Agenda and minutes

To issue a welcome to those present, and to confirm if there are any apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr Joshi and Cllr Mohammed.

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

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

No declarations were made.

The minutes of the meeting of the Culture and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny Commission held on Monday 4^th November 2024 have been circulated, and Members will be asked to confirm them as a correct record.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Culture and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny Commission held on 4 November 2024 be confirmed as a correct record.

The Chair is invited to make any announcements as they see fit. 

None

Any questions, representations and statements of case submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures will be reported.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

Any petitions received in accordance with Council procedures will be reported.

The Monitoring Officer reported that none had been received.

The Director of Finance submits a draft report proposing the Capital Programme for 2025/26.

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

As the reports on the Revenue Budget and Capital Programme were related, they were taken as one item.

The Director of Finance submitted reports detailing the proposed Capital Programme for 2025/26 and the proposed Revenue Budget for 2025/26.

Key points included:

• The medium-term outlook was the most severe ever experienced. The Local Authority, along with many other authorities, would face increasing difficulties with budget balancing. Some local authorities had already issued a Section 114 notice and,
• The aim of the strategy was to balance budgets up to and including 2027/28; if successful, the budget strategy would avoid the same outcome for the next three years. 
• The decade of austerity up to 2020 was an influencing factor, during this period services other than Social Care had to be reduced by 53% in real terms. This had substantially reduced the scope to make further cuts.
• There were also cost pressures which were not matched by an increase in income. These included Social Care, support for homeless households, and increased inflation.
• The Council were fortunate to have one-off monies available, however, following the Chancellor’s national budget in October, more constraints were anticipated.
• The Government understood the situation that councils were in, however, it was thought that new funding would be modest and a cut in ‘unprotected services’ which usually include local authorities would be expected in the period to 2028/29.
• There were five strands to the strategy:
  • Strand 1 - To release one off monies of £110m to buy time. This included £20m from earmarked reserves and £90m previously set aside to fund the current Capital Programme. This left a gap in funding for already approved schemes. Borrowing of £90m would be required which would cost the local authority £5m pounds in interest and debt repayments.  This would not usually be contemplated.
  • Strand 2 – Involves reductions of £13m from the approved Capital            Programme to reduce the amount of borrowing required.
  • Strand 3 – The sale of property to secure an additional £60m.  To use this for the budgets, permission is required from The Secretary Of State.
  • Strand 4 - To constrain growth in statutory services that are under demand-led pressure. Much work on this had already been done, cost growth had been reduced by estimates of £99m per year.
  • Strand 5 – To make ongoing savings to revenue budget of £20m per year.
• Savings required that were relevant to this Commission included £7.2m needed from Neighbourhoods and Environmental Services and £2.3m needed from Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment.
• The strategy was heavily reliant on one-off money to reach 2027/28, in which year a gap of £90m was expected.
• The strategy included risk as it was difficult to predict new pressures in social care or the housing crisis.  Lots of one-off monies were being used, as such, an unexpected cost of £5m would result in the use of £15m of reserves being needed unless more cuts could be found.  This was another reason why annual savings were important.
• Elements of the Capital Programme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106.

The Strategic Director of City Development & Neighbourhood Services submits a report to provide an update on fly-tipping issues across the city.  A slide presentation will also be given.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report to provide an update on fly-tipping issues across the city. A slide presentation was given (as included in the agenda pack).

Key points other than those in the slides included:

·       Initiatives included Ward Action Plans.  These were mini-projects within an area coordinated between City Wardens, Cleansing Services and Housing.  Private Sector Housing and Waste Management were also involved.  These could involve identifying issues at a particular time, also conducting cleanup days and door-knocking schemes.

·       With regard to investigations and fines, the opportunities to investigate were limited by a lack of identifiable marks.  Unidentifiable tips were still cleaned away for the public good.

·       Serious or repeat cases could be referred on to the EnviroCrime team.

·       When evidence was found by City Wardens, the person identified was asked for an interview.

·       Other authorities were increasing their fixed penalty notices.  This was discretionary to the local authority.

·       Match spending was done where necessary.

·       A positive effect was starting to be seen.

