Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr O’Neill.

Members are asked to declare any interests they may have in the business to be discussed on the agenda.

Members were asked to declare any interests they may have had in the business to be discussed.

Councillor Batool declared that with regard to Item 8 – Labour Market: Economic Inactivity and ESOL, she was working for the UK Shared Prosperity Fund (UKSPF) project.

The minutes of the meeting of the Commission held on 7 December 2023 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as correct record.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Children, Young People and Education Scrutiny Commission held on 7 December 2023 be confirmed as a correct record.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any questions, representations and statements of case received in accordance with Council procedures.

Mr James Blackhall to ask:

“Given the council's commitment to Net 0 and supporting those who are economically disadvantaged is it truly acceptable that a flexi 4 week ticket is rising by nearly £10?”

The following question was presented to the Commission by Mr James Blackhall:

Given the council's commitment to Net Zero and supporting those who are economically disadvantaged is it truly acceptable that a flexi four-week ticket is rising by nearly £10?

In response to the question the Director for Planning, Transportation and Development noted that:

Fares for all bus tickets in Leicester were determined commercially by the bus operators, with the Council having no legal control.

Costs for operating buses had been rising faster than inflation for the past 2 years, with driver wages, fuel, insurance and repair work all rising quickly.

As a result commercial bus operators were increasing ticket prices nationally.

Whilst this was regrettable, it should be noted that, through the council working closely with bus operators through the Enhanced Partnership, the Leicester bus network has remained comprehensive, with over 30 high frequency, more reliable routes running throughout the day. Many other areas in England have seen significant service cuts following Covid.

In addition, nearly half the network was now operating with new electric buses with more accessible onboard facilities, real time information displays and new shelters at all main stops across the city.

Bus travel in Leicester remained comparatively good value.

As well as the national £2 single fare there are also travel discounts for the elderly, disabled, for those who are unemployed and for eligible school children.

The range of unlimited, all operator, Flexi tickets remained good value given the significantly improved network now being provided. Compared with other nearby cities such as Nottingham and Derby prices were still competitive. A four-week equivalent flexi ticket in Nottingham cost £85.50 and in Derby £85.00 compared with £74.00 in Leicester.

In addition, following an initiative coordinated by the council, Leicester remained the only area outside of London with all-operator contactless fare capping. This guarantees the cheapest fare for any combination of trips made on any bus operator over a day or week, with no further charge for any travel made once the fare cap has been reached.

There was one free bus service under a government funded trial, namely the Hop! city centre circular.

The Chair thanked Mr Blackhall for the question and Officers for the response.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any petitions received in accordance with Council procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

The Director of Finance submits a draft report proposing the General Fund Revenue Budget for 2024/25.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider and provide any feedback which will be submitted to the Council Budget meeting in February 2024.

The Director of Finance submitted a report detailing the proposed Revenue Budget for 2024/25.

The Head of Finance (CDN) then presented the report.

Key points included:

• The budget was very challenging for the 2024/25 financial year and was the worst outlook that the Council had ever faced.
• Without drastic action, the Council would not be able to balance the budget in the 2025/26 financial year.
• A Section 114 notice would not mean that the Council was bankrupt, as Councils cannot technically go bankrupt.  A Section 114 notice would state that the Council’s resources could not meet its commitments and as such it could mean a freeze on commitments and government interventions.
• Many other Councils were in a similar position to Leicester.
• Whilst not directly linked to EDTCE, a growth in statutory services had put pressure on the budget, for example, the costs of Adult and Children’s Social Care, pressure on home-to-school transport and the homelessness budget.
• The budget was in a volatile position and there was expected to be a need to add a further £11m to the final budget, largely due to an increase in minimum wage which had raised care costs and homelessness.
• The growth in statutory services and the failure of the government to provide adequate funding had meant it was difficult for local authorities to keep up.  Despite pressures and inflation increasing since 2021, the government had only just announced additional finding for local governments, however, this may only amount to around £3m for Leicester City Council.
• There was £10m of savings in the budget, but this still left a large sum to be met from the reserves.
• A further austerity drive from the government was signalled from 2025-26.  Analysis from the Institute of Fiscal Studies showed that there would be a real-terms cut of 3.4% per year for services other than the NHS, aid and defence.
• The Council approach to budget reductions had been to use a managed reserves strategy, however, the proposed budget would make use of all reserves available.
• Some local authorities had been offered exceptional financial support from the government which in some cases allowed them to use the proceeds from the sale of assets to balance the revenue budget, and in some cases allowed councils to increase their council tax above the 5% permitted.  However, no local authority had been offered extra money.  No exceptional financial support would be offered to Leicester City Council in 24/25 as it was able to balance the budget.
• The commission was directed to Appendix 1 of the report, in particular highlighting those budget ceilings for service areas under the scope of the commission. Decisions already taken had the effect of reducing the budget in some areas (i.e. savings). Service areas and services were expected to manage inflationary pressures in their own budgets.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• These savings showed the impact of decisions already taken on next year’s budget throughout the year that had been shared  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

The Director of Finance submits a draft report proposing the Capital Programme for 2024/25.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider and provide any feedback which will be submitted to the Council Budget meeting in February 2024.

