Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Thalukdar.

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

Members were asked to disclose any pecuniary or other interests they may have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Westley declared an interest in agenda item 15. Scoping Document – Housing Crisis in Leicester, that family members were council tenants.

Councillor Halford declared an interest in agenda items to be discussed that family members were council tenants.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, the interest was not considered so significant that it were likely to prejudice the Councillor’s judgement of the public interest. The Member was not, therefore, required to withdraw from the meeting.

The Chair announced that, as the scrutiny programme for 2021/22 was drawing to a close, he wanted to thank the Overview Select Committee Members for their work on the Committee. He also thanked each of the Committee Chairs for their work on the Committee, for leading varied and interesting programmes of work. He further noted there were still several pieces of task group and review work that were concluding.

The Chair thanked the City Mayor for his full participation with the Committee, along with Executive colleagues who had addressed the Committee when required. His thanks also went to all of the officers who had reported to OSC and the Commissions over the past year, and to Scrutiny and Democratic Support staff.

The Chair informed the meeting the annual report would now be compiled which would summarise scrutiny’s activity and outcomes throughout the year. He added that he looked forward to seeing scrutiny continue to examine key and emerging priorities and to carry on engaging with local decision makers, both within the City Council and beyond.

Thanks came from Members of the Committee to the Chair for the way he had conducted the meeting over the year.

The minutes of the meeting of the Overview Select Committee held on 10 February 2022 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 10^th February 2022 be confirmed as a correct record.

To note progress on actions agreed at the previous meeting and not reported elsewhere on the agenda (if any).

The Chair informed the meeting there were no actions arising from the last meeting that required an update on their progress, and several issues had been referred to future meetings, and captured in the current work programme.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any questions, representations and statements of case submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no questions, representations and statements of case had been submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any petitions received.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been received in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer submits a report that updates Members on the monitoring of outstanding petitions. The Committee is asked to note the current outstanding petitions and agree to remove those petitions marked ‘Petitions Process Complete’ from the report.

The Monitoring Officer submitted a report which provided an update on the status of outstanding petitions against the Council’s target of providing a formal response within three months of being referred to the Divisional Director.

The Democratic Support Officer circulated an update on a petition that had been completed since the publication of the report.

AGREED:

That the status of the outstanding petitions be noted, and to remove those petitions marked ‘Petition Complete’ Ref:21/11/03 and 21/12/01 from the report.

Mr Rupert Matthews, Police and Crime Commissioner will be present to provide an overview of his vision and priorities for the city.

Mr Rupert Matthews, Police and Crime Commissioner for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (PCC), was invited to address the Overview Select Committee about his work in the role to date and his priorities for the future.

Mr Matthews touched on the role of the PCC, what it was and wasn’t entitled to do, during which the meeting was informed that:

·         The role of PCC was to decide the ‘what’ and it was the role of the Chief Constable to decide the ‘how’ of local policing. The public held both the PCC and the Chief Constable to account. Operational matters were the decision of the Chief Constable.

·         The Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police and Crime Panel scrutinised the work of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC).

·         The Police and Crime Plan, which each PCC had to produce when they first took up office, was a living document and set out the broad parameters of what the PCC expected of the Chief Constable. The Plan was largely based on the elected PCC’s manifesto.

·         There were a mass of national guidelines, rules and regulations about what the police were / were not allowed to do, for example, the Home Office mandated how may officers should be licensed, trained and fully updated to carry firearms, which was not a decision that could be made locally, but had cost implications locally for training those officers and having the requisite number of weapons.

·         Mr Matthews then went on to pay tribute to Simon Cole, who had left his role as Chief Constable the week prior to the Committee meeting, a role he had held for nearly 12 years. He added Mr Cole had been a tower of strength for the police and community and would be very much missed.

·         It would be the PCC’s duty to recruit a new Chief Constable, the system for which was largely mandated by the Home Office, though there was room for local discretion and variation on how a Chief Constable was selected and recruited. The PCC would involve local elected representatives in the city and county to play an advisory role in the process as it was important the voices of elected representatives for the people in the city and county had an opportunity to be heard.

