Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting and, at her invitation, Councillors and officers introduced themselves.

An apology for absence was received from Councillor Dr Chowdhury.

An apology for absence also was received for Councillor Master, Assistant City Mayor for Neighbourhood Services, who although not a member of the Commission would usually attend its meetings.

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

Councillor Aldred declared an Other Disclosable Interest in the general business of the meeting, in that she was Secretary of the Community Association in Thurncourt Ward.

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

In response to a question, Members were reminded that they did not need to declare an interest at a meeting if that interest was already entered in the corporately held Register of Interests, although some chose to do so for clarity.

The Minutes of the meeting of the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission held on 12 May 2016 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

AGREED:

That the minutes of the meeting of the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission held on 12 May 2016 be agreed as a correct record, subject to the first line of minute 68, “Channel Shift Delivery Programme”, be amended to refer to the Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance, (not the Director of Finance).

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

a)     Channel Shift Delivery Programme (minute 68)

A further review of the Channel Shift Delivery Programme was programmed for November 2016.

b)     Transforming Neighbourhood Services – North West Area (minute 69)

A report on how voluntary groups would be supported under the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme would be included in the Commission’s work programme.

c)     Impact of Gambling on Vulnerable Communities Scrutiny Report Update (minute 70)

Members’ thanks were extended to the Scrutiny Policy Officer and all participants in the review of the impact of gambling on vulnerable communities.  A review of progress with the report’s recommendations would be made in one year.  In the meantime, the Vice-Chair, who had chaired the review, would discuss with the Scrutiny Policy Officer how the work could be taken forward.

Councillor Waddington, Assistant City Mayor for Jobs and Skills, advised the Commission that the recommendations in the report were being considered individually by the relevant service areas and officers were collating responses.  These responses would be considered by the Executive and then submitted to this Commission, to determine whether there were any specific matters that Members would like to examine in more detail.

The Head of Licensing and Pollution Control had been leading on this work, but would be leaving the employment of the authority in July.  A new lead officer would then be identified.

Members are asked to note the Terms of Reference for the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission, (attached).

AGREED:

That the Terms of Reference for the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission be noted.

Members are asked to note the membership of the Commission for 2016/17:-

Councillor Cutkelvin (Chair)

Councillor Gugnani (Vice-Chair)

Councillor Aldred

Councillor Chowdhury

Councillor Fonseca

Councillor Halford

Councillor Hunter

The Chair thanked Members for agreeing to join the Commission and noted that the range of experience held and Wards represented by members of the Commission would be very useful.

AGREED:

That the membership of the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission for 2016/17 be noted.

Members are asked to note the meeting dates of the Commission for the 2016/17 municipal year:-

Wednesday 6 July 2016

Wednesday 24 August 2016

Wednesday 5 October 2016

Wednesday 30 November 2016

Wednesday 25 January 2017

Wednesday 22 March 2017

Members noted that all of the Commission’s meetings would be held at 5.30 pm in meeting room G.02 at City Hall.

AGREED:

That the dates of meetings of the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission for the 2016/17 municipal year be noted.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any petitions submitted in accordance with the Council’s procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been received.

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 Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services, Director of Finance and Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submit a report providing an overview of the key areas and services related to the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission.  The Commission is recommended to note the report and use the information to help inform its work for the coming municipal year.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services, Director of Finance and Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submitted a report providing an overview of the key areas and services related to the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission.  Members were reminded that no budgetary information was included in the report and that, although no reference was made to service reviews, these would impact the work of the service areas and the Commission.

The Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services drew attention to the following points:

·           There were over 140 staff employed in Neighbourhood Services, which had a budget of approximately £5.1 million;

·           A major initiative in Neighbourhood Services was the Transforming Neighbourhood Services (TNS) programme, which was part of the Using Buildings Better initiative;

·           The Private Finance Initiative contract with Biffa for the collection, treatment and disposal of the city’s household waste ran until the end of 2028;

·           Cleansing services had a net budget of approximately £2.4 million and employed approximately 160 full-time employees; and

·           An important element of cleansing services’ work was responding to particular events in the city, such as cleaning after the parade for the reinterment of King Richard III and the recent parade to mark the success of Leicester City Football Club.

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance noted that:

o    There were no Heads of Service posts within her division, each team being managed by its own team manager;

o    The work of the Digital Media team included looking after the Council’s social media profiles; and

o    She was the Chair of the corporate Channel Shift Board and led the TNS programme.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support advised the Commission that the Channel Shift programme fell within her service area, as did management of the advice contracts held with partners.

Councillor Sood, Assistant City Mayor for Communities and Equalities, explained that:

§   Her portfolio included responsibility for how the Council worked with external partners and employees;

§   Work with employees was focussed through nine employees’ equalities groups;

§   Work with external partners was done through a variety of forums, such as the City Centre Board, the Faith and Community Forum, and the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Police Crime Panel; and

§   The portfolio also included responsibility for granting final approval to requests for funding through Ward Community Grants.

