Agenda and minutes

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting, reminding everyone 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 then introduced themselves.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Joel.

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

Councillor Broadwell declared a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in relation to the general business of the meeting, in that she was a sole trader running a business building and refurbishing electric bikes.

The minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Transport and Tourism Scrutiny Commission held on 19 November 2020 are attached and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

a)    19 November 2020

Further to minute 98, “Minutes of the previous meeting”, it was noted that:

The Director of Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership (LLEP) be invited to attend the next meeting and the Partnership’s Economic Recovery Plan be circulated to Members.

AGREED:

1.    That the Director of the Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership be invited to attend the next meeting and be requested to provide copies of the Partnership’s Economic Recovery Plan to all members of this Commission.

2.    That the minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Transport and Tourism Scrutiny Commission held on 19 November 2020 be confirmed as a correct record.

a)    19 November 2020

Further to minute 98, “Minutes of the previous meeting”, it was noted that:

That the Commission supported the provision of English classes for Speakers of Other Languages be extended to people without the usual documentation. Progress had been made looking at next year’s budget to identify funds for this.

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

The Monitoring Officer reported that no petitions had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on any Questions, Representations and Statements of Case received in accordance with Council procedures.

The Monitoring Officer reported that no questions, representations, or statements of case had been received.

The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation submits a report on the Transforming Cities Schemes – Connected Leicester.

Scrutiny commission members are requested to note the officer comments made in response to issues raised by them at the recent informal commission briefing. Further comments can be made at the Scrutiny meeting and these can be considered as the schemes are developed in detail prior to scheme delivery.

The Director of Planning, Development and Transportation submitted a report on the Transforming Cities Schemes – Connected Leicester.

The City Centre Streets Programme Manager introduced the report and noted the basis of the Transforming Cities Bid which was submitted just over one year ago to the Department for Transport (DfT) and was supported with a grant to LCC of £32.5m. The current scenario was that people were travelling more on a day to day basis and with plans to build 40,000 houses in and around the city and the increasing usage of private cars, it was noted that the city’s road network could not manage this level of usage and there was no space to provide increased capacity. However, if it were possible to accommodate an increased capacity, this could lead to more pollution and a reduction in road safety amongst other concerns. The view was that it was therefore necessary to reduce congestion, improve access for all and find ways of improving air quality by providing good alternatives to car usage through public transport and active travel modes. Better public transport was required but this would also need to have reliable service times. To help this situation the increase of cycling and walking would also be promoted.

During the briefing session recently held with Members and Officers, three schemes were considered:

·         A6 Abbey Lane/ St Margaret’s Way - improving bus use down that corridor and significant improvements for cyclists and pedestrians.

·         Melton Road scheme – improvement for buses.

·         Anstey Lane scheme – some improvement for buses, a bus lane and a bus only road between Beaumont Centre and Anstey, in addition to walking and cycling provision along the entire route. It was anticipated that the section which would be provided imminently was the section of Anstey Lane from Buckminister Road towards the outer ring road and further linkages which were being looked at in more detail considering various options to provide the best facilities possible.

The following points were then made in discussion:

·         A query raised at the briefing session as to why all the TCF schemes were taking place in the West and not the East of the City and it was further reiterated at this meeting that South of the city also required development.?

Response from the City Centre Streets Programme Manager:

It was responded that with the resources which were available, it was better to focus in one particular area. Furthermore, DFT wanted to look at specific areas, however future bids for more funding were anticipated to enable expansion of the work in other areas.

·         Action on a larger scale was required including greater investment and support from central government.

Response from the City Centre Streets Programme Manager:

Further support was required, either direct or through strategy from central government.

·         The report noted the increase of people cycling and walking however there were concerns about the bus usage.

Response from the City Centre Streets Programme Manager:

As a result of Covid-19,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 115.

