Agenda item

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 programme 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. 

 

The Head of Neighbourhood Services drew the Commission’s attention to the following points:

 

·           This service area was responsible for the Transforming Neighbourhood Services programme and had been working with other organisations and groups on the future use of neighbourhood buildings.  All six areas of the city had now been reviewed under this programme; and

 

·           Neighbourhood Services had high levels of customer contact, with over 2 million usages of facilities each year.  Officers also provided support for ward community funding and meetings.

 

Members raised some concerns that applicants for ward community funding were unable to save their on-line application form, so did not have a record of what they had submitted.  Other issues about this funding also had been raised with Members, so it was suggested that the Head of Neighbourhood Services meet with interested Members to identify these issues and assess how they could be addressed.

 

The Assistant City Mayor – Communities and Equalities advised the Commission that the bidding process for ward community funding was followed carefully and was kept under review, as it was recognised that even small amounts of funding could make a significant difference to the applicants.

 

The Head of Standards and Development advised the Commission that:

 

o    One priority for Neighbourhoods and Environmental Services was to continue with enforcement campaigns where needed.  This included a programme of visits to businesses to ensure they had appropriate waste disposal arrangements as one of the actions being taken to reduce fly-tipping;

 

o    A large number of CCTV cameras were being replaced across the city with digital CCTV cameras.  These would be managed through the new control room at the Council’s data centre, which was a new, fit-for-purpose modern facility.  The replacement programme was likely to be completed in the late summer of 2018;

 

o    A Single Smoke Control Order had been introduced across the city; and

 

o    The Noise and Pollution Control teams continued to undertake programmed and ad hoc inspections.

 

During discussion on this part of the report, officers confirmed that this was the first full review of CCTV in the city.  During the CCTV camera replacement programme, only a few locations of cameras would change.  It was suggested that cameras should be installed at all pedestrian crossings, but officers advised that cameras were positioned where it was felt there was a need.  They were unlikely to be moved once in position, unless this was triggered by information received from the Police or the public, or something seen by an operator.  Live and retrospective viewings were possible with the cameras.

 

Strict regulations governed how CCTV could be used and the Council was very aware of data protection issues, but a key element was work being done with the Police.  If camera operators witnessed incidents they were able to contact Police dispatchers via radios kept in the control room and through the City Watch scheme.  Similarly, if the Police had any concerns, they were able to contact the operators to request surveillance via the cameras.

 

The replacement cameras would have the ability to focus in on smaller areas, such as a door way, or someone moving across an area.  From this, it would be possible to see things such as people coming and going from particular addresses, or loitering.  Officers stressed that regulations required this sort of use to be appropriate and proportionate to the situation under investigation.

 

Members were advised that the Council followed established criteria when considering the location of mobile CCTV cameras and liaised with the relevant Ward Members to help address local concerns, such as transient anti-social behaviour, including activities such as fly tipping.  Seventeen mobile cameras currently were deployable city-wide, but following the review of CCTV it was hoped that this number could be increased to 30. 

 

The Head of Regulatory Services outlined the work undertaken in his service area, noting the following:

 

§   Services within this area currently were being reconfigured and consolidated following a recent spending review;

 

§   Every year, over 14,000 inspections and compliance visits were made and approximately 7,500 licences were issued;

 

§   A long-term project for Regulatory Services would be responding to issues raised by the fire at the Grenfell Tower block of flats in London.  This included responding to the Hackett Report, produced following the fire, which established new ways for local authorities to work with the Health and Safety Executive in relation to high-rise accommodation;

 

§   The Council’s Gambling Policy and its Taxi Strategy would be reviewed this year; and

 

§   The implications for importers and exporters of Britain leaving the European Union, (for example, in relation to product, food or environmental safety), were being monitored.

 

In response to a question, the Head of Regulatory Services advised the Commission that, as part of the European system of regulation, the Council received alerts about products imported and exported, (for example, identifying those considered to be unsafe).  Consequently, when Great Britain left the European Union, the country would have to establish its own system of regulation.  This was being developed, but the country’s first line of defence was its border.  For example, Leicestershire County Council staff worked at East Midlands Airport checking and intercepting goods arriving in the country.  The Leicester and Leicestershire Enterprise Partnership currently was considering what the impact of leaving the European Union was likely to be.