The Commission welcomed the work that was being done with employees’ equalities groups and noted that it was hoped that the Council could become one of the top 100 organisations in the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index.

The following comments were then made in discussion:

Ø  The wide range of work covered by this Commission meant that it needed to focus on the most important and/or urgent issues;

Ø  The City Wardens and Parks officers worked jointly to try, where appropriate, to deter people from feeding geese and swans if this was causing a littering problem.  If the amount of food put down by someone was greater than the number of birds,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11.

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submits a report providing an overview of the Using Buildings Better (UBB) programme.  The Commission is recommended to note the report and comment as appropriate.

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submitted a report providing an overview of the Using Buildings Better (UBB) programme, noting that:

·           The programme had been running since the end of 2015;

·           The Chief Operating Officer chaired the UBB Programme Board.  All directors were members of that Board;

·           Decisions were taken on individual work streams within the UBB programme as needed;

·           Before any decisions were taken, consideration was given to the impacts of those decisions.  The Corporate Equalities Lead officer advised when a full Equality Impact Assessment was needed;

·           The UBB programme did not include schools, but it was recognised that they could be affected by decisions taken under the programme;

·           The Council’s commercial portfolio, (approximately 250 buildings), also was not included in the programme;

·           It was hoped that the programme would lead to an improved customer experience, improve the Council’s carbon emissions and provide financial savings;

·           Consultation was underway on Transforming Neighbourhood Services (TNS) in the north-east of the city.  When this was completed, one area of the city remained to be considered under the TNS programme;

·           Channel Shift was included in the UBB programme, as this would help assess whether there was a need to keep customer service access points in any buildings;

·           There currently were 23 Children, Young People and Family Centres in the city.  Remodelling Early Help targeted services could include delivering some of these services, currently delivered at the 23 Centres, from other Council buildings, so this also was included in the TNS programme;

·           Consideration was being given to moving some Adult Social care staff to the office accommodation in Beaumont Leys Library in Beaumont Way;

·           Consideration was being given to the most appropriate service model(s) for the Council’s depots, workshops and stores, in order to identify the best future use of these premises.  No target had been set for reducing the number by a certain amount but, as set out in the report, financial savings were being sought through the UBB programme;

·           Disposal of the eight depots identified in the report would have little or no impact on staffing, as they were not staffing bases.  No staff would be lost as a result of the disposal of these premises;

·           Public consultation had not been carried out on the disposal of the eight depots identified in the report, as they were not open to the public and their disposal should not affect service delivery;

·           Following consultation with Youth Services officers, further consideration needed to be given to the future use of two buildings that were key to their activities;

·           In the West area, further work was needed under the TNS programme on the proposed community asset transfers of the Manor House Neighbourhood Centre and Braunstone Grove Community Centre; and

·           The disposal of surplus assets was a reactive work stream, which responded to decisions taken in other work streams of the UBB programme.

Some concern was expressed that young people had not been invited to a discussion on the impact of the closure of buildings  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

The Director of Finance submits a report providing a response to the risks and issues highlighted in an independently prepared report by the Social Welfare Advice Partnership (SWAP).  The Commission is recommended to note the report and comment as appropriate.

The Director of Finance submitted a report providing a response to the risks and issues highlighted in an independently prepared report by the Social Welfare Advice Partnership (SWAP).

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support introduced the report, explaining that the SWAP wanted to increase its profile and alert the Commission to the needs and experiences of people they worked with in the voluntary sector.  In considering the SWAP report, and the Council’s response to it, the Head of Revenues and Customer Support explained that:

·           This would be an annual report and would be presented to the Commission with the Council’s response;

·           The Council had had a contract for the provision of advice services with the SWAP for approximately one year;

·           Benchmarking was undertaken of this Council’s work against that of other authorities.  Most of the authorities comparted to were outside of London;

·           60% of appellants won appeals against the level of Personal Independence Payments awarded.  SWAP specifically monitored these because, as a new scheme, it was likely to generate appeals.  It had been anticipated that, as a result, there would be a higher demand for support for appeals, but this had not materialised;

·           Single people assessed as being ineligible for Job Seekers Allowance were unable to re-apply for it.  Many of these people therefore applied for crisis funding, as they often did not have family, or other support networks, to help them.  The numbers of people applying for crisis funding were fairly evenly divided between males and females;

·           In order to receive Housing Benefit, anyone not on Job Seekers Allowance had to prove they had no income;

·           Monitoring was done of whether people had access to IT and whether they had the knowledge to be able to use it.  All City Council libraries and Customer Service at Granby Street had dedicated IT facilities for public use and a referrals system was used for people needing to be shown how to use it;

·           The Department for Work and Pensions recognised that at least 5% of claimants would find it hard to access the IT help described above, so provision had been arranged to enable people identified as needing more intense support and was provided by Citizens Advice LeicesterShire.  For those who needed a little more help to increase their confidence using computers, one to one tuition could be arranged and referrals made on to adult learning courses;

