 14 October 2011.

            RESOLVED: That

1)         the findings of the Sebastian James Review of Education Capital be noted; and

2)         the Strategic Director, Children and Enterprise, in consultation with the Lead Member for Children, Young People and Families be authorised to submit applications for the PSBP for all schools that meet the Department for Education (DfE) condition criteria.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Enterprise, on the new statutory requirements regarding short break services to disabled children and their families.

            In 2008, Halton became part of the Aiming High for Disabled Children programme, which provided access to a range of short break services for disabled children and their families. This programme formally ended in March 2011, with new statutory practice guidance and financial investment effective from 1 April 2011 to provide short breaks for disabled children.

            The Board was advised that the Government had stated a clear commitment to “continued investment” in short breaks with a nationwide financial commitment of £800 million until 2015 as part of the Early Intervention Grant. It was further noted that in addition to this, Halton had been allocated £241,942 to support the Authority towards capital expenditure incurred in relation to short break services.

            As part of Statutory Guidance, all authorities must:

(i)         Publish a statement of short break services on their website;

(ii)        Keep their short breaks statement under review;

(iii)       State in their Service Statement the range of short breaks services available, the criteria by which eligibility for services would be assessed, and how the range of services was designed to meet the needs of families with disabled children in their area;

(iv)       Consult with parents as part of the review of the statement.

Halton’s Statement, attached at Appendix 1 for Members’ consideration, complied with statutory guidance and  took account of the views of partners  and comments made by families and providers.

            RESOLVED: That

1)     the contents of the report be noted;

2)      the draft Short Break Statement be agreed; and

3)      the Statement be formally endorsed by the Children’s Trust.

The Board considered:

(1)       whether Members of the press and public should be excluded from the meeting of the Board during consideration of the following item of business in accordance with Sub-Section 4 of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 because it was likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be considered, exempt information would be disclosed, being information defined in Section 100 (1) and paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972; and

(2)       whether the disclosure of information was in the public interest, whether any relevant exemptions were applicable and whether, when applying the public interest test and exemptions, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed that in disclosing the information.

            RESOLVED: That as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following items of business in accordance with Sub-Section 4 of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 because it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business, exempt information will be disclosed, being information defined in Section 100 (1) and paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Enterprise, on the procurement options for future Information Advice and Guidance service for children and young people and the contractual implications between the six Greater Merseyside Local Authorities and the Greater Merseyside Connexions Partnership.

            The Board was asked to consider the service delivery requirements from 2012-13 and the arrangements needed to secure that delivery. At the meeting, it was confirmed that at the last Learn Together Partneship meeting, the Directors of Childrens’ Services had agreed that 2012/13 service specifications be used with negotiations with Connexions and for the procurement exercise.

            RESOLVED: That

1)         Executive Board agrees that work can continue on a City Region level;

2)         a parallel procurement process can be undertaken for 2012/2013; and

3)         Subject to agreement by the Directors of Childrens’ Services on 24^th September 2011, service specifications can be used with negotiations with Connexions and for the procurement exercise.

(N.B. Councillor Swain declared a personal interest in the following item of business as a Board Member of Halton Housing Trust)

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources on the disposal of seven Council owned sites to Halton Housing Trust (HHT).

            The Board was advised that HHT had been working with partners to secure funding from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA), to build new housing under the HCA’s 2011-15 Affordable Housing Programme.

            RESOLVED: That the disposal to HHT of the 7 sites shown edged red in the Appendices on the terms outlined in the report, subject to planning permission and HHT (via its Consortium partner) entering into a development framework agreement with the HCA be approved.

MINUTES ISSUED: 26 September 2011

CALL-IN: 3 October 2011

Any matter decided by the Executive Board may be called in no later than 5.00pm on 3 October 2011