Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, reminding them that this was a virtual meeting, as permitted under Section 78 of the Coronavirus Act 2020, to enable meetings to take place whilst observing social distancing measures.

At the invitation of the Chair, Members and officers present at the meeting introduced themselves.

The Committee noted that Councillor Thalukdar was present as a substitute member.

The Chair also advised that he would be taking items in a different order to that listed in the agenda.

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

Councillor Halford declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting, in that she and family members were Council tenants.

Councillor Joshi declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting, in that his wife worked for the Council.

Councillor Porter declared for openness that he previously had made public his concerns that green spaces in the city were being destroyed, (agenda item 9, “Draft Climate Emergency Strategy and Action Plan”, referred).

Councillor Thalukdar declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting, in that a family member was a Council tenant.

Councillor Westley declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting, in that family members were Council tenants.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct, these interests were not considered so significant that they were likely to prejudice the Councillors’ judgement of the public interest.  They were not, therefore, required to withdraw from the meeting.

On behalf of the Committee, the Chair thanked management, staff and volunteers for their hard work in addressing the Covid-19 crisis.  He also acknowledged the difficulty residents in the city had faced in a prolonged lockdown.  He asked them to ensure they stayed safe, thanking them for their perseverance.

The minutes of the meeting of the Overview Select Committee held on 28 July 2020 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Overview Select Committee held on 28 July 2020 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).

Further to minute 95, “Black Lives Matter”, it was suggested that Councillor Hunter, (Assistant City Mayor with responsibility for the Black Lives Matter project), be invited to the meeting of this Committee to be held on 3 December 2020 to update the Committee on her work. 

Members note that all other actions identified in the minutes were ongoing or completed.

AGREED:

That the Scrutiny Policy Officer be asked to invite Councillor Hunter, (Assistant City Mayor with responsibility for the Black Lives Matter project), to the meeting of this Committee to be held on 3 December 2020 to update the Committee on her work.

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, or statements of case had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any petitions received.

The Monitoring Officer advised that there were no petitions to report.

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 updating Members on the monitoring of outstanding petitions.

AGREED:

That the Monitoring Report be noted.

To receive and endorse the following report of a review carried out by a Scrutiny Commission:

Adult Social Care Workforce Planning: Looking to the future (Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission)

Councillor March, Vice-Chair of the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Commission, presented a report of the review “Adult Social Care Workforce Planning: Looking to the Future”, that she had led.

Councillor March stated her appreciation of the value of the adult social care workforce and explained that the report had shown that by 2035 there would be a need to employ 1.5 times more staff than currently.  The main recommendations of the review were that the Council should continue to pay workers at least the Living Wage, with contractors encouraged to do the same, and that the implementation of an ethical care charter should be expedited.

The Committee welcomed the report and congratulated those involved on the work that had been done. 

Challenges faced by the sector were recognised and it was questioned how these would be addressed.  For example, as many care workers were not British, what would be the impact of leaving the European Union?  Retention and shortages of staff also were issues, but were employers willing to invest in training and development for staff? 

Councillor March advised that nationally approximately 12% of the adult social care workforce were non-British nationals, but in Leicester this figure was nearer 4%.  With regard to training and development, anecdotal evidence suggested that there was a hierarchy due to a lack of parity of esteem between health and social care, with the former being more highly valued than the latter.  It therefore was hoped that establishing proper pathways for development would help those employed in adult social care feel more valued.

Members suggested that the current crisis arising from the Covid-19 pandemic provided a chance to develop more quality opportunities, such as apprenticeships, as recommended in the report.  It also was important that managers were appropriately qualified, which would help raise the profile of the sector and increase confidence in all those working in it.

In response to an enquiry from Councillors about how this authority could promote quality of service provision, Councillor March explained that a substantial quality assessment framework was in place, which ensured that the best possible quality service was received.

Councillor March noted that another concern was that a large number of people working in the sector were over 50 years old, so were beginning to approach retirement age.  A lot of young people did not remain working in the sector very long and often did not return once they left it.  It was felt that this was at least in part due to the imbalance of esteem between the health and social care sectors.  This was a national issue, but it was hoped that the recommendations in the report would help address the situation locally.