·         The Plan had been put out to consultation to the public, the P&CP and the Chief Officer Team of Leicestershire Police. Many changes had been made to produce the first draft of the Police and Crime Plan which was used to produce the final draft, and printed copies would be sent to the council over the next week or so.

·         The Peelian Principles still underlay the modern concept of policing by consent, for example, the police are the public, and the public are the police. The PCC said it was essential to draw recruits from as wide a selection of the public as possible, and that the police force is made up as near as possible that they were representative  ...  view the full minutes text for item 98.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submits a report which provides the Overview Select Committee with details of current community safety work around supporting a safer Leicester for women and girls. The report also highlights how programmes of work are being developed with respect to this agenda and put in place to enhance support for women and girls both at home and in public spaces.

The Committee is recommended to note the current work being undertaken on this agenda and comment on the proposed way forward identifying any additional steps that can be taken to address the issue of women’s safety.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services submitted a report which provided the Overview Select Committee with details of current community safety work around supporting a safer Leicester for women and girls. The report also highlighted how programmes of work were being developed with respect to this agenda and put in place to enhance support for women and girls both at home and in public spaces.

The Deputy City Mayor, Councillor Clair introduced the report which talked about the safety and women of girls. The report also updated on areas of work reported previously to the Committee on the night-time economy and Safer Streets (parks & open spaces), and provided information on Home Office funding to the OPCC and local authorities to address issues of crime and the fear of crime faced by women and girls.

Officers reported that the safer streets element on parks was identified by police based on highest crime and anti-social behaviour statistics, and eight parks and open spaces in the city were identified as needing intervention, and a programme of works was developed and completed, with the last few CCTV cameras having been installed, with city centre operators monitoring and recording footage from the cameras.

Members agreed with the focus on women and girls safety and asked if there was further progress on tackling issues in areas such as St Margaret’s underpass. They also highlighted that the need for education was paramount in changing the behaviour of men towards women and girls. Officers reported there was a large campaign planned around behavioural change.

Members also noted the reference to SIA registered door staff who were key in making women feel safer during the night-time economy but there was a lack of faith that women had in the door staff. It was asked if there was further work planned with SIA door staff for improving safety and confidence of women to approach SIA staff.

The agenda item was partially taken, but due to technical problems the Committee was unable to engage fully with the officers online. It was agreed to bring a further report back to a future meeting of the Committee that would also provide more detail on the provision of door staff in serving the night-time economy and respond to issue raised regarding the safety of St Margaret’s underpass.

RESOLVED:

That:

1.    The report be noted.

2.    An update report be brought to a future meeting to include detail around the provision of SIA door staff and training and respond to the issue raised regarding the safety of St Margaret’s underpass.

The City Mayor will provide an update on local vaccination uptake.

The City Mayor provided an overview of the latest picture of ward trends, including Covid-19 infection rates and vaccinations. The presentation is attached for information, and the following points were noted:

·         Delivery of vaccinations in the city had virtually stalled and was well behind what was being achieved more generally in England.

·         The delivery of vaccinations in two particular settings very worrying:

1/ delivery in schools. There were some exceptions but had vastly failed.

2/ elderly persons care homes, which was causing considerable concern.

·         There was no criticism of NHS management, but that there was a systemic failure as a result of how the Government had formed and reformed the service over many years.

·         There were concerns over the integrated care system, as it was very difficult to marshal the NHS locally to deliver vaccinations.

·         The science on the slides showed clearly geographical communities where levels of deprivation were significant and levels of vaccinations were very low, and that the Director of Public Health had spoken on the links between deprivation and vaccinations on several occasions.

The Chair noted that the pandemic was not over and the City Mayor and Director of Public Health were keen to emphasise the fact.

