Agenda Item___4___
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY
Minutes of a meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 05 April 2011 in
the Council Chamber, Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer at 9.30 am.
Members Present:
Committee:
Mr N Ripley (Chairman)
Mrs S Arnold
Mr R Combe
Mrs H Eales
Mr B Hannah
Officers in
Attendance:
Members in
Attendance:
Mrs B McGoun
Mrs J Moss
Mrs A C Sweeney
The Procurement Officer (for item 95) The Environmental Health Manager
(for item 96), The Strategic Director – Environment (for item 97), the Health
Improvement Officer (for item 97) and the Democratic Services Team
Leader.
Mrs A Moore, Mr P Moore, Mr W J Northam
88 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
Apologies were received from Mr P High and Mr J Perry-Warnes
89 SUBSTITUTES
Mr J Wyatt for Mr P High and Mr R Price for Mr J Perry-Warnes
90 PUBLIC QUESTIONS
None received.
91 MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 02 March 2011 were signed as a correct record.
92 ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
None received
93 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No Members declared an interest.
`
94 OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY UPDATE
a) The first draft of the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report and Guidelines 2010 –
2011 had been circulated to Committee Members. A Member pointed out a possible
spelling error within the explanatory notes for the section on the Councillor Call for
Action. It was agreed that the Monitoring Officer would decide whether the wording
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
1
05 April 2011
should be changed as it was within government issued guidance. No other changes
were suggested.
b) There were general concerns regarding community safety at county level. There had
been no consultation with the District Councils and it remained a standing item on
the agenda for the Norfolk Scrutiny Network. The Democratic Services Team Leader
said that work would need to be done in relation to the Committee’s role in the
scrutiny of community safety before the new Committee met in June 2011.
c) The Democratic Services Team Leader thanked the Committee and the outgoing
Chairman for their commitment and hard work.
RESOLVED
To recommend the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Annual Report and Guidelines
2010-2011 to Full Council.
95 BUDGET MONITORING 2010/11 – PERIOD 10
The report presented the budget monitoring position for the revenue account and capital
programme to the end of January 2011. The overall position at the end of January 2011
showed an underspend of £118,855 for the current financial year. Several Budget
Managers had requested to carry forward the underspend to the new financial year. Any
requests would be considered as part of the outturn process and would take into
account the overall financial position compared to the budget at 31 March 2010.
Members discussed the report:
1. Further clarification was sought regarding local land charges, in particular the
proposed changes to the level of fees charged. The Procurement Officer explained
that further guidance had been issued regarding local land charges and the Council
needed to review the current level of fees and to revise the charging process as
there was a possibility of legal challenge.
2. A Member queried the underspend in coastal protection. He believed that there was
a time limit regarding the spending of this fund. The Portfolio Holder – Financial
Services explained that the underspend was due to a delay in work caused by the
bad weather. It would be requested that it was carried forward to fund the current
programme of works.
3. It was suggested that the travellers site at Cromer could be used as an overflow car
park for the Council Offices when it was not in use. It would be helpful to know how
often the Cromer site in particular was used by travellers. The Democratic Services
Team Leader said that a report on the use of travellers sites in the District was to be
presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in June 2011.
4. The variance in car parking income was raised. A Member commented that despite
an extra 151,000 visitors to North Norfolk during 2010 there was a considerable loss
in car parking income. He suggested that it may be time to reassess the current
system of charging for parking. The option of varying charges at different times of
the year could be considered. The Portfolio Holder – Financial Services said that in
the past it had not been possible to monitor the pattern of use across the District’s
car parks as the ticket machines were not sophisticated enough. The partnership
arrangement with Kings Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council involved the
replacement of the old-style ticket machines and the new machines could provide a
more detailed analysis of ticket sales. He stressed that it was important to enforce
the issue of street parking too. Another Member added that there could be a role for
local businesses and trade associations to work with the Council to guarantee a
better income. The possibility of residents’ permits in Cromer was raised. The
Portfolio Holder – Financial Services said that the Council would be reluctant to
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
2
05 April 2011
issue residents permits as they could deter some visitors to the town. He agreed that
parking at the east end of Cromer was a problem and would need to be looked at in
the future.
The Democratic Services Team Leader informed the Committee that a new joint Car
Parking Committee had recently been established. It would be based at County Hall
and the Council would appoint a representative to attend the meetings.
AGREED
To note the contents of the report.
