Agenda Item no.______4_____
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY
Minutes of a meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 26 June 2012 in
the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 9.30 am.
Members Present:
Committee:
Mr E Seward (Chairman)
Ms V R Gay
Mrs A Green
Mr P W Moore
Mr J Perry-Warnes
Mr B Smith
Mr N Smith
Mr R Smith
Mr P Terrington
Officers in
Attendance:
The Chief Executive, the Corporate Director, the Head of Financial
Services, the Head of Customer Services, the Policy and Performance
Management Officer, the Housing Services Manager, the Planning Policy
and Property Information Manager, the Technical Accountant, the North
Norfolk Learning Skills and Project Manager and the Scrutiny Officer.
Members in
Attendance:
Mrs A Fitch-Tillett, Mrs P Grove-Jones, Mr P W High, Mr K Johnson, , Mrs
A Moore, Mr W Northam, Ms B Palmer, Mr R Price, Mr R Shepherd, Ms V
Uprichard and Mr D Young.
Democratic Services Officer (AA)
18 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds, Mr B Jarvis and Mr R Reynolds.
19 SUBSTITUTES
Mr R Price for Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds and Mr R Shepherd for Mr R Reynolds.
20 PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received.
21 MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 23 May
2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
22 ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None received.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
23 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
None received.
24 PETITIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
None received.
25 CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTER REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE BY A
MEMBER
None received.
26 RESPONSES OF THE COUNCIL OR THE CABINET TO THE COMMITTEE’S
REPORTS OR RECOMMENDATIONS
The Chairman said no response had been received in respect of providing a temporary
extra resource to deal with enforcement matters in the Planning Department. He asked
the Scrutiny Officer to follow this up.
27 THE FORWARD PLAN AND MANAGEMENT OF COUNCIL BUSINESS
At the meeting between the Leader, Chair of Overview and Scrutiny and Chief
Executive, it had been decided that the Debt Management Annual Report would not be
reported to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Outturn Report which was on
today’s agenda was integral to it so that any matters which Members wish to bring up
they could do so then.
A further workshop on housing policy would take place before Full Council on 25 July
2012.
28 LEARNING FOR EVERYONE PRESENTATION
John Morgan, the North Norfolk Learning Skills and Project Manager and Julia Knight,
IAG Worker L2 Practitioner made a PowerPoint presentation on ‘Learning for Everyone’
(attached at Minutes Appendix A).
Questions and Discussions
a) John Morgan said there was a need to raise the profile of what the team did and to
engage with more people. The team was launched in 2002 so today’s presentation was
a 10th anniversary celebration.
b) Mrs A Green asked whether the Team went into schools to advise. John Morgan
said that some work was done with schools, but the Team’s main focus was with the
over 19s as this was who access funding was for.
c) Ms V Gay said the Team’s work made a huge difference to people’s lives.
d) Mr P Moore asked whether any help was given with transport to those who lived in
rural areas in order to access training. John Morgan said transport was a major
issue. The Team tried to provide a service in the District and some work had been
carried out in outlying villages as part of the Leader Plus Project. It was a balancing
act to make the best use of resources and this limited what could be achieved. The
focus on market towns and working with children’s centres and Victory Housing Trust
provided some help towards child care costs. A maths course had been run at North
Walsham library and a series of employability classes was also planned for the team.
More work could be done but it was dependant on resources. Julia Knight added that
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
LEARNING FOR EVERYONE PRESENTATION
(Continued)
transport was a problem but the Team had developed relationships with
organisations, for example, the Job Centre and been able to secure funding for
transport.
e) The Human Resources Team at the Council had been made aware of Learning for
Life services. In the last two years some former employees had found work.
f) In 2011 the Team had dealt with over 600 people, of whom 60-65% were
unemployed of which 90 (25%) had been helped back into work. The Team worked
closely with voluntary services which was the appropriate next step for some people.
They worked with a wide range of clients for all abilities. They also worked with
graduates and helped them to secure employment, although most clients did not
have good qualifications to start with.
g) Mr P Terrington asked whether there was a network of educational providers. John
Morgan replied that the Team dealt with cases as and when they could get resources
and to match need. Their approach was to build up the local network, but there were
not many providers who could consistently provide in North Norfolk. Part of the
Team’s job was to be aware of what was available locally.
