Please Contact: Mary Howard
Please email: mary.howard@north-norfolk.gov.uk Please Direct Dial on: 01263 516047
Committee Administrator: Alison Argent: alison.argent@north-norfolk.gov.uk
13 July 2012
A meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee of North Norfolk District Council will be held
in the Council Chamber at the Council Offices, Holt Road, Cromer on Tuesday 24 July 2012 at
9.30a.m.
At the discretion of the Chairman, a short break will be taken after the meeting has been running
for approximately one and a half hours. Coffee will be available in the staff restaurant at 9.30 a.m.
and at the break.
Members of the public who wish to ask a question or speak on an agenda item are requested to
arrive at least 15 minutes before the start of the meeting. It will not always be possible to
accommodate requests after that time. This is to allow time for the Committee Chair to rearrange
the order of items on the agenda for the convenience of members of the public. Further information
on the procedure for public speaking can be obtained from Democratic Services, Tel: 01263
516047, Email: democraticservices@north-norfolk.gov.uk
Sheila Oxtoby
Chief Executive
To: Mrs A Claussen-Reynolds, Ms V R Gay, Mrs A Green, Mr B Jarvis, Mr P Moore, Mr J H PerryWarnes, Mr R Reynolds, Mr E Seward, Mr B Smith, Mr N Smith, Mr R Smith and Mr P Terrington.
All other Members of the Council for information.
Members of the Management Team, appropriate Officers, Press and Public.
If you have any special requirements in order to attend this
meeting, please let us know in advance
If you would like any document in large print, audio, Braille, alternative
format or in a different language please contact us.
Chief Executive: Sheila Oxtoby Corporate Directors: Nick Baker & Steve Blatch
Tel 01263 513811 Fax 01263 515042 Minicom 01263 516005
Email districtcouncil@north-norfolk.gov.uk Web site northnorfolk.org
AGENDA
1.
TO RECEIVE APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE
2.
SUBSTITUTES
3.
PUBLIC QUESTIONS
To receive questions from the public, if any
4.
MINUTES
(Page 1)
(9.30 – 9.40)
To approve as correct records, the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee held on 26 June 2012.
5.
ITEMS OF URGENT BUSINESS
To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be
considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government
Act 1972.
6.
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the
following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires that
declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary
interest.
7.
PETITIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC
To consider any petitions received from members of the public.
8.
CONSIDERATION OF ANY MATTER REFERRED TO THE COMMITTEE BY A MEMBER
To consider any requests made by non-executive Members of the Council, and notified to
the Monitoring Officer with seven clear working days notice, to include an item on the
agenda of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
9.
RESPONSES OF THE COUNCIL OR THE CABINET TO THE COMMITTEE’S REPORTS
OR RECOMMENDATIONS
To consider any responses of the Council or the Cabinet to the Committee’s reports or
recommendations.
10.
THE FORWARD PLAN AND MANAGEMENT OF COUNCIL BUSINESS
(Page 18 )
To discuss the Forward Plan and to consider the programme of business for Cabinet,
Overview and Scrutiny, Audit and Full Council.
11.
SIX MONTHLY REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CONTRACT
Summary:
(Page 20 )
(9.40 – 10.10)
The report outlines the key findings of the review
of the performance of the contract between Kier
and the council over the previous six months and
explains some of the ongoing work to improve
services deliver value and reduce costs
associated with the contract.
Conclusions:
The functions of the contract are being delivered
to the benefit of the council and residents by
Kier. Kier and the council are aware of
shortcomings in design, delivery, monitoring and
performance reporting associated with the
service. Both parties are seeking to agree
improvements in all areas over the next six
months.
Recommendations:
It is requested that Overview and Scrutiny note
the report and provide objective comments which
may be beneficial in developing the service
further.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Councillor John
Lee
Contact Officer, telephone number and email: Barry Brandford, barry.brandford@northnorfolk.gov.uk
12.
REVIEW OF SURVEILLANCE POLICIES AND AUTHORISATIONS
(Page 25)
(10.10 – 10.40)
Summary:
The report provides an update for members on
the two Policies required by the Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the
actual use of these policies by Council services.
Conclusions:
There are no changes required by legislation and
statutory guidance to either Policy.
The Policies are in need of update to reflect
changes in posts and responsibilities following
the management restructuring.
In the past 12 months, any Authorisations have
been lawfully undertaken.
Recommendations:
Members are asked to note the report of
authorisations made in the past year and note
and accept the delay to changes made to the
policy in light of the on-going management
restructuring.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Cllr John Lee, Cllr
All
Trevor Ivory
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Nick Baker, ext 6221, nick.baker@north-norfolk.gov.uk
13.