96 STREET SIGNS
The report updated the Committee on work undertaken on street signs installed and
maintained between April 2010 and April 2011. Following a management restructuring in
early 2010 there was little progress between April and October 2010 and this led to a
backlog of outstanding installations and repairs to damaged signs building up. The
contractor completed the original capital programme of producing and replacing 1000
signs in June and July 2010. Subsequently, they had reviewed their service and were
now concentrating on sign production rather than installation. This had reduced the cost
significantly and the temporary Technical Assistant (Street Signs) post had been
increased to full-time equivalent to the end of the contract period to cope with the
installation of signs. As far as the budget was concerned, the revenue budget was
unspent in the early part of the year and had been able to support the majority of staffing
costs and the 360 signs that had been ordered. The revenue budget would be fully
spent for the financial year and the remainder of the costs for signs would be funded
from the capital budget. The process of replacing damaged, vandalised or missing signs
would continue. The revenue budget and 0.5fte staff resource could only realistically
allow for the replacement of about 300 signs per year. A number of parishes remained
unsigned. This was because they had indicated they did not wish signs to be installed
Members discussed the report:
a) Several Members praised the work of the Environmental Health Manager and his
team regarding street signs. There had been a noticeable improvement in recent
months across their wards.
b) A Member suggested that when the Council contacted parishes that did not want
street signs that the local Member should be copied in so they were aware of the
situation and what had been agreed.
c) The issue of who was responsible for reporting damaged or missing street signs was
raised. The Environmental Health Manager replied that if a member of his team saw
damaged signs then they would replace them. Otherwise they relied on the parish
councils notifying them.
d) A concern was raised regarding parishes that wished to remain unsigned. It could
lead to a lack of continuity across the District and cause problems for visitors to the
area and emergency services. The Environmental Health Manager replied that the
Council had a statutory obligation to provide signs but that it was not necessary to
sign every lane. The main streets through all parishes were signed.
AGREED
To note the contents of the report.
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
3
05 April 2011
97 HEALTH STRATEGY UPDATE
The Strategic Director – Environment provided an oral update on the Health Strategy.
The event held on 25 January 2011 had been very well attended and all the key
partners were there. It had been agreed that there was a need to incorporate the health
agenda across all the service areas and as a result, NHS Norfolk, Norfolk County
Council, the North Norfolk GP Consortium, Adult and Children’s services, Mental Health
services and VCS Together had established the North Norfolk Health Improvement
Forum. The forum would identify key areas for targeting funding and health delivery. The
first meeting would take place on 18 May. Initially it would be an officer-led group with
Member and Scrutiny input once it was up and running.
At county level, there was the Health and Wellbeing Board. There was no requirement
for District representation on the Board and it was possible that this model may need to
be replicated at district level. The intention was to wait and see how things played out at
county level first. Consequently, there was no obvious place for Members to be
represented at both County and District level and this would have to be monitored.
Another outcome of the January event was an agreement to join Home Shield Norfolk.
This was a cross-referral service, for vulnerable and older people and their carers. The
service was supported and coordinated through a group of partner agencies whose aim
was to find ways to enable people to stay safe, healthy and happy in their own homes.
The service currently sat with the County Council but possibilities were being
investigated for the future.
A brief summary was provided on current health-related projects:
1. The Warm and Cosy campaign: an information pack on the services available –
including benefits and leisure would be given to people when they collected their bus
passes.
2. Childhood Obesity Project: there was a possibility of linking up with Broadland
District Council on this.
3. Town and Parish Councils: an event was planned for 20 July 2011 offering advice
on how they could get involved with the health agenda. Initial interest was high.
4. Health and safety inspections: the focus had shifted to workplace health issues. The
intention was to work with local Chambers of Commerce and business forums.
5. Fuel poverty: this project had started and initial indications were that it was proving
successful.
Members discussed the update:
a) A Member suggested that there may be an opportunity to liaise with local chemists
and pharmacies to promote their free screening programmes – possibly via Outlook.
The Strategic Director – Environment agreed that it was important to engage with
the private sector and that self-help programmes were an effective way to do this.
b) Concerns were raised about the level of district representation. A Member asked
whether additional resources were required to increase district involvement and
raise public awareness about health issues generally. The Strategic Director –
Environment replied that he did not anticipate the need for additional resources. It
was about using existing resources differently. Department Managers needed to
consider the health impact when planning their services and GPs would continue to
increase the number of activity referrals. He added that North Norfolk District
Council was the only local council to employ a full-time Health Improvement Officer
c) A Member commented that despite initial concerns about disbanding the Norfolk
Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee, it remained active and was aggressively
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
4
05 April 2011
pursuing member involvement in health matters. Generally, engagement in health
was spreading and the focus on preventative health was to be applauded. The
Strategic Director – Environment agreed. The focus had shifted to keeping people
out of hospital – not building more.
d) The importance of the quality of life was emphasised. North Norfolk had a lot to offer
to support people in their general wellbeing and happiness – the Fit Together
programme was a good example of this.
e) A Member asked how the Committee could bring pressure to bear regarding
Member involvement in the Health and Wellbeing Board. It was agreed that initial
concerns would be expressed via officers attending the meetings. Members could
then lobby for further involvement if necessary after the local elections in May 2011.
AGREED
To note the contents of the report.
The meeting concluded at 12.30pm.
____________________
Chairman
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
5
05 April 2011