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Investment submits a report to provide details of the impact of COVID-19 on the Adult Skills and Learning Service, the service’s initial response in the 2019-20 academic year and the impact on the Autumn 2020-21 programme.

Members of the Commission are recommended as follows;

1)    That the successful transition to online and distance learning is noted and the service staff commended for their commitment and hard work in challenging circumstances.

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Investment submitted a report to provide details of the impact of COVID-19 on the Adult Skills and Learning Service, the service’s initial response in the 2019-20 academic year and the impact on the Autumn 2020-21 programme.

The Head of Adult Skills and Learning Services presented the report and noted the efforts of addressing the impact of Covid-19 on the service. Enrolment figures were strong at the beginning of the academic year 2019-20 and following lockdown most courses still continued but in a virtual format and some also moved to an informal model. Due to digital exclusion factors including lack of confidence, this caused for a decrease to 60% of people that continued on the course however some people who didn’t engage before were now engaging due to this online option. Following OFSTED’s visit in September, a report was received which gave positive feedback. Another impact of the pandemic were the required venue changes and 2 metre social distance restrictions which restricted class sizes at the beginning of the 2020-21 academic year. Many positives derived from online and distant learning and it was therefore anticipated that this aspect would be retained moving forward. However, many learners still preferred the classroom option. The financial implications to the service remain unclear however the Government announced expansion of free level 3 qualifications. Plans for September courses had commenced.

The Commission welcomed the report and made the following points during discussion:

·         A Member of the Commission asked for clarification of the mechanism whereby the government could request back funds for underperformance. What was these percentage in previous years, and could these claw back decisions be appealed?

Response from the Head of Adult Skills and Learning Services:

The percentage of fund received for each learner dependant on the chosen course, their achievement and progression was explained. It was further noted that if the learner completion amount was under 97% of allocation, the government could claw back some of the funding.

·         Are the Council able to provide money to help people get on courses and reskill, for example to be able to get into employment for construction work?

Response from the Head of Adult Skills and Learning Services:

The new Textiles Training Academy launching later in the year would support individuals looking to work in fashion and textiles sector.

Response from the Head of Economic Regeneration:

Funding had been secured from CITB to establish a specific sector focussed training initiative for the construction sector which would be based at Ashton Green. Working with specialist training providers this would help provide people with the basic skills required for entry level to gain a specific qualification. Furthermore, work was taking place collaboratively with a range of construction companies and this would bring together businesses to target skills and would be bought forward later in the year. This could also be targeted to particular groups such as women and Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) communities.

·         Scale of Operations?

Response from the Head of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 116.

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submits a report to outline the research undertaken by the City Listening Project team over the previous 12 months and summarise the key findings and recommendation relevant to this committee.

The Commission is recommended to;

1)    Note the contents of the report, in particular the findings of the research project and the recommendations (both local and national).

2)    Endorse the recommendations in principle, subject to any comment and/or revisions.

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submitted a report to outline the research undertaken by the City Listening Project team over the previous 12 months and summarise the key findings and recommendation relevant to this committee.

The Assistant City Mayor for Communities, Equalities and Special Projects introduced the report and noted the importance of this work in terms of equalities and giving women in Leicester a voice. Leicester was one of three cities awarded funds to carry out this project to research women’s position in the city. The project which had now concluded, was jointly carried out with the Neighbourhoods and Equalities teams. The research focussed on identifying barriers to equality and women’s achievements in diverse communities of Leicester and to gain their view as to what solutions would work for the challenge’s women faced on a day to day basis. These very valuable insights and dialogue were used to help produce recommendations for local and national government. Department management teams had been enthusiastic about taking forward the recommendations and also added some of their own recommendations in areas of work that they would like to see further developed. For Leicester City Council (LCC) all the recommendations taken forward would be reported back through the equalities action plan.

Area Development Manager for Neighbourhoods and Environmental Services added that there were two ways of using this research; the report had direct recommendations however some projects were using the research as evidence to better other works/ projects. The government had recently informed the service that they would like to make contact with some of the stakeholder groups who engaged with LCC during their research, to ask further questions in relation to childcare and childcare provision.