The Chairman thanked John Morgan and Julia Knight for their presentation. He asked
Members to reflect on the problems of organisations who were contracted to provide
education services but, for whatever reason, were not delivering in North Norfolk. The
Committee might wish to invite the team back at a later date to discuss this.
29 NORTH NORFOLK
INFRASTRUCTURE)
HOUSING
STRATEGY
2012
–
2015
(HOUSING
AND
a) The Housing Manager said that this was the first of the following three Housing
Strategy documents which was being presented and was in line with the Council’s
objectives:
• Supporting the delivery of new homes and infrastructure
• Making the most effective use of the existing stock
• Supporting independence
This report was the first of the documents and considered the context within which
new housing would be delivered across the District and identified that the Localism
Act 2011 and the new National Planning Policy Framework were enablers which
would support a new more flexible and progressive approach to ensure the delivery
of more market and affordable housing. The document contained a detailed action
plan which set out specific actions to be taken to ensure the delivery of more
homes.
b) The Strategy had resulted in a lot of discussion at the Housing Workshop the
previous week so that only the first two parts of the intended presentation had been
covered. A further workshop would be arranged to cover the third part. This would
happen before Full Council met on 25 July. In response to a question on whether
the Council’s housing policy should be revisited to see if it was still appropriate, the
Planning Policy and Property Information Manager said he was looking to provide
professional advice on this and from there the Council could review its position.
Officers were trying to establish a process for providing flexibility within the existing
framework.
c) In response to a point regarding the need for flexibility regarding housing targets, the
Housing Manager advised that it was subject to viability. Work was being
undertaken on reviewing our approach to viability, including ideas which would give
more value to a developer and the point at which a dwelling was affordable.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
NORTH NORFOLK
INFRASTRUCTURE)
HOUSING
STRATEGY
2012
–
2015
(HOUSING AND
(Continued)
d) Mr P Terrington considered that even if the Council built many houses in North
Norfolk, many people would be unable to buy or rent them at present. He was
interested in ideas such as the Council releasing resources for loaning. He was
informed that Officers hoped to present more on this to Members at the workshop
and that detailed discussions had already been held with providers in North Norfolk,
one of whom was very interested in looking at a possible strategy which would
include loan provision.
e) Mr B Smith suggested repeating some exercises which Members had undertaken at
a previous workshop in 2007.
f) The Strategy period was 2012 – 2015 but the work had already started. Detailed
discussions had been held with housing providers in North Norfolk and it was hoped
to bring a paper to Members in the Autumn on using the Council’s own resources to
support delivery.
g) Mrs V Uprichard said there had been some concern expressed at the building of
market houses on exception sites as she considered there was not a shortage of
houses to buy in North Norfolk and exception sites were intended for local people
with housing needs and for affordable housing. The Housing Manager responded
that there was a difference in opinion as to whether market dwellings were desirable.
The means of delivering affordable housing was being looked into but there was a
lack of funding and the Council could no longer give grants. It was considered,
however, that market houses could be provided within the current framework in so
much as that they enabled the affordable housing to be delivered.
h) Mr D Young said people were concerned about the local lettings policy and he
asked what was the timescale for this to be reviewed and how much the Council
was constrained by national rules and regulations. The Housing Manager explained
that it was hoped to take this forward in September as the second part of the
Strategy. Counsel advice had been sought on what flexibility the Localism Act
would give the Council. Officers felt that 10% of lettings could be let through the
Local Lettings Agreement.
i) In response to a question from Mr N Smith regarding S106 money, the Head of
Financial Services said that a developer would sell a property for what he could
achieve, which would certainly not be less than he thought it was worth. The Chair
and Vice-Chair suggested that, for Members to understand this topic better, it would
be worth repeating some exercises which Members had undertaken at a previous
workshop in 2007. The Committee recommended that this should be part of the
next workshop.