NORFOLK CREDIT UNION PRESENTATION
(10.40 – 11.15)
To receive a presentation from James Bacon of Norfolk Credit Union, requested by
Members at the Committee’s meeting on 28 March 2012.
14.
ANIMAL CONTROL UPDATE
(Page 30 )
(11.30 - 11.45)
Summary:
Animal Control Update
Conclusions:
Animal Control team is integrated fully into the
work of the Environmental Protection Team. The
stray dog Kennel Contract is let and the
Approved Pest Control company contract is
pending.
Recommendations:
No recommendations but Members are asked
to note the contents of the report
Cabinet Member(s)
John Lee
Ward(s) affected: All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email: Mark Whitmore ext 6206
mark.whitmore@north-norfolk.gov.uk
15.
SHARED SERVICES INCLUDING ICT PROCUREMENT FOR REVENUES AND
BENEFITS REPLACEMENT SYSTEMS
(11.45 – 12.15)
An oral report will be made by the Revenues and Benefits Services Manager.
16.
REVIEW OF OUTSIDE BODIES
(Page 33)
(12.15 – 12.30)
Summary:
This report provides the Committee with
information on five Outside Bodies referred for
review from Full Council on 30 May 2012.
Conclusions:
Norfolk Tourism and the North Norfolk
Community Transport Partnership should be
removed from the Council’s schedule of
approved Outside Bodies. Representation on the
Norfolk Playing Fields Association, Norfolk Rural
Community Council and the North Norfolk Skills
Partnership merits further consideration.
Recommendations:
1. To recommend to Full Council that the North
Norfolk Community Transport Partnership
and Norfolk Tourism should be removed from
the Official List.
2. To further consider the value to the Council
of continued representation on the Norfolk
Playing Fields Association, Norfolk Rural
Community Council and the North Norfolk
Skills Partnership.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Mr T FitzPatrick
All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Mary Howard, 01263 516047, mary.howard@north-norfolk.gov.uk
17.
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY UPDATE
(Page 38)
(Appendix A – page 41, appendix B – page 45, appendix C – page 46)
(12.30 – 12.40)
Summary:
This report updates the Committee on progress with
topics in its agreed work programme (attached at
Appendix A) and invites Members to identify any
arising items for future meetings. The Scrutiny
Committee’s working style and role is attached at
Appendix B.
Conclusions:
That progress is being made in some areas, others
need to be monitored and opportunities for scrutiny
should be discussed.
Recommendations:
That Members should consider any follow-up
actions required on these topics.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Mr T J FitzPatrick
All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email: Mary Howard, Democratic Services Team
Leader, Tel.01263 516047, mary.howard@north-norfolk.gov.uk
18.
EXCLUSION OF THE PRESS AND PUBLIC
To pass the following resolution, if necessary:
“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be
excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they
involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph _ of Part I of
Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”
19.
TO CONSIDER ANY EXEMPT MATTERS ARISING FROM CONSIDERATION OF THE
PUBLIC BUSINESS OF THE AGENDA
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)
Mr B Smith
Mr N Smith
Mr R Smith
Mr P Terrington
Ms V R Gay
Mrs A Green
Mr P W Moore
Mr J Perry-Warnes
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
1
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
2
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
3
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
4
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
5
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
6
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
7
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
8
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
9
26 June 2012
Learning for Everyone
part of the
Economic Development Team
June 2012
Prepared by Economic Development Unit – June2012
10
Learning for Everyone – part of Economic Development
Improving job prospects and developing a skilled workforce
•
Providing information, advice and guidance to improve skills and raise aspirations
•
Bespoke programmes to support people faced by redundancy
•
Engage with business to co-ordinate provision of relevant training courses
•
Explore opportunities to support provision of apprenticeships and work experience
•
Promote self-employment and new business start-ups through IT support
and training
•
Meet the ever increasing demand for advice and training
Prepared by Economic Development Unit
11
Learning for Everyone – part of Economic Development
Prepared by Economic Development Unit
12
Learning for Everyone – part of Economic Development
Embedded in the Corporate & Economic Development Strategy
Economic Development Strategy
Corporate Strategy
Jobs and the Local Economy
SG1 Business Support
Objective A Increase the number of
new businesses
SG2 Employment Creation
Objective B Improve the job
prospects
SG3 Marketing North Norfolk
Objective D Promote premier visitor
destination
SG4 Investor Development
Objective E Improve access to
funding
SG5 Strategic Voice for the
Economy
Objective C Reduce burdens to
business
Prepared by Economic Development Unit
13
Labour Market April 2011 to March 2012
Key Outputs from 1st April 2011 to 30th March 2012
•
Number helped into work
Identify transferable skills, job search guidance,
CV’s confidence building,
skills updating
90
•
Number of adults being trained
Core skills – English, Maths, IT
309
•
Number of adults gaining qualifications
59
•
Number of people made redundant supported
99
•
Number of business start ups supported
15
•
Number of unemployed people receiving support
14
364
Prepared by Economic Development Unit
Case Study 2012
I first met Learning for Everyone in July 2011. I
have 3 children and my husband is unemployed
due to ill health. I had not worked for 2 ½ years.