The Director of Finance submitted a report detailing the proposed Capital Programme for 2024/25. 

Key points included:

• This was a one-year programme of schemes from grants, borrowing and the sale of assets.  The programme was limited to one-year due to the uncertainty of resources, the impact of inflation and to ease pressure on revenue budgets.
• The Commission were given a rundown of expenditure relevant to Economic Development, Transport and Climate Emergency, including:
  • £3.3m for the continued Highway Capital Maintenance programme.
  • £2.6m to continue the programme of works constituting the Transport Improvement Programme.
  • £400k for local environmental works within Wards.
  • £300k to continue the Flood Risk Prevention Scheme.
  • £200k for enveloping of front walls.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• The Flood Risk Prevention Scheme figure of £300k was established to support the work of the Flooding and Drainage team to bring forward schemes in terms of flood risk management, particularly relating to potential highway drainage and sustainable drainage schemes.  This figure was sufficient and supported the team’s work with the key partner the Environment Agency.  Further to this there were other opportunities to bid for grant funding from the government and through the local levy, including through the Trent Regional Flooding & Coastal Committee to try and find other sources of funding to support that work. Successful examples of the partnership working included the £8m major flood risk management schemes completed along the Rover Soar in recent years to improve the flow of flood water through the city at Aylestone Meadows, Ellis Meadows and a new flood bypass culvert at Loughborough Rd bridge.
• The Council had two machines for clearing drains, one of which was held as a spare, although this spare had been used during the recent flooding incidents.  The work of the Cleansing Services team who were responsible for clearing leaf fall was also funded from revenue.  Leaf fall had traditionally been a problem and the team had a list of problem areas that needed tackling regularly.  This issue also fell under the remit of the Culture and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny Commission
• The Disabled Facilities Grant fell under the remit of Housing Services and the Housing Scrutiny Commission.  These grants were offered across the city and not limited to specific Wards.
• The front walls scheme was aimed at repairing collapsing front walls of run-down property frontages along key gateways and in district centres which significantly impact on the street scene appearance making areas look run down and unwelcoming. Areas where front walls had already been tackled included Green Lane Road, Evington Road and Narborough Road. The poor state of walls along Welford Road was the next area being considered in order to improve the street scene.
• Pots of money existed within policy provisions within the capital budget and these were subject to executive decisions to release the money into the programme.  This included money needed to assess the scope of a scheme as sometimes it was necessary for a scheme to incur  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submits a report summarising the levels of economic inactivity and English language proficiency across Leicester’s labour market, and the interventions commissioned in response to these issues by the UK Shared Prosperity Fund.

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submitted a report summarising the levels of economic inactivity and English language proficiency across Leicester’s labour market, and the interventions commissioned in response to these issues by the UK Shared Prosperity Fund.

The Head of Economic Regeneration presented the report.

Key points included:

• The report concerned features of Leicester’s labour markets, specifically economic inactivity and English as a Second Language (ESOL).
• Leicester had a higher-than-average unemployment figure which disguised a distinctive feature of the labour market around economic inactivity.
• Definitions of economic inactivity included people who are not employed, seeking work, or available for work due to various reasons such as students, retirees, homemakers, and those who have given up searching for a job.
• Many people withdrew from the Labour Market during the Covid-19 pandemic, sometimes this was due to them feeling discouraged or due to health issues.
• Many people were involuntarily inactive, and it was thought that they could re-join the workforce with the right encouragement.  Support was directed to this target group.
• There was a high proportion of economically inactive people in Leicester, however the share of these who did not want a job was lower in Leicester than the national average, and a quarter were long-term sick.
• Another feature of economic inactivity in Leicester was a low level of proficiency in the English language and the demographic structure of Leicester was a feature of this.  7% of Leicester residents could not speak English which was the third highest percentage out of all Local Authorities in England and only 70% spoke English as a first language compared to just over 90% in England.
• Resource was being directed to areas of need and funding was being allocated to these issues.
• Twelve external organisations were delivering support through the Shared Prosperity programme and there were two projects focused on economic inactivity, and two focussed on ESOL and basic skills.
• Future initiatives from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) included one that proposed to allocate funding directly to local authorities focussed on supported employment for disabled people to enter the economy, however, no detail had been announced at the time of the report.

The Head of Adult Education gave a presentation on ESOL provision using slides as attached in the agenda pack.

Key points other than those on the slides included:

• The Twin Training ESOL programme focussed on qualifications to get people into work.
• The Adult Education team with their VCS partners were focused on the Everyday English scheme which provided informal first steps into ESOL, opportunities to build confidence in everyday situations and a limited number of places for asylum seekers and others who were not otherwise eligible for ESOL funding. A caseworker supported individual to progress onto more formal learning opportunities.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• Points were raised about the locations of the schemes and services within the city.  It was clarified that whilst the organisations involved may be based in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 54.