Members asked what the Council could do to encourage people to get vaccinated. The City Mayor stated that detailed discussions had been held with the NHS to discuss ways in which the Council could help them, for example, through using pharmacies, which had been used in one or two places in the city and had been very successful. Discussions had taken place with the NHS on the extent to which the model could be used elsewhere.

Councillor Kitterick, Chair of Health Scrutiny Commission, stated the Director of Public Health had provided a report with a full breakdown of areas of deprivation and vaccination take up. It had been noted the people had fallen ill with Covid quite evenly across the city, but the effect on those with Covid was noticeable based on health inequalities in the city.

The City Mayor, Councillor Cassidy and Councillor Kitterick would discuss the sharing of information to all Members.

RESOLVED:

That:

1.    The update be noted.

2.    The City Mayor, Councillor Cassidy and Councillor Kitterick discuss the sharing of the Report of the Director of Public Health and information therein on the links between the areas of deprivation and vaccination take-up.

The Overview Select Committee will receive a presentation at the meeting from the Assistant City Mayor for Jobs, Skills, Policy Delivery and Communications setting out a summary of progress in relation to the key strategic priorities and commitments of the Council. The Director of Delivery Communications and Political Governance submits a report summarising the priorities.

The Committee is recommended to comment on progress in relation to the key strategic priorities, and consider the potential to focus on specific areas in more detail as an opportunity for scrutiny work programmes for the new municipal year.

The Director of Delivery Communications and Political Governance submitted a report which summarised the strategic priorities and commitments of the Council.

The Overview Select Committee received a presentation at the meeting from Councillor Myers, Assistant City Mayor for Jobs, Skills, Policy Delivery and Communications, which set out a summary of progress against the key strategic priorities based on each theme for the period 2019 to 2023. The following points were highlighted:

·         Within the strategic priorities, there were 95 commitments.

·         The pandemic had inevitably impacted on the delivery and feasibility of some areas and there had been redirection of resources, though excellent progress had been made.

·         A summary position was provided:

o   56 (59%) were completed / embedded

o   29 (31%) were ongoing

o   6 (6%) had been delayed by Covid-19 - primarily building or Public Health related

o   4 (4%) were no longer appropriate or feasible, namely, establishing a local lottery, EV Taxi scheme, Unison ethical care charter (prohibitive in terms of cost) and the affordable undertaking service, as there had been government change and would expose the Council to financial risk.

·         A fair city – there was noticeable flexibility to provide financial support through various grant schemes and tax reduction scheme. Fuel poverty had been identified in the city long before it became a news issue. There was an anti-poverty focus including the launch of a strategy with a raft of measures. The Council had maintained its commitment over the holiday hunger programme, had invested in council estates, continued with the front wall improvement scheme, and provided jobs and skills investment with the upskilling of fashion and textiles in the city, and construction hub.

·         There had been a challenge around business engagement which was largely down to the pandemic, and the communication channels and relationship with the business community became largely administrative through the business grant schemes. Coming out the other side of the process the authority was much more aware of the wider business community, with more data available and relationships were being re-built.

·         Homes for all – £89million had been invested with a council homes improvement programme. The authority had reduced overcrowding in council properties, over 2,000 adaptations had been made to homes, and a private landlord licensing scheme was in progress. There had been further enhancement of homelessness services with wrap around services, and a positive working relationship with St Mungo’s was in place.

·         838 Council homes had been provided but there would be a struggle to meet the 1,500 target due an increase in the cost of land and pandemic impacts.

The Chair asked if the target of 1,500 homes would be achieved by 2023 at its end point. The City Mayor responded that he was frustrated that a deal previously proposed and discussed at OSC had fallen through, which had included as part of the mix the building of new and the purchase of some homes. He added that it had required the Council to rethink the mix of construction and other types of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 101.

The Deputy Director of Finance submits a report to the Overview Select Committee which is the third in the monitoring cycle for 2021/22 and forecasts the expected performance against the budget for the year.

The Committee is recommended to consider the overall position presented within the report and make any observations it sees fit.