I wanted to gain some qualifications and progress
towards a return to work.
We explored courses and I enrolled on an English
class. We explored ideas of becoming a teaching
assistant in a school. I joined a local NVQ2
Supporting Teaching and Learning course. I also
started volunteering at the local junior school.
I have now achieved a level 2 in English, a level 1 in
Maths (now working towards level 2) and have completed my NVQ2. In February 2012 I
commenced employment at the school as a mid-day supervisor and have progressed to be a
Teaching Assistant, from May.
Whilst a volunteer at the school I re-introduced the cooking classes with the support of other
volunteers and have attended the Food Safety in May 2012 to gain my level 2 qualification.
With the support of my advisers, tutors and volunteering I am a more confident individual with
increased skills, knowledge and experience to support me in my new career path.
15
Prepared by Economic Development Unit
Case Study 2012
Amanda wished to change career. She was working as a child minder for two
children in her own home, the youngest was approaching full time school age.
At the first appointment we looked at Amanda’s skills and qualifications, and
explored ideas of possible careers. She was keen to study to update her
qualifications and improve her job prospects.
Amanda began a maths course, and was full of enthusiasm about being in
learning again. We began to put together the CV and looked at the local
employment market to see what sorts of jobs were available.
Amanda achieved her Level 2 National Test in maths followed by ITQ Level 1 and
began to apply for other jobs.
Eighteen months after the initial appointment Amanda was working in reception
and administration in a local company.
16
Prepared by Economic Development Unit
Thank you
Prepared by Economic Development Unit – June2012
17
North Norfolk District Council
Cabinet Work Programme & Forward Plan
For the Period 01 July to 31 October 2012
Decision Maker(s)
Meeting
Date
Subject &
Summary
Cabinet
Member(s)
Cabinet
16 July 20112
Localisation of
Council Tax
Support
Wyndham
Northam
Cabinet
16 July 2012
Angie FitchTillett
Cabinet
16 July 2012
Cabinet
10 Sept 2012
Cromer Sea
Defence Scheme
Appointment of
Consultants
Position Statement
on Former RAF
Coltishall site
Allocations Policy
and Local Lettings
Agreement
Cabinet
10 Sept 2012
Wyndham
Northam
25 Sept 2012
Tony Brown
Technical Accountant
01263 516126
Cyclical item
Overview & Scrutiny
Half Yearly Treasury
Management Report
for 2011/2012
Full Council
Cabinet
10 Sept 2012
Budget Monitoring
Period 4
Wyndham
Northam
Cyclical item
Overview & Scrutiny
25 Sept 2012
Karen Sly
Financial Services
Manager
01263 516243
Key Decision
Tom
FitzPatrick
Keith Johnson
18
Consultations
Comments can be
sent to
Status &
Documents
Submitted
Louise Wolsey
Revenues & Benefits
Services Manager
01263 516081
Brian Farrow
Coastal Engineer
01263 516193
Steve Blatch
Corporate Director
01263 516232
Karen Hill
Housing Services
Manager
01263 516183
North Norfolk District Council
Cabinet Work Programme & Forward Plan
For the Period 01 July to 31 October 2012
Decision Maker(s)
Meeting
Date
Subject &
Summary
Cabinet
Member(s)
Cabinet
10 Sept 2012
Housing Renewal
Policy and Housing
Enforcement
Keith Johnson
Cabinet
10 Sept 2012
Performance
Management
Keith Johnson
Overview & Scrutiny
25 Sept 2012
Cabinet
10 Sept 2012
Intended approach
to Coastal Issues
Angie FitchTillett
Financial Strategy
2013/14
Wyndham
Northam
25 Sept 2012
Cabinet
15 Oct 2012
Signed
Keith Johnson, Leader of North Norfolk District Council, 1st July 2012
Key Decision
19
Consultations
Comments can be
sent to
Karen Hill
Housing Services
Manager
01263 516183
Helen Thomas
Policy & Performance
Management Officer
01263 516214
Rob Young
Coast & Community
Partnerships
Manager
01263 516162
Karen Sly
Financial Services
Manager
01263 516243
Status &
Documents
Submitted
Agenda Item No______11______
SIX MONTHLY REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES CONTRACT
Summary:
The report outlines the key findings of the review of
the performance of the contract between Kier and
the council over the previous six months and
explains some of the ongoing work to improve
services deliver value and reduce costs associated
with the contract.