The Chair submits a report providing an overview of the Commissions examination of the policy regarding the implementation of 20mph streets in Leicester.

The Chair submitted a report providing an overview of the Commissions examination of the policy regarding the implementation of 20mph streets in Leicester.

Key points included:

• The bespoke method adopted by the Council was seen as preferable to having a default 20mph speed limit.  This approach allowed for consultation, improvements and traffic-calming.
• The commitment of achieving 20mph coverage of 80% of suitable streets was supported but recommended aiming for 100% of appropriate residential streets, and it was suggested that these should include post-completion feedback and the air quality data in these areas should be monitored.
• It should be ensured that schemes were self-enforcing and looked at older 20mph streets to see if the traffic calming measures needed to be modernised.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• Data presented before the work group suggested that accidents were reduced in 20mph zones.  Data on air quality was not widely available as such but monitoring would be undertaken.
• Commentary from the government cautioned against a blanket 20mph limit.  The Outcome of the work group landed on the same position in continuing this approach.
• Regarding a future work group on 24-hour bus lanes, guidance was expected from the government, but had so far not been produced.
• The targets were thought to be realistic as they were based on an assessment of what was possible and practical.  It was suggested that the Council should stretch its targets.
• The Senior Governance Officer who supported the work group was thanked.
• A schedule of delivery dates and locations of 20mph streets was requested.  This could be considered at 6-monthly meetings as this was an opportunity to share the programme.
• Investment would be made in Knighton to reduce speeds.
• Speeding issues in Aylestone were raised along with the possibility of 20mph streets in the Ward.

The Chair noted that this was an illustration of a short task group.  The next task group would consider Electronic Vehicle (EV) charging points and the one after that would look at 24-hour bus lanes once government guidance was received.  These were also aimed to be short task groups.

Invitations for expressions in sitting on the EV Charging task group would be sent out once the scope of the group was established.

AGREED:

1)    That the report be noted.

2)    That comments made by members of this commission to be taken into account by the lead officers.

3)    That the report be presented to the Executive and the response from the Executive be brough back to the Commission.

The Commission will be consulted as to how they wish to proceed with the Waterside visit.

The Commission were asked how they wanted to proceed with the Waterside visit.

AGREED:

That the relevant office be informed that two members of the Commission wished to have a site visit and a presentation be produced and presented to members in the meantime.

The City Highways Director submits a report updating the Commission on the response to the flooding impacts in the City arising from Storm Henk.

The City Highways Director submits a report updating the Commission on the response to the flooding impacts in the city arising from Storm Henk.

Key points included:

• The briefing note provided background to the incident.  This was a rapidly developing issue as the situation had gone from a steady state on the Monday to rapid flood warnings overnight.  The flooding did not manifest itself until the following day and it was not understood until the early hours of the Wednesday as to where the impact was.
• Calls had been responded to and activities had been coordinated.   Teams had monitored river levels.
• A number of streets had been badly affected.  This had been very distressing for residents.
• The Fire Service had been worked with, especially on Thurcaston Road and Beaumanor Road where people had needed to be evacuated by boat ant taken to Rest Centres or other accommodation such as staying with family or friends.
• During the recovery phase, the Council had been very active in affected areas, speaking to people about support needed and cleanup needed and helping them to get back to a situation that was as normal as possible.
• Internally flooded houses would take time to deal with.
• The Council were looking to help people gain access to government grants to help.  The Council could also help people to contact insurers and landlords.
• Drop-in sessions were being held in Rushey Mead with partners who could help.
• An email had been sent to all members setting out financial support for residents and businesses.  In the long term there would be support for property resilience.
• Work had been undertaken to improve the flow of the River Soar.  Had this not been done then the situation would have been worse.
• In terms of defending properties, there were economies of scale which needed to satisfy the Government cost-benefit tests for funding.  Sometimes it could cost more to defend a house from flooding than the house was worth.
• Property Resilience Grants were a way forward for some properties to protect themselves.
• The level of rainfall had not been exceptional, but other weather events such as Storm Babet in October 2023 and subsequent rainfall had left the ground saturated.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points included:

• In terms of access, residents known to be flooded were contacted directly.  There was also a website whereby people could obtain links and information and the details they needed. 
• There was a community recovery grant of up to £500 available for residents who had been flooded internally.  To be eligible for this grant, water would have needed to have entered living space and made a dwelling unliveable for 48 hours.  Further to this, eligible houses would receive a Council Tax discount for a minimum of three months.  If they had temporary accommodation in the meantime (that was not a second home), the discount might also apply to that.  There was financial support for businesses available of up to £2500, details of this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 57.

For Members’ consideration, the work programme for the Commission is attached.

Members of the Commission were invited to consider content of the work programme and were invited to make suggestions for additions as appropriate to be brought to future meetings.

The work programme was noted. 

There being no further items of urgent business, the meeting finished at 19:57.