The Deputy Director of Finance submitted a report to the Overview Select Committee which was the third in the monitoring cycle for 2021/22 and forecast the expected performance against the budget for the year. The Committee is recommended to consider the overall position presented within the report and make any observations it sees fit.

Amy Oliver, Head of Finance, provided the following information:

·         The current position was in line with the previous position reported to committee, showing an overspend £8.4m.

·         As had previously been reported there was a significant income loss as a direct consequence of COVID, particularly in City, Developments and Neighbourhoods.  The costs associated to the pandemic were manageable within the one-off sums the Council had set aside to support the pandemic.

·         It was noted Adult Social Care were forecasting an underspend of £7million which would be used to offset the overspend in Children’s Services. As an explanation for the underspend, the budget mostly comprised of the cost of packages for the care of individuals.  Each year, the cost increased due to increasing numbers of people receiving services, the changing needs of those already in receipt of packages and the contractual fee increases (essentially the increase in the national living wage and other price inflation). 

·         The Council had used a model for a number of years to set the budgets which has proved robust with actual gross package costs close to budget. The model was based on the trends of cost increases both from the increasing needs of people already receiving care and the growth in numbers newly receiving care.  Unsurprisingly the pandemic had a significant impact on these trends with greater reluctance to access services, in particular during the lockdowns and there were nearly 100 fewer people in residential care at the end of March 2021 compared to the start of the pandemic.

·         The impact of COVID in 2020 had continued into 2021/22. Whilst overall numbers receiving care at the start of 2021/22 was in line with the budget set, there had been fewer package cost increases then previous years and fewer people in residential care.

·         The cost pressures in SEN home to school transport related to the £1million saving built into the budget for 2021/22 in anticipation for a new framework contract being in place with fixed taxi charge rates at a unit rate.  Unfortunately, prior to the contract going live the providers refused to take on the individual contracts awarded at the new framework rate.  Therefore, the Council was left with no option but to abandon the framework.  A new contract was starting from mid-April with existing contracts being honoured until the summer term.  In addition, to the framework being abandoned the unit costs for SEN transport had significantly increased 26% higher than 2020. 

In response to Members’ questions, the following information was provided:

·         With regards to the total overspend of £8million related to one-off costs arising from the pandemic and continued losses of income, but were accommodated with monies set aside at last year’s  ...  view the full minutes text for item 102.

The Deputy Director of Finance submits a report to the Overview Select Committee to show the position of the capital programme at the end of December 2021 (Period 9).

The Committee is recommended to consider the overall position presented within the report and make any observations it sees fit.

The Deputy Director of Finance submitted a report to the Overview Select Committee to show the position of the capital programme at the end of December 2021 (Period 9). The Committee was recommended to consider the overall position presented within the report and make any observations it sees fit.

Amy Oliver, Head of Finance, presented the report and drew Members’ attention to the following:

·         The report contained two decisions:

o   St Margaret’s Gateway – an additional £800k to be funded from monies set aside for potential additional costs on current schemes associated with the Covid-19 pandemic.

o   Green Homes scheme – an additional £1.6million was being asked for to be funded from government grant.

Councillor Kitterick asked for a position update on Jewry Wall Museum which was costing £15million that covered the latest contractual procurement and financial issues. He also asked that updates be provided on Abbey Pumping Station and Leicester City Football Club planning decisions.

Councillor Clair, Deputy City Mayor responded, and confirmed that he expected that Jewry Wall would come within budget. He further informed those present that there had been some sickness and the requirement for officers to take leave within the Planning team. It was further reported there had been an issue regarding technology and equipment in planning. He added there was a commitment to providing more resources in planning and a progress report had been requested.

Councillor Kitterick welcome the opportunity to receive briefing note on the planning process and timescales taken when currently dealing with planning applications in light of delays.

The Chair noted the current position on the budget.

AGREED:

That:

1.    The current budget position be noted.

2.    An update report on the Jewry Wall Museum be circulated to scrutiny members that covered the latest contractual procurement and financial issues.