Conclusions:
The functions of the contract are being delivered to
the benefit of the council and residents by Kier.
Kier and the council are aware of shortcomings in
design, delivery, monitoring and performance
reporting associated with the service. Both parties
are seeking to agree improvements in all areas
over the next six months.
Recommendations:
It is requested that Overview and Scrutiny note the
report and provide objective comments which may
be beneficial in developing the service further.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Councillor John Lee
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
1.
Introduction
In 2010/11 the council negotiated and let a new contract for a range of
Environmental Services and appointed Kier Service to undertake the works for
a period of 10 years, commencing April 2011.
The services covered include:
•
•
•
•
Waste collections
Street cleansing
Grounds maintenance
Bring sites, litter bins and dog waste bin emptying.
20
The services commenced in April 2011 with significant changes not
introduced until late 2011, including the restructuring of collection rounds to
deliver efficiency within the contract.
21
2.
Background
Current Situation
Whilst the transition process to new collection rounds has been completed,
full functionality of intelligent reporting from collection rounds to the operations
base at Aylsham has not been delivered. It is expected this will be fully
achieved during the summer of 2012.
Waste Collections
Some problems associated with round restructuring have been identified
which meant not all households have received the standard of service
expected by Kier or the council. Contract management practices, including
use of rectifications and defaults to manage service failures have been
successful in minimising continuing problems.
The householder has therefore faced issues of missed collections and
collections on irregular days whilst the problems have been resolved.
Householders have been directed to contact Kier directly using the 0300
number. When a complaint or request for service is received by Kier, it is
recorded on a computer database. Call centre operators are empowered to
resolve many requests from residents. A very simple enquiry regarding
collection days is available within moments of entering an address or post
code. Call centre operators are also able to issue instructions for missed
collections to be rectified. Works tickets are generated and passed to the
appropriate crew by a supervisor. Completed work tickets need to be
returned by crews to administrators to ensure tasks are completed. The
council’s officers are able to obtain reports on any complaint and have
provided a weekly report on missed collections.
Cleansing
Cleansing performance has remained high on officially monitored measures.
The total amount of land which is litter free is 99%. The official measure does
not however, always reflect the council’s requirements. Significant additional
monitoring has been applied to cleansing activities to ensure the outcomes of
the contract are delivered effectively and consistently. Defaults and
improvement proposals have led to a more consistent and acceptable
outcome.
Cleansing of public conveniences has delivered much greater public
satisfaction with reduced complaints and a far more consistent and pleasant
environment within these facilities, despite the age and construction of many
of the facilities concerned.
Bring Sites
Bring sites (bottle, paper and textiles) were changed to being under the
control of Kier and containers have changed and been well used by the
public. The council, as part of a consortium with all councils in Norfolk, are
negotiating a new contract for the sorting of materials within the recycling bin
and the future of Bring Sites as they are currently operated may change
because of this contract. It is not expected any new sites will be developed
until these negotiations are concluded, around March 2013.
22
Textile Collections
The contract with Kier introduced a new service proposal of kerbside textile
collections. The arrangements for these were that Kier would work with a
charity partner, the Salvation Army, to deliver both recycling of clothing in a
sustainable manner and a new, no cost, service to residents.
At the time of negotiation of the contract, kerbside charity collections were
rare. Such collections on a semi commercial basis are now common. The
changes have impacted on the service operated by Kier.
The service was therefore delivered in a changed environment which meant it
was far less successful than intended. This was exacerbated by an under
estimation of the need for collection resources with collections being unable
to be fully completed each day by two collection teams. This meant that not
all collections were completed within the day. Subsequently, the number of
non collections reported was higher than anticipated and resulted in adverse
comments from residents and Councillors. The position was made worse as
not all households placed sacks out for collection on the designated week.
Changes were implemented to deal with the collection arrangements for the
second collection. The collections did cause 20 tonnes of textiles to be
recycled and over 80% of material collected will be used as clothing by the
Salvation Army.
The council have put forward proposals for change within the contract to
provide community bring events using the skills of the council, Kier and the
Salvation Army to maximise textile recycling for residents.
3.
Performance
There are arrangements under the contract for the reporting of performance.