j) The Chairman had the following observations to make: firstly, in North Walsham,
where the average salary was £21,000, there was no opportunity to get onto the
housing market – he considered that in the last 40 years, being able to afford a
house had become more difficult; secondly, developers had overpaid for land in
boom times and the Council was using public money to get them out of trouble;
thirdly, many people needed 1-2 bedroom properties, some due to family break-ups
and not in a position to re-enter the housing markets in their 40s and 50s – he
considered that the Council’s Corporate Plan had a wonderful aspiration but it was
not achievable; fourthly, in the 1930s, the Country had got itself out of recession by
a housing programme and he suggested that this was what would need to happen
again as it would create jobs and meet real needs – 4,000 people were on the
Council’s waiting lists and the Council should try to meet it – the Council was not
dealing with reality but theorising on what worked.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
NORTH NORFOLK
INFRASTRUCTURE)
HOUSING
STRATEGY
2012
–
2015
(HOUSING AND
(Continued)
k) Ms V Gay agreed with the Chairman’s observations and added that previously many
houses had been built through local authorities which was not possible nowadays.
Many new houses built were very small.
l) In response to a question from Mr J Perry-Warnes, the Housing Manager said that
the Localism Act gave the Council the possibility of having a closed housing waiting
list. The majority of people on it were living in North Norfolk or had close family
living here. Careful thought needed to be given to this.
m) Mr K Johnson noted that there appeared to be a consensus that everyone regarded
affordable housing as being important and hopefully the proposed strategies would
allow this issue to be addressed.
RESOLVED
a) To continue monitoring the development and implementation of the Strategy.
b) To support Cabinet’s RECOMMENDATION TO FULL COUNCIL:
The adoption of the North Norfolk Housing Strategy (Housing and Infrastructure)
30 REVIEW OF SURVEILLANCE POLICIES AND AUTHORITIES
a) No officers were available so it was decided to defer the report until July.
b) It was noted that the policy would have to be reviewed because of a change in
legislation.
c) It was important that this report came to Scrutiny to ensure that surveillance was
used properly.
d) Members expressed concern that there were no officers available. The Scrutiny
Officer would find out the reason and report back to Members.
e) The Head of Environmental Health would be asked to provide a briefing on the policy
before the report was presented in July.
31 2011/12 OUTTURN REPORT
a) Mr W Northam, Portfolio Holder for Financial Services, introduced this item. He
explained that the report presented the outturn position for the revenue account and
capital programme for the 2011/12 financial year. Details were provided of the more
significant year-end variance and of recommended contributions to earmarked
reserves for future spending commitments. An update to the current capital
programme was also included.
The outturn position on the revenue account as at 31 March 2012 showed an
underspend for the year of £241,601. The general fund balance remained within the
current recommended level.
b) It was the last year of the current 2-year financial settlement. Later this year there
would be an announcement regarding financial settlements for local authorities from
Central Government.
c) Capital Programme 2012/13 Update, 6.3: this referred to capital receipts which had
been generated in previous years.
d) The restructuring fund was currently being used. The balance stood at just over
£468k.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
2011/12 OUTTURN REPORT
(Continued)
e) Ms V R Gay asked why the playground project for Sadler’s Wood had been delayed
again. The Head of Financial Services would get a written answer for her. Mr P W
Moore said that the delay in starting this work was a reputational risk for the Council.
f) A review was being carried out on the Splash at Sheringham and a report would be
brought to Members as soon as possible.
g) Reserves were reviewed annually when the Budget was set. Officer guidance was
necessary on the level of reserves which should be held.
h) Mr P Terrington suggested that some of the reserves be used for Affordable Housing.
The Head of Financial services said that work was being done on financial products,
e.g. mortgages.
i) The Vice Chairman reminded the Committee that there would be significant changes
to the way that local authorities would be funded and, in view of this, it was prudent to
keep our reserves.
RESOLVED
To support Cabinet’s RECOMMENDATION TO FULL COUNCIL:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
The final accounts position for the general fund revenue account for 2011/12;
The transfers to and from reserves as detailed in the report;
Transfer the surplus to the restructuring reserve;
The financing of the 2011/12 capital programme as detailed within the report;
The balance on the general reserve of £1,948,590 at 31 March 2012;
The updated capital programme for 2012/13 to 2013/14 and the associated financing
of the schemes as outlined within the report and detailed at Appendix E.