The Committee stressed the need to recognise the importance of care workers during the current Covid-19 pandemic.  One way of doing this would be to ensure that they received a full living wage, which highlighted the difference between the fees paid by those receiving the services and the lower wages received by those  ...  view the full minutes text for item 111.

The Director of Estates and Building Services submits a report presenting a draft three-year strategy for addressing the Climate Emergency declared in February 2019, along with a draft of the first iteration of a three-year action plan. 

The Commission is recommended to:

a)    Consider and comment on the drafts of Leicester’s Climate Emergency Strategy 2020 – 2023 (Appendix 1) and Leicester City Council’s Climate Emergency Action Plan 2020 – 2023 Version 1 (Appendix 2) to inform the completion of their development prior to their formal implementation through an Executive Decision by the Deputy City Mayor for Environment and Transportation;

b)    Note the extensive consultation and engagement undertaken in preparing the Strategy and the Plan, and the resulting mandate for an ambitious response to the Climate Emergency;

c)    Note the intention to actively encourage and support organisations in the city to join with the Council in taking action, including developing their own action plans; and

d)    Note the commitment made in the strategy to monitoring and publicly reporting on progress.

The Director of Estates and Building Services submitted a report presenting a draft three-year strategy for addressing the Climate Emergency declared in February 2019, along with the first draft of a three-year action plan.

Councillor Clarke, Deputy City Mayor – Environment and Transportation, introduced the report, thanking all involved for developing the strategy to this point.  These included:

·           An Expert Commission, formed during the consultation period, which would continue to provide support in the development of the strategy going forward;

·           The Climate Assembly, comprising 53 members of the public;

·           A Young People’s Climate Assembly had been formed;

·           Self-led groups also had participated, including several schools and public and private bodies and organisations;

·           The Council’s Economic Development, Transport & Tourism Scrutiny Commission; and

·           Council officers.

The Change Manager (Climate Emergency) explained that extensive consultation had been undertaken on the strategy and action plan through a Climate Emergency Conversation.  This had provided a strong mandate from people in the city to take forward the proposals.

It was noted that there was an ambition for the city to be carbon-neutral by 2030, ahead of the government target of 2050.  This would be addressed through six themes, as set out in the report, which were based on the key sources of greenhouse gas emissions generated by the city and Council, and areas for adaptation to climate change.  The strategy acknowledged that the Council did not have the powers and responsibilities to address all of these things on its own, but needed to work in partnership with others.

The Committee welcomed the boldness of the report and the clear proposals that would enable the city to set an example to others.  The involvement of the community and other groups in the preparation of the strategy and action plan also was warmly welcomed.

Members then made the following comments:

o    Would the water environment workshops for schools be delivered with a single type of school, or age group?  How would other schools be encouraged and enabled to benefit from these workshops?

Response from the Change Manager (Climate Emergency):

This information could be provided as the programme developed.

Response from Councillor Clarke:

The Council had the most successful eco schools programme in the country, working with over 100 schools of a wide range of types to promote a green school ethos.  The Council also had employed a dedicated officer for this work.

o    The suggestion of holding an international Healthy Cities Summit was welcomed, but it was questioned how people could be encouraged locally to engage in making Leicester a healthy city.  The city had a very diverse population, with a wide range of health challenges.

Response from Councillor Clarke:

Preparations for a Healthy Cities Summit had been well advanced before the restrictions imposed in response to the current Covid-19 pandemic were introduced.  As a result of these restrictions, the Summit had had to be postponed.

o    The proposal to create “touchdown spaces”, as part of the move by the Council towards agile working, needed to be reflected  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112.

A verbal update will be given at the meeting on the current situation regarding the Covid-19 pandemic.  The Committee is recommended to receive the update and comment as wished.

Directors gave verbal updates and the Committee made comments on the current situation regarding the Covid-19 pandemic, as set out below.

a)     Update from the Director of Public Health

The Director of Public Health advised the Committee that in total there had been 6,557 confirmed cases of Covid-19 between the start of the pandemic and 7 September 2020. 