Significantly the range of performance indicators being measured by the
council has reduced. The operating environment and outcomes are reflected
in indicator measures.
a. Fuel Use
This indicator was missed mainly due to the failure to reorganise rounds
at an early stage in the contract and doubts of the data from the previous
contractor. This has now been resolved for the future.
b. Missed Collections
A major computer system failure, failed to allow effective round
management and reporting. This has led to a stringent target not being
met.
c. Cleansing of Council Land
Independent monitoring showed this target was met with 99% of land
being litter free. Detritus (decomposing leaves, silt etc.) was higher but
acceptable in a mainly rural district.
d. Recycling Rate
As the Committee has previously discussed, the recycling rate has
reduced overall, however, this is not a matter under the control of Kier.
The generation of waste and that part of waste that can be recycled, is a
23
function of the economy. Waste is falling and the amount of recyclables is
falling even faster. The biggest reduction being in the newspaper
component as the amount of newsprint used reduces. Relatively buoyant
markets for materials have reduced the financial effect of reduced
tonnages. It is expected this trend will continue.
4.
Improvement
Proposals for improvement in terms of the contract and service delivery are
currently being negotiated with Kier by officers.
5.
•
This will include the removal of third party monitoring of cleansing
activities. This will save £15,000 pa and will not affect service
outcomes.
•
Clearer cleansing performance outcomes so that certainly with regard
to standards which may not be derogated from in terms of timing and
action thresholds are embedded in the contract. It is easier to enforce
a contract when expectations are clear.
•
Changes to trade waste arrangements to better share risk and
rewards between the council and Kier.
Conclusion
The contract has not been stabilised to the extent required by the council or
expected by Kier. Stabilisation occurs at an expected 6 months from
commencement. Full stabilisation is expected within the next 6 months.
6.
Implications and Risks
There are no implications from proposals currently being negotiated.
7.
Financial Implications and Risks
Savings of £15,000 pa can be achieved in the cleansing budget with no
effect on service.
8.
Sustainability
There are no sustainability risks associated with this report.
9.
Equality and Diversity
There are no effects on equity or diversity outcomes within this report.
10.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
There are no effects of Crime and Disorder issues within this paper.
24
Agenda Item No_______12_____
REVIEW OF SURVEILLANCE POLICIES AND AUTHORISATIONS
Summary:
The report provides an update for members on the two
Policies required by the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the actual use of these
policies by Council services.
Conclusions:
There are no changes required by legislation and
statutory guidance to either Policy.
The Policies are in need of update to reflect changes in
posts and responsibilities following the management
restructuring.
In the past 12 months, any Authorisations have been
lawfully undertaken.
Recommendations:
Members are asked to note the report of authorisations
made in the past year and note and accept the delay to
changes made to the policy in light of the on-going
management restructuring.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Cllr John Lee, Cllr Trevor
All
Ivory
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Nick Baker, ext 6221, nick.baker@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
Members may be aware that the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
(RIPA) (“the Act”) provides a structure under which certain methods of
surveillance are controlled.
Some of these methods are used by local authorities and indeed this Council,
for a range of activities, particularly as a part of regulatory and enforcement
activity and for the purposes of preventing crime and disorder.
Clearly, there will always be concern about intrusion into people’s privacy
where any surveillance is undertaken and indeed, the Human Rights Act 1998
enshrines this issue in legislation. The Policies under consideration here seek
25
to ensure that where surveillance activity is necessary, privacy is protected
wherever possible.
The Act requires that the Council publishes two Policies for its activities in this
area which lay out a framework for authorising certain methods of
surveillance which may be necessary during activity undertaken by the
Council. The Council is required to keep the Policies under review on an
annual basis and it is the anniversary of the last report to this committee on
these policies.
The policies also require that the uses of authorisations under RIPA are
reported to this committee on an annual basis. This report provides details of
the authorisations made since June 2011.
2.
Authorisations over the past year
2.1
Worksheet 110007712-2
The application was made in respect of the use of covert motion operated
CCTV cameras installed in a property subjected to anti-social behaviour by
local youths. This was a jointly run operation as part of the OPT (Operational
Partnership Team).
Operation
Applicant
WK/110007712-2
Mark Whitmore
Authorising
Officer
Stephen Hems
Authorisation
Date
Cancellation
Date
20.07.11
14.10.11
The surveillance met its objectives in that it enabled the identification of
offenders and allowed further interventions to take place, leading to a
significant decrease in problems encountered by the victims.
2.2
Worksheet 110025071-1
The application was made following significant and repeated fly tipping of
clothing and plastic bags on a sugar beet pad. There was some pattern with
regard to the days of the week when the fly tipping took place but no
indication regarding time of night.