 

In addition to this, information could be received from sources such as complaints or enquiries received that enabled an importer or exporter to be identified.  Where needed, the Council co-operated in cross-boundary working with neighbouring authorities.

 

The Director of Finance introduced the work of the Finance Division, (which included IT), explaining that:

 

Ø  The Web team was responsible for ensuring that the Council’s website was available and was safe and secure, but was not responsible for content;

 

Ø  Approximately 55 staff were employed on the Customer Service Line.  On average, they handled approximately 45,000 telephone calls and 6,000 e-contacts per month;

 

Ø  The number of face-to-face contacts in Customer Services had reduced from approximately 10,000 per month in April 2017 to approximately 2,000 per month in April 2018.  The introduction of self-service scan stations had had a significant effect on achieving this reduction, as people could “self-serve” and use these to prove their identity, rather than having to wait for a member of staff to photocopy documentation;

 

Ø  The Finance Division processed approximately £125million of benefit claims for approximately 30,000 claimants per year.  Although the grant paid to the Council for the administration of Housing Benefit claims had reduced by 50% since 2010, the case load had not reduced;

 

Ø  £130million of council tax and £140million of business rates were collected annually.  The Council consistently achieved its targets of a 95% collection rate for council tax and a 97% collection rate for business rates; and

 

Ø  The national vote for Great Britain to leave the European Union had resulted in a big increase in the number of requests received by the  Council’s welfare advice providers for immigration advice.

 

In response to a question about the level of discretionary payments following the roll-out of Universal Credit in the city, the Director of Finance advised that, although discretionary housing payments funded by the Department for Work and Pensions currently were consistently approximately £1.1million per year, they would reduce in future years.  However, the Council’s own discretionary funding had been retained at the same level as previously until approximately 2022, at which time a further review of discretionary funds would need to be undertaken, as the Council’s own funding would be depleted.  It was anticipated that, as people moved on to Universal Credit, the number of people on benefits would reduce, so the Council should need to employ fewer staff to process them.

 

Members noted that, under the provisions for housing benefit, recipients could ask for rent to be paid directly to the housing provider.  However, when asked on completing benefit claim forms if they had housing costs, some people who previously had had housing benefit paid directly to their provider stated that they did not have housing costs.

 

To alleviate this situation, work had been done by officers to identify potentially vulnerable households from the Council’s records and offer them support.  The Council generally had good relationships with small private sector landlords, so was able to gain information from them on vulnerable households they were aware of.  This had been discussed at the meeting of the Housing Scrutiny Commission held on 25 June 2018.  The relevant report and minute would be circulated to members of this Commission for information.

 

Members reported some telephony problems when contacting the Council about housing issues.  The Director of Finance confirmed that the Council was aware of these.  In the longer term, a key project was to move away from telephone contact, but at present the computer system used by Housing Services did not facilitate this.

 

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance concluded consideration of this report by introducing the service areas within her division relevant to this Commission’s remit.

 

AGREED:

1)    That the overview of the key areas and services relating to the Neighbourhood Services and Community Involvement Scrutiny Commission be noted;

 

2)    That the Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services be asked to submit a report to this Commission at an appropriate time on the use of CCTV cameras in the city, this report to include information on how decisions are taken on where to site CCTV cameras;

 

3)    That the Head of Neighbourhood Services be asked to meet the Chair and Councillor Waddington, along with any other interested members of the Commission, as soon as possible to discuss the way in which ward community funding is working and how issues can be addressed;

 

4)    That, following the meeting referred to under 3) above, the Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services be asked to submit a report to the next meeting of this Commission on ward community funding procedures, this report to include reasons for weaknesses in applications bids and how potential applicants can get support before making an application;

 

5)    That the Director of Neighbourhood and Environmental Services be asked to arrange a visit to the CCTV camera team when it has relocated to the new data centre, to enable members of the Commission to gain an understanding of how the CCTV camera system operates;

 

6)    That the Scrutiny Policy Officer be asked to circulate the information considered at the meeting of the Housing Scrutiny Commission meeting on 25 June 2018 regarding rent debt management in relation to Universal Credit and the minute of that discussion.