116,168 tests had been processed through the Public Health England recording route, with an average of 670 tests being done per day.  There had been issues nationally with testing capacity, but a lot of work had been done maintain local test facilities and the benefit of this had shown in the results being obtained.

Since the start of the pandemic, 839 Leicester residents had been admitted to hospital in relation to Covid-19.  There had been 11 hospital admissions per week in August 2020 and over the last seven days there had been 10. 

There had been 278 deaths in the city where the person had tested positive for Covid-19 within 28 days of death.

At the end of August 2020 there had been 25.4 cases per 100,000 people.  There was a very sharp increase in numbers at the start of September 2020, but over the most recent seven days this had reduced to 100 cases per 100,000 people.  Nationally, there currently were 34.4 cases per 100,000 people.  In August, the city had had the 23rd highest number of cases in the country and although it currently had the 26th highest number of cases, the numbers were causing a lot of concern.

Door to door testing of city residents had been successful in keeping the number of cases down and would continue.  However, it was felt that the safety messages needed to be widened in communities, which would also help address the widespread increase in anxiety.

A very successful contact tracing system had been established in the Council.  However, cases being received from the national team were slightly older (over 24 hours), so were having to be pursued hard.

b)     Update from the Strategic Director Social Care and Education

The Strategic Director Social Care and Education reminded the Committee that the Council had a role in monitoring the Adult social Care market, as almost all provision was made externally.

There were 103 care homes in the city and they were all contacted by telephone once or twice a week, to ensure that they had the resources they needed, (for example, staffing capacity, personal protection equipment (PPE), or training).  During the pandemic, there had not been any point at which care providers had been genuinely at immediate risk of running out of PPE.

Providers registered through the Care Quality Commission could access PPE through the national portal.  Other providers could access PPE through the local authority, so the Council was making sure that those providers knew about this provision and could access it.

Officers also ensured that care homes had adequate staff, using bank staff when needed, though ensuring that these only worked in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.

The Director of Finance submits the first report in the monitoring cycle for the 2020/21 Revenue Budget, which also forecasts the expected performance against the budget for the year.  The Committee is recommended to consider the overall position presented within this report and make any observations it sees fit.

The Director of Finance submitted the first report in the monitoring cycle for the 2020/21 Revenue Budget, which also forecast expected performance against the budget for the year. 

The Director reminded Members that the forecast cost of the Covid-19 pandemic to the Council was £40million.  However, a lot of unknown factors remained, such as how long the current restrictions imposed in response to the pandemic would continue and whether people’s behaviours would change after the pandemic, (for example, whether they would return to leisure centres).  The impact on Council Tax collection, business rates and the longer term effect on the local economy also were unknown.

To date, £24million unringfenced government funding had been received by the Council towards meeting the cost of the pandemic, but it would be applying for further funding through the government’s income loss scheme.  The criteria for funding from this were complex, but it was thought that the Council could be eligible to receive approximately £10million. 

The Director of Finance advised that the budget gap could be met this year through the Council’s managed reserves strategy, but the financial position after this year was unknown, as the government was having to fund a significant national challenge.  It had been reported that a number of local authorities considered themselves to be close to no longer being economically viable, due to the impact on them of the Covid-19 pandemic.  The City Mayor confirmed that Leicester City Council was not amongst these, due to the effectiveness of its economic strategy over recent years.

In response to a question, it was noted that additional unbudgeted resources had been deployed in the Special Education Service in 2020/21 for Education Health and Care plan assessments and reviews.  This would enable the current backlog to be reduced, following which some additional resource would remain in that budget to ensure the situation did not arise again.

The Committee thanked officers for the important work being done managing the Council’s finances, noting that the government did not appear to fully understand the financial pressures currently faced by local councils.

AGREED:

That the overall position of the Revenue Budget 2020/21 presented in the report be noted.

Councillor Joel left the meeting during discussion on this item

The Director of Finance submits a report showing the position of the capital programme for 2020/21 as at the end of July 2020 (Period 4).  The Committee is recommended to consider the overall position presented within this report and make any observations it sees fit.