The authorisation was for the installation of covert motion triggered CCTV
cameras on the affected land with the objective of identifying any individuals
responsible and vehicle details used in the commissioning of the offence.
Operation
WK/110025071-1
2.3
Applicant
Rachel Smith
Authorising
Officer
Stephen Hems
Authorisation
Date
Cancellation
Date
25.10.11
04.11.11
Worksheet 110025071-2
This application related to a second piece of land which had also been
subject to fly tipping of the same type of material, close to the original site. It
26
was considered appropriate to make a second application in relation to the
site to ensure that the Council could demonstrate compliance with the
legislation. The authorisation was for the same surveillance as the other site.
Operation
Applicant
Authorising
Officer
Authorisation
Date
Cancellation
Date
WK/110025071-2
Rachel Smith
Stephen Hems
27.10.11
04.11.11
The surveillance operation met its objectives as on the first night of being in
place led to the arrest of three individuals for the fly tipping of clothes waste
on one of the sites. On the basis that the objective had been met and the
likelihood of further fly tipping was very low, the authorisation was cancelled
for both sites.
2.4
VHT/AB/01
The application was for directed surveillance to corroborate reports of antisocial behaviour and witness intimidation by Victory Housing Trust tenants
against residents of sheltered housing. The objective was to determine the
extent and seriousness of any anti-social behaviour to enable the most
appropriate course of action to prevent further occurrences.
The authorisation was for the installation of 4 CCTV covert motion operated
cameras.
Operation
Applicant
Authorising
Officer
Authorisation
Date
Cancellation
Date
VHT/AB/01
Mark Whitmore
Nick Baker
18.11.11
13.02.12
Following installation of the cameras, only one incident of anti-social
behaviour took place and so continuation of the surveillance was not deemed
necessary or proportionate.
2.5
HBC/001
The application for directed surveillance was made by the Operational
Partnership Team in order to corroborate reports of anti-social behaviour and
criminal damage associated with youths gathering on a play area adjacent to
sheltered housing. Other interventions had not led to any reduction in antisocial behaviour.
The authorisation was for the installation of two covert CCTV motion operated
cameras, sited to view the front and rear of the victim’s property.
Operation
HBC/001
Applicant
PCSO
Robotham
Authorising
Officer
Stephen Hems
Authorisation
Date
Cancellation
Date
08.03.12
07.06.12
The authorisation reached its maximum duration on the 7th May 2012. As this
was the first application made by an officer outside of the Local Authority, in
this case a member of the Operational Partnership Team, the normal internal
monitoring arrangement for review and cancellation were not used. Although
27
there have been no infringements of the Human Rights Act, as none of the
data recorded since the authorisation lapsed has been viewed, this is a
breach of the RIPA legislation by the Council. A review of the management of
the authorisations is being progressed with other members of the Operational
Partnership Team.
3.
General
There are no RIPA authorisations currently in force.
There have been no applications for the use of covert human intelligence
sources (CHIS).
There have been two instances of surveillance authorised which did not fall
under the requirements of RIPA. In both these cases appropriate signage
was erected to advise individuals that cameras were in use in the area.
There has been one breach of procedures in relation to directed surveillance
detailed under 2.5 above.
The Senior Responsible Officer has provided the Office of Surveillance
Commissions with statistical data in relation to the use of directed surveillance
and covert human intelligence sources for inclusion in the annual report to the
Prime Minister.
4.
Review of Policies
Members have previously agreed two policy documents –
•
•
Policy for Directed Surveillance and Use of Covert Human Intelligence
Sources (CHIS)
Policy on the Use of Covert Surveillance and Access to
Communications Data
Both these policies are subject to annual review by the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee, the last review by this committee having been June 2011.
There have been no updates to the codes of practice covering RIPA since the
last report. On this basis the contents of both policies remain fit for purpose in
relation to compliance with legislation and good practice. Within the
documents reference is made to a number of posts which, following the
management restructure, no longer exist. As the management restructure is
not yet complete it would make sense to await the outcome, including the
potential reallocation of responsibilities, of the restructure to ensure the policy
adequately and accurately reflects posts and responsibilities under RIPA.
The Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 received Royal Assent on 1st May
2012. Part 2 of the Act covers regulation of surveillance, including
safeguards for certain surveillance under RIPA. The main effect is that any
authorisation for directed surveillance will need judicial approval before taking
effect. This means that once an Authorising Officer is satisfied that the
directed surveillance can be authorised it will need to be taken for agreement
by a Magistrates Court. Full guidance on the process and procedures for this
28
change has yet to be provided. The legislation is being introduced
incrementally and, as yet, there is no date set for implementation of the above
provision. Both policies will require further review once the provisions come
into force and this will be subject to a future report to this Committee and
subsequently through to Full Council.