·           Client behaviour was being monitored, to help Council staff and employees at the Job Centre+ understand what Universal Credit meant to people in real terms;

·           A leaflet was being prepared about debt advice.  This would include information on discretionary funds available from the Job Centre+;

·           The Council used its own experience to identify individuals who could benefit from referral to the Advice Leicester partnership;

·           It was anticipated that there would be approximately the same number of appeals lodged in relation to Universal Credit claims as currently were lodged regarding Job Seekers Allowance claims.  It was felt that the advice sector could cope  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

The Director of Finance submits a report providing an overview and brief history of the Council-funded Food Bank provision and forthcoming developments for the Emergency Food provision in the City.  The Commission is recommended to note and comment on the impacts and trends highlighted in the report and on findings and the updated food action plan as appropriate.

The Director of Finance submitted a report providing an overview and brief history of Council-funded Food Bank provision and forthcoming developments for emergency food provision in the City.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support introduced the report, explaining that:

·           There were approximately 22 emergency food outlets in the city.  This number could vary, because as outlets closed others opened.  However, there were fewer organisations providing this assistance than there had been three years previously.  Also, there were gaps in provision across the city, but it was hoped that the new network would make it possible to identify gaps and take action to minimise their impact;

·           The Council procured emergency food provision on a crisis basis.  The central provision was through Action Homeless, based in the Malcolm Arcade;

·           Action Homeless also was responsible for facilitating the Leicester City Emergency Food Partnership network.  This network encouraged organisations providing emergency food to act co-operatively;

·           Approximately 800 one-day food parcels were given out, along with approximately 2,000 3-day parcels across the city.  Recipients also could top up fuel cards, as crisis was linked to food and fuel poverty;

·           Food currently was sourced from food drives and the FairShare charity, but this was not sustainable.  For example, the cost of membership of FairShare doubled over the last few years, which made it difficult for food banks to raise the necessary funding;

·           Nationally, a community supermarket model was considered to be a good alternative to food banks.  Anyone identified as eligible would be able to shop there and buy food at up to a 70% discount;

·           Some of the funding needed to operate a community supermarket model of food distribution could be obtained from the operation of a café at the shop.  Advice also would be available in the café;

·           The possibility of establishing a community supermarket in the city would be explored with Action Homeless and a feasibility study would be undertaken during 2016/17.  As Action Homeless had only just started its contract with the Council, it was anticipated that feasibility options would be discussed within the next year;

·           A Food Strategy was being drafted; and

·           The key points for resolution set out in the report were very similar to those that had been raised over the last few years.  However, the sector now was more engaged with the process and understood the need for a co-ordinated approach, which should make it easier to address these points.

Councillor Waddington, Assistant City Mayor for Jobs and Skills, noted that there was no indication that the number of people needing crisis assistance would reduce.  Also, co-ordination was needed, as what food banks offered could vary greatly, as did the rules they operated under.  An additional consideration was that some people receiving food parcels could have no access to a fridge or freezer.

Councillor Waddington welcomed the idea of a community supermarket and café.  However, it could be difficult for volunteers to set up and run this type of enterprise, so a paid managerial presence probably would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

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

The Chair introduced the Commission’s work programme, stressing that this was not an exhaustive list of items.  Members were invited to pass any questions on items to the Chair, so that they could be responded to in future reports.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support noted that a re-procurement exercise would be undertaken during the year for the Social Welfare Advice contract.  This would include a review of what demand there was for the service and what was considered to be good advice.  Scrutiny by this Commission could be included in the re-procurement process.

The Head of Revenues and Customer Support noted that, before Council took a decision on the Council Tax Reduction Scheme, public consultation on proposed changes would be undertaken, hopefully from early August to late September 2016.  She therefore suggested that could be included in the Commission’s work programme.

AGREED:

1)    That the Chair liaise with the Head of Revenues and Customer Support to determine whether briefing sessions for members of the Commission should be held on the Social Advice Welfare Contract and the Council Tax Reduction Scheme;

2)    That consideration be given to establishing a Task Group with the remit of scrutinising whether buildings remaining with the Council under the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme are vibrant and that staff have the resources needed to provide an appropriate service to customers; and

3)    That the following be included in the Commission’s work programme:

a)     a review of the work being undertaken to combat fly tipping, including that by the City Warden’s service, as agreed under minute 10, “Portfolio Overview Report”, above;

b)     a report on the legacy of the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme, to be presented to the Commission in one year’s time, and in the meantime the Commission to continue to receive reports on that programme as it progresses, as agreed under minute 11, “Using Buildings Better (UBB) Overview”, above;

c)     the next annual report by the Social Welfare Advice Partnership and the Council response to this, as agreed under minute 12, “Response to the Leicester Advice Sector: A Report Outlining the Risk and Demands in the City”, above;

d)     a report on the re-procurement of the Social Welfare Advice contract; and

e)     a report scrutinising proposed changes to the Council Tax Reduction Scheme.

The meeting closed at 8.15 pm