32 ANNUAL TREASURY MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR 2011/12 AND STRATEGY
UPDATE FOR 2012/13
a) This report had not originally been on the agenda but, it was noted that the Council’s
Constitution stated that the Annual Treasury Management report should be reported
to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. A Member wondered whether it should
instead be reported to the Audit Committee.
b) Mr D Young referred to the second recommendation in the report (That a proportion
of the investment portfolio is invested in the LAMIT and Lime Property Funds) and
said that no reference had been made to a minimum or maximum investment.
Some careful calculations would need to be done before figures could be included.
This recommendation would then have to go back to Cabinet.
c) Money invested with Santander on a fixed term deposit had been re-invested with
them when it matured. It was held in a business reserve account and could be
repaid at any time, should this be necessary.
RESOLVED
a) To ask the Constitution Working Party to consider whether Treasury reports should
be scrutinised by Overview and Scrutiny or the Audit Committee.
b) To support the RECOMMENDATION TO FULL COUNCIL that the Treasury
Management Annual Report for 2011/12 is approved.
c) To RECOMMEND to FULL COUNCIL that when appropriate, and after further
discussion at Cabinet, consideration be given to a proportion of the investment
portfolio being invested in the LAMIT and Lime Property Funds.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
33 DRAFT ANNUAL REPORT 2011/12
a) Members expressed concern over worsening performance in the following areas:
• Processing of planning applications
• Fly-tipping investigated within 2 working days
• Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting
The Scrutiny Officer would contact the relevant service managers to ask their
comments.
b) Members commented on improved performance in the following areas:
• Sickness absence
• Improved street and environmental cleanliness
• Number of economically active people assisted into work
• Number of unemployed people receiving advice and guidance
The 2 latter points were due to the work of Learning for Everyone.
c) When the Annual Plan was produced assurance would have to be given on how the
shortfall on timescales for processing of Planning applications would be met. Cabinet
was aware of this.
d) Concern was expressed about the number of empty properties brought back into
use. However, at the Housing workshop it had been explained that some empty
properties were not within the influence of the Council.
e) Some suggestions were made regarding improving performance in processing of
Planning applications. However it would be more appropriate to raise them at the
Development Committee.
f) The subject of Planning Performance should come back to Overview and Scrutiny.
RESOLVED
a) To note the report
b) To receive an update on Planning Performance
34 COMPLIMENTS, COMPLAINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
a) A review of the Work Programme had changed the frequency of this report from
quarterly to annual. Eleven new or improved processes had resulted from the
receipt of compliments, complaints and suggestions. A couple of changes had been
made, for example, the wording on a direct debit form sent to customers had been
amended.
b) Year on year complaints had increased by 10%, although there were still very few
complaints (124) in proportion to the number of customer contacts. 10,000 calls per
month were made to the Council. There had also been 40 compliments.
c) The Chairman said that complaints about Revenues and Benefits were inevitable
because of the nature of it. The way Officers said things could trigger a complaint,
rather than the content of what they said.
d) Complaints concerning Property Services tended to focus around public
conveniences.
e) Customer Services had been working closely with Kier and there had been no
significant increase in complaints.
f) There was a difference between a complaint and a request for service, e.g. a missed
bin collection. Information from requests for service was used to reduce the
likelihood of future complaints. The Committee was due to receive an update on the
Waste Contract in July. Information on how requests for service were logged would
be requested.
g) Mr R Price referred to meetings with the Taxi Association regarding contacting
licencing officers. The Head of Customer Services explained that the complaints
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
COMPLIMENTS, COMPLAINTS AND SUGGESTIONS
(Continued)
process only dealt with official complaints. The Chairman suggested that Mr Price
should discuss his concern at the Licensing and Appeals Committee.
h) The Chairman said it was important to differentiate between complaints and formal
complaints.
i) The public appreciated being able to talk to Officers at the Council.
j) The Chairman thanked the Head of Customer Services and her team for the work
they did and noted that the number of formal complaints was low in relation to the
number of enquiries received.