The Commission welcomed the project and made the following points during discussion on the report:

·         Will the equalities action plan then be incorporating or taking forward many of the recommendations that were included in the report?

Response from Area Development Manager for Neighbourhoods and Environmental Services:

Once the current vacancy in the Equalities Manager post had been filled it would be in the equalities plan to ensure that the recommendations were followed up. This would ensure the longevity of the project and also look at more research outside of the recommendations.

·         Concerns were expressed for the safety of women especially in dark areas, can the streetlights be brightened?

Response from the Director of Planning, Development and Transportation:

The service carried out equalities impact assessments on all projects which considered all aspects of equalities including those that related to women. For instance, lighting matters, Leicester City had a good network of LED lighting which served the community and allowed for lights to be altered depending on safety concerns.

·         How do we influence workplace and flexible working?

Response from the Head of Economic Regeneration:

It was noted that this team managed the Employment Hub service which involved working with businesses to encourage them to recruit people into their workforce. When developing employment skills plans with businesses, it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 117.

The Director of Finance submits the following reports which set out the City Mayor’s proposed Draft General Fund Budget 2021/22 and Draft Capital Programme 2021/22.

Link to the Draft General Fund Budget 2021/22: https://tinyurl.com/y4exsrz9

Link to the Draft Capital Programme 2021/22: https://tinyurl.com/y6pkudkz

The Commission is recommended to pass any comments to the Overview Select Committee as part of its consideration of the report before it is presented to the Council meeting on 17 February 2021.

The Director of Finance submitted the reports which set out the City Mayor’s proposed Draft General Fund Budget 2021/22 and Draft Capital Programme 2021/22.

The Deputy Director of Finance introduced the Draft General Fund Budget report, explaining that this year’s budget had been set in a time of extreme uncertainty. The pandemic had hit, after dealing with 10 years of severe funding cuts of over £100m government funding. At present, the full extent of spending which would result from the pandemic restrictions was not known and some services may need to be reshaped to best meet the need of the new environment when the pandemic was over.

The government had now published the draft finance settlement for local government. This however was published after the publication of Leicester’s draft budget report and therefore the figures in the final report would be subject to some limited change.

It was explained that this year the budget was a one year stop gap budget, as it was unclear as to the ongoing impact of the pandemic, on spending and on the economic downturn. There had been minimal changes to the budget for 21/22 and no further information had been received from government regarding the budget beyond this period.

The Deputy Director of Finance noted that significant amount of funds still needed to be provided for Social Care which included £10m for adult social care and of this, the government only provided £3m. In order to contribute to this gap, the government proposed that the Council increase Council Tax by an additional 3% which would raise £3.6m but would still result in a shortfall of funds. Leicester City Council along with other councils, were still awaiting the social care funding review. Members’ attention was drawn to the table on pg. 5 which set out how the draft budget was balanced with the use of £20m of reserves. However, the Council’s ability to use reserves was declining. Substantial savings would need to be made to balance the budget in future years.

Comments received from Members of this Committee would then go to the Overview Select Committee and subsequently Full Council 17 February 2021.

Following comments from Members of the Commission, officers provided the following responses:

·         Concerns that it was the wrong time to put pressure on people with an increase in Council Tax and as reported the adult social care precept would only raise £3.6m which would not be sufficient for the gap. It was queried also as to why the Council were investing in specific named projects.

Response from the City Mayor:

The difference between the Capital fund and the draft General Fund Budget 2021/22 was clarified. It was confirmed that the investment of some of the Council’s capital resources had been used to enable the regeneration of the city and to ensure a continued revenue stream into the future which did have a positive impact into the Council’s position with regard to their revenue budget.

The City Mayor noted that he  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

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

No questions were submitted.

The meeting closed at 6:46pm.