The Director of Finance submitted a report showing the position of the Capital Programme for 2020/21 as at the end of July 2020 (Period 4), explaining that there was some slippage in the programme due to the Coid-19 pandemic and resulting national “lockdown”.

The Director of Capital Projects confirmed that some sites had had to shut down during the pandemic, due to social distancing requirements.  As a result, it had been necessary to reschedule when various trades could be present on site, so some schemes had slipped.  In some cases, if they were not business critical, schemes had been moved back in the programme.

The Committee received the following responses to questions raised:

·           For which scheme was the Cank Street feasibility study proposed?

Response from the City Mayor:

A very successful link had been created between Town Hall Square and the area in which market Food Hall previously had stood (near Green Dragon Square).  The feasibility study was to consider extending that link through Green Dragon Square to Cank Street.

·           In addressing the city’s declared Climate Emergency, using natural gas was not an appropriate way forward.  Were the old boilers in Council houses being replaced with gas ones?

Response from the City Mayor:

The city had a very extensive district heating network, from which Council housing benefited.

·           The forecast completion date of Haymarket Hotel project appeared to have slipped.

Response from the City Mayor:

Funding for this project was a commercial investment and was considered to be a responsible use of revenue to obtain a good return in the future.

Response from the Director of Capital Projects:

The hotel was due to be completed in November 2020.  The site had been visited and progress reviewed approximately two weeks ago.  The development was on target, so currently there was no reason to think that this completion date would be missed.

·           How were the Jewry Wall Museum improvements progressing?

Response from the City Mayor:

Contractors were due to start on site in October 2020, as a lot of fitting out work needed to be done to the former Vaughn College to make it suitable for its new use as part of the museum.

·           Further information was requested on the funding held for the Waterside Primary School.

Response from the Director of Capital Projects:

Some funding was held by the Council for the purpose of undertaking a feasibility study on the project on behalf of the Department for Education.

·           Further information was requested on the Leicester North-West Transport Scheme. 

Response from the Director of Finance:

Further information was not available at the meeting, but could be circulated afterwards to members of the Committee.

AGREED:

1)    That the overall position of the 2020/21 Capital Programme be noted;

2)    That the Director of Housing be asked to make a presentation to the Committee at an appropriate time on the effectiveness of the district heating network, including the network’s contribution to addressing the city’s declared Climate Emergency and opportunities that could be available to extend the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

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

a)     Grants for Exit from Lockdown Expenses

Councillor Waddington asked the City Mayor the following question:

“On 24^th August the City Mayor invited Leicester VCS and Faith groups to apply for grants to enable them to exit lockdown and make their services sustainable in a Covid-safe manner. Can the City Mayor please provide an update on the allocation of this grant funding? Have any of our adventure playgrounds been successful in applying for grants from this fund to enable them to reopen safely?”

Response from the City Mayor:

Voluntary Action Leicester had received over 170 applications for funding for this purpose from a wide range of groups, including several playgrounds.

These applications would be assessed by Voluntary Action LeicesterShire over the next few days, but no decisions on funding had been taken yet.

b)     Ward Data on Covid-19 Cases

Councillor Westley asked the City Mayor when Councillors could, if possible, receive a breakdown of Covid cases in each ward.

Response from the City Mayor:

An update including a breakdown of cases on a ward basis would be circulated to Councillors on 25 September.  However, although it was interesting to know the number of cases on a ward by ward basis, it was more useful to have information on the number of cases by Lower Super Output Areas.  These were smaller than wards, so provided finer detail.

c)     Former Great Central Station Premises

Councillor Porter referred to the redevelopment of the former Great Central Station and the option that the Council had to take office accommodation there if it could not be let.  In view of the government’s directive to work from home if possible, Councillor Porter asked the City Mayor what was likely to happen to this development.

Response from the City Mayor:

The developer remained very confident that a tenant would be found for this building.  Rent in Leicester was slightly lower than in comparable cities and the city provided good access to London, which made a good offer for prospective tenants.  This would not change as a result of current working restrictions.

The meeting closed at 7.29 pm