5.
Conclusion
There are no changes required by legislation and statutory guidance to either
Policy.
The Policies are in need of update to reflect changes in posts and
responsibilities following the management restructuring.
In the past 12 months, any Authorisations have been lawfully undertaken.
6.
Implications and Risks
If Directed Surveillance is undertaken by the Council or its Officers which is
not in accordance with the requirements of the RIPA, proceedings or
compensation are possible under Section 7 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Unauthorised Directed Surveillance may also jeopardise any prosecutions
that the Council may bring against offenders. Properly authorised activity will
protect the Council from such challenges and risks.
7.
Financial Implications and Risks
If Directed Surveillance is undertaken by the Council or its Officers which is
not in accordance with the requirements of the RIPA, proceedings or
compensation are possible under Section 7 of the Human Rights Act 1998.
Unsuccessful court action may result in costs being awarded against the
Council. Properly authorised activity will protect the Council from such
challenges and risks.
8.
Sustainability
There are not considered to be any Sustainability issues as these would be a
required consideration when authorising the use of RIPA Powers.
9.
Equality and Diversity
There are not considered to be any Equality and Diversity issues as these
would be a required consideration when authorising the use of RIPA Powers.
10.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
By the very nature of RIPA activity, the prevention of crime and disorder
would go to the heart of any authorisation. In addition, there is a need for
RIPA to be considered in some circumstances during the use of CCTV
operations by the Council.
29
Agenda Item No_____14_______
ANIMAL CONTROL UPDATE
Summary:
Animal Control Update
Conclusions:
Animal Control team is integrated fully into the work of
the Environmental Protection Team. The stray dog
Kennel Contract is let and the Approved Pest Control
company contract is pending.
Recommendations:
No recommendations but members are asked to
note the contents of the report
Cabinet Member(s)
John Lee
Ward(s) affected: All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email: Mark Whitmore ext 6206
mark.whitmore@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
1.1
This report is for information only and updates members on the current
position with regard to the Animal Control Team, specifically changes in staff
numbers, the Stray Dog Kennel Contract and the Pest Control service.
2.
Changes to the Animal Control Team
2.1
Since the last update to members in September 2011 there have been
changes to the structure of the Animal Control Team. With effect from the 17
July 2012 the post of Animal Control Officer was made redundant This was a
full time equivalent post. The work undertaken by the post holder, which
comprised of enforcing the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act and the Dog
Control Orders, as well as assisting officers with drainage and surveillance
work will be taken up by the Environmental Protection team, supported by the
Animal Control Assistant.
Suitable training for the Environmental Protection Officers to enable the
effective enforcement of the Prevention of Damage by Pests Act is being
investigated.
3.
Kennel Contract
3.1
The Kennel Contract with Norstead Hall kennels has been signed and the
new contract is now in force. The most significant change that members are
30
asked to note, is that there is now a fixed price for collection of dogs by the
kennels of £62.50. This replaces the previous rate which was based on
mileage covered. This produced an inequality in the fees charged to owners
of stray dogs and the council, in cases where dogs were not claimed.
4.
Pest Control Service – Pest Express
4.1
This service continues to be undertaken by our preferred supplier Pest
Express Ltd. New arrangements for monitoring standards of service are
currently being discussed and will added as part of the new contract
agreement being discussed with the company. These new conditions will
allow for greater scrutiny of the work provided by Pest Express as our
approved contractor.
5.
Conclusion
The work of the Animal Control Officer will be absorbed into the
Environmental Protection Team, which will require training of approximately
ten officers.
The kennel contract has been let with changes to the pricing structure for
collection of stray dogs.
Pest Express Ltd continue to provide a domestic pest control service on
behalf of the Council, a new monitoring programme will be introduced as part
of contract discussions.
6.
Implications and Risks
The loss of an experienced Animal Control Officer will present short term
risks whilst training is delivered to the Environmental Protection Officers.
The change in pricing for collection of stray dogs may give rise to challenges,
specifically from residents in the immediate vicinity of North Walsham who
may consider the costs to be high when compared to the distance travelled.
However this should be weighed against costs of over £100 for collection of
dogs in the west of the District.
7.
Financial Implications and Risks
The changes in kennel fees are minimal and have been considered as part of
the department’s budget planning. No significant financial implications are
anticipated.
8.
Sustainability
There are no significant sustainability issues identified as part of this report.
9.
Equality and Diversity
Equality and Diversity has been considered, there are no issues arising from
this report.