·       AI was being used along with CCTV to assist with enforcement as there is a need to prove tipping was done by a certain person.  Cars could be traced by DVLA records.

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

·       In response to a question about how fines and prosecutions were counted, it was explained that a City Warden would investigate an incidence.  If there was no evidence as to who was responsible, it would be removed by Cleansing Services.  If there was evidence, the person involved would be called in and if there was a prosecution then there may be a fine.  The figure on the slide was for both prosecutions and fines.

·       Data on the number of fixed penalty notices (FPNs) to businesses in comparison to households could be obtained.

·       It was clarified that a fine was the final stage of the process. 

·       People in St Matthews had been approached and it appeared as though many were unaware that leaving rubbish bags outside a bin was fly tipping.

·       People could be persuaded not to fly tip both through education and through fines in a ‘carrot and stick’ approach. 

·       With regard to points raised about fly tipping around recycling areas, it was explained that a balance was needed as people needed the opportunity to recycle correctly, but people also needed to be discouraged form tipping at these sites.  It was necessary to see if recycling sites needed to be there or if they invited fly tipping.

·       Bring Banks were beneficial to some communities but detrimental for others.  It was intended to encourage people to use them for household waste recycling.  It was accepted that they did not always work, and some had been removed.

·       There were a number of CCTV cameras across the city, including at the Brite Centre and Cossington Rec.  Cameras were deployed in problem areas to capture fly tipping.

·       Councillors challenged whether more city wardens would help combat fly tipping.

·       Leafleting could be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 107.

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submits a report providing an overview of Leicester Museums & Galleries’ Museum Engagement programme, which is funded by Arts Council England (ACE).

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submitted a report providing an overview of Leicester Museums & Galleries’ Museum Engagement programme, which is funded by Arts Council England (ACE).

The Assistant City Mayor for Culture, Libraries and Community Centres introduced the report and noted that the programme aimed to go out to residents rather than residents coming to the museums.  There were a number of buildings across the city where museum services were getting out and engaging with local residents, including Hamilton Library, the Brite Centre and Highfields Library.  This had generated interest amongst people which had in turn brought them in to engage with museums.  Leicester Museum and Art Gallery (LMAG) had been doing well in attracting investment, however, there was more to be done in terms of Councillors helping to get the message out, including through social media.  This programme was a cornerstone of the cultural strategy.

The Head of Arts and Museums and the Audience Development & Engagement Manager presented the report.

Key points included:

·       The Museum Service had been successful in obtaining funding from Arts Council England (ACE).  £1.2m had been awarded for 2023-26 and was currently being used for inclusive activities aimed at making museums  more relevant, involving more local people.  It had also funded fixed term posts to deliver activities to communities.

·       An additional year of funding had been applied for.  If this was successful it would run from April 2026 to March 2027.  Feedback from ACE had been positive.

·       The report gave a snapshot of the range of work undertaken.

·       Engagement with communities and audiences had been deepened across the city.  The aim was to increase participation, taking objects out to be enjoyed and for people to be inspired to take part in other activities.  An example of this was ‘Peppy the Polar Bear’ going to the Brite Centre and St Matthews Library. The team were focussed on engagement with objects that would otherwise be in storage.

·       Choice was important in so much as people having the opportunity to speak for themselves.  The ‘Popping to the Shops’ exhibitions and co-produced exhibitions were examples of this.  People could talk about their own histories and have their own voices.

·       Exhibitions on Narborough Road and Saffron Lane were in progress and would open in March.

·       Digital Engagement was breaking new ground, moving away from posters to new technology.  The social media and interaction had a large reach.  The service was a leading proponent of interactive labels.  This was a long-term investment; however, it was recognised internationally for pioneering.

·       People were encouraged to share their culture with people in communities.

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

·       Museum staff were praised, and it was recognised that bringing culture to the community was important.

·       It was particularly recognised that museums provided free, warm, safe environments for people to learn and have a free day out.

·       Museums were seen as the jewel in the crown of Leicester.

·       It was good to see young people  ...  view the full minutes text for item 108.

Members of the Commission will be asked to consider the work programme and make suggestions for additional items as it considers necessary.

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 19.09.