RESOLVED
To note the report.
35 FINAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT TIME AND TASK LIMITED PANEL
a) The Scrutiny Officer reported that the recommendations had gone to Cabinet at
Broadland District Council. Cabinet had referred the report back to Broadland’s
Overview and Scrutiny Committee to fine-tune their recommendations.
b) Mr P Terrington said that the proposals seemed very much based in Broadland and
East Norfolk rather than in the West. The Scrutiny Officer said 2 of the 4 members
on the Panel were from the West, but perhaps Broadland District Council were trying
to keep to the Broadland area.
c) Ms V Gay said the Coasthopper service had been discussed by the Panel. Most
people were in favour of the service and wanted to see it retained. However, there
had been some bias towards the Broadland and Greater Norwich area and the topic
had not been looked at as holistically as it could have been. However, all Members
had been committeed to public transport and the membership of the Panel had been
very representative. It had been good to go out and gather information from key
stakeholders.
d) Ms V R Gay said that the importance of community transport as a way forward had
been recognised by the Panel. There had also been concern regarding hospital
transport. The Council part-funded community transport. Members should meet
with providers and discuss services. It was unlikely that commercial operators
would provide for rural transport.
e) Ms V Gay said she had spoken to NWACTA. Rural transport was of great
importance and one bus per day in a village did not allow people to get out. Some
information gathering was taking place with community transport groups.
f) The Chairman highlighted various issues including the increasing importance of
community transport, ringfencing grant aid, the difficulties with younger people
getting to work and whether a late night service should be provided.
g) Mr J Perry-Warnes said Blakeney might be interested in having a dial-a-ride bus.
h) Mrs A Green informed Members that Great Ryburgh ran a taxi service which was
subsidised by the parish precept.
i) Ms V Gay said that some bus pass users would rather pay a small charge than have
no service. The Scrutiny Officer said that bus passes were now administered by
Norfolk County Council. Mr P Moore suggested a similar system be operated for
young people as was operated with the Council’s car park season tickets.
j) Some Members suggested more thought should be given to the service provided by
the taxi service.
k) Mr R Price said it had been unanimously agreed by the Licensing and Appeals
Committee that once credentials had been verified, the Taxi Association be invited
to send a representative to the Taxi Licensing Group.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012
FINAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT TIME AND TASK LIMITED PANEL
(Continued)
RESOLVED
a) To convey comments to the Scrutiny Committee at Broadland District Council.
b) To discuss the report further after it has been given further consideration by the
Scrutiny Committee at Broadland District Council.
36 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY UPDATE
a) The Scrutiny Officer informed the meeting that a presentation from Norfolk Credit
Union would take place next month. She asked that questions be sent to her in
advance.
b) Members agreed that the review of outside bodies should be moved to July on the
Work Programme.
c) The Scrutiny Officer had attended the Norfolk Scrutiny Network meeting at which
there had been a presentation by the Health Scrutiny Manager of Norfolk County
Council. She would attach copies of the presentation as an appendix to her July
report.
d) The Cabinet would probably meet in August instead of July, which would impact on
the timing of the next meeting of this Committee. (This was later moved back in
July, but the date of this Committee did not need to be moved).
e) The Chief Executive considered that referrals and reports from the Overview and
Scrutiny Committee should be a standing item on the Cabinet agenda, and this
would be actioned by Democratic Services.
f) Members had already agreed to defer the item on the Review of Surveillance
Policies and Authorisations to July.
g) Some work was to be carried out on planning performance and would be reported
back to the Committee.
h) At the Cabinet meeting on 16 April 2012, Mr P Terrington said Steve Blatch had
made a report on renewable energy. He had requested a report on outcomes and
asked that this be added to the Work Programme.
RESOLVED
a) To begin the review of Outside Bodies, referred to the Committee by Full Council, in
July.
b) That the report on Coastal issues be deferred to September.
The meeting concluded at 1.05pm.
_________________________
Chairman
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
26 June 2012