3.    A briefing note on the planning process and timescales taken when dealing with planning application be circulated to scrutiny members.

The Overview Select Committee is asked to receive and endorse the Scoping Document ‘Housing Crisis in Leicester” (Housing Scrutiny Commission).

The Overview Select Committee was asked to receive and endorse the Scoping Document ‘Housing Crisis in Leicester” (Housing Scrutiny Commission).

Councillor Westley, Chair of Housing Scrutiny Commission introduced the document. He stated that it was recognised that there was a housing crisis and welcomed what the Council was achieving to the best of its ability in providing affordable housing but stated that levelling up did not work.

The scoping document set out the purpose and aims of the review to look in the long term at purely social housing. It was recognised that the needs of the population in Leicester had increased, with impacts on health, education and working life, and a lack of a decent home for people led to complications.

The Chair of Housing welcomed Members who were not on the Housing Scrutiny Commission to give evidence and take part in the review as the issue was city-wide and would be a complex and challenging study. The working party would also need to look at the issue of available land, and how the Right to Buy policy had undermined the housing stock over the years and could not be sustained.

The Chair felt that it needed to be defined what a housing crisis was, but acknowledged the review was scoped in such a way that it did not cover everything. He suggested one thing that could be looked at further on was the impact it had on families and individuals without housing.

The Chair noted the review and endorsed it with a definition of housing crisis to be determined.

AGREED:

1.    That the Housing Scrutiny Review of the housing crisis in Leicester (definition to be determined) be endorsed.

The City Mayor will answer questions raised by members of the Overview Select Committee on issues not covered elsewhere on the agenda.

1.    Question from the Chair, Councillor Cassidy:

It goes without saying that we all want to do everything we can to support those suffering as a result of the perilous situation that has unfolded in Ukraine. Can the City Mayor outline the lines of support that the City Council and our partner agencies can provide in terms of distributing aid and in offering refuge to those fleeing the conflict?

The City Mayor responded to the question and made the following points:

·         He recognised it was an important question and all were aware of the unfolding tragedy as a result of Russian aggression. The city was proud of its past in supporting refugees and would support those fleeing Ukraine.

·         An online registration for the sponsorship scheme had opened and responses were being registered. It was noted the Home Office handling of the situation was far from enthusiastic and effective. The sponsors and guests were being asked to put themselves forward and be matched. Sponsors would be enhanced DBS checked.

·         There were a number of important functions along with the responsibility to safeguarding, checking properties, guests and sponsors, and checking accommodation.

·         Advice would also be provided with specialists, public health services, mental health services, and education personnel on hand.

·         School places would be found for children and employment sought for adults.

·         As part of next steps, council representatives would be meeting with Ukrainian community representatives and Association of Ukrainians in Britain.

·         The city was proudly diverse and there would be challenges but were not unsurmountable.

The City Mayor stated the Ukrainian community locally had been utterly brilliant, and he paid tribute to the work of Councillor Russell, Deputy City Mayor, who had been working with the Ukrainian community.

The Council was working to deliver immediate support needs and longer term needs for those that might be in the community for some time to come. Members would be kept fully briefed as the situation developed.

The Chair thanked the City Mayor, officers working on supporting the Ukrainian refugees, and Councillor Russell who was providing excellent care to the community. It was further noted that the generosity of the people of Leicester had been tremendous, with a van load of essential goods having left for Poland. Thanks were also given for Councillor Cank who was coordinating a response.

The City Mayor thanked Councillor Cassidy for his constructive and appropriate Chairing and scrutiny. Further updates on the situation in Ukraine and work with the community would be provided.

The current work programme for the Committee is attached.  The Committee is asked to consider this and make comments and/or amendments as it considers necessary.

The Committee will also receive an update on the position of outstanding scrutiny review and task group work.

The work programme for the Committee was noted.

There being no other items of urgent business, the meeting closed at 8.56pm.