10.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
31
There are no Section 17 considerations associated with this report.
32
Agenda Item No______16______
REVIEW OF OUTSIDE BODIES
Summary:
Conclusions:
This report provides the Committee with information on
five Outside Bodies referred for review from Full Council
on 30 May 2012.
Norfolk Tourism and the North Norfolk Community
Transport Partnership should be removed from the
Council’s schedule of approved Outside Bodies.
Representation on the Norfolk Playing Fields
Association, Norfolk Rural Community Council and the
North Norfolk Skills Partnership merits further
consideration.
Recommendations:
1. To recommend to Full Council that the North
Norfolk Community Transport Partnership and
Norfolk Tourism should be removed from the
Official List.
2. To further consider the value to the Council of
continued representation on the Norfolk Playing
Fields Association, Norfolk Rural Community
Council and the North Norfolk Skills Partnership.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Mr T FitzPatrick
All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email:
Mary Howard, 01263 516047, mary.howard@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
1.1
At Full Council on 30 May 2012 a report on Outside Bodies was presented by
the Legal and Democratic Services Manager. She identified five Bodies
where responses from Members (or a lack of response from the Outside
Body) indicated that it would be useful for representation to be reviewed by
the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The purpose of the review would be to
decide if continued representation was of value and in the best interests of
the Council. This was agreed by Members.
33
1.2
The five Bodies referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee were the
Norfolk Playing Fields Association, the Norfolk Rural Community Council,
Norfolk Tourism, the North Norfolk Community Transport Partnership and the
North Norfolk Skills Partnership.
1.3
In preparing this report, reference has been made to the information already
on file from a review undertaken annually by Democratic Services.
Information on funding has been obtained from the Accountancy Team and
lead officers have been interviewed, where applicable. Reference has also
been made to the Corporate Plan. Further information will be requested
should Members consider it necessary.
2.
The process undertaken by Democratic Services before the Annual
Meeting of Full Council
2.1
Each year Outside Bodies are sent a questionnaire to confirm contact details,
terms of reference and aims, the number of Members appointed to each
body, the numbers of meetings and attendance. Confirmation is also sought
that the organisation is requesting appointment for the forthcoming municipal
year.
2.2
Members are sent a questionnaire requesting confirmation that they were
invited to meetings, the number of meetings convened and the number
attended. They are also asked to comment on the following
•
The value contributed by the organisation to the quality of life in North
Norfolk and to the Council’s priorities.
•
Whether representatives had received a briefing from an Officer or
outgoing Member before attending the first meeting.
•
The best method for reporting on the work of the organisation.
•
The reason for representing the Council on the organisation, that is,
specific interest/knowledge or relevance to Ward.
Democratic Services consult both the Outside Body and the Member
representative in order to gain a more complete picture of the work of the
Body and its value to the District.
3.
Information gathered in the 2012 review
3.1
Norfolk Playing Fields Association
The Organisation did not respond to the questionnaire or subsequent
reminder. The NNDC representative said that he had never been invited to a
meeting.
3.2
Norfolk Rural Community Council
The Organisation responded that the Council was entitled to appoint a
representative. Meetings were held quarterly and there was also an Annual
General Meeting. No information on the attendance of the NNDC
34
representative was provided. The NNDC representative said that he received
information about the organisation but had never been invited to a meeting.
3.3
Norfolk Tourism
The Organisation did not respond to the questionnaire or subsequent
reminder. The NNDC representative said that she had not yet been invited to
a meeting.
3.4
North Norfolk Community Transport Partnership and North Norfolk
Skills Partnership
No appointment had been made to these organisations in 2011 – 2012
because it had been understood that they were linked to the North Norfolk
Community Partnership, the future of which was under review. As part of the
2012 review there had been attempts to seek clarity, but these had been
unsuccessful.
4.
Links to the Corporate Plan
•
Norfolk Playing Fields Association: tenuous link to Coast, Countryside and
Built Heritage.
•
Norfolk Rural Community Council: Localism
•
Norfolk Tourism: Jobs and the Local Economy D
•
North Norfolk Community Transport Partnership: tenuous link to Jobs and
the Local Economy
•
North Norfolk Skills Partnership: Jobs and the Local Economy B
5.
Further Information gathered for the purpose of this report
5.1
Norfolk Playing Fields Association
The Norfolk Playing Fields Association receives no funding from the Council.
The aims of the Norfolk Playing Fields Association are “to support the saving
of threatened recreational facilities and to extend the benefits of playing fields,
playgrounds and open spaces to all members of the community. Grants are
for capital projects and priority is given to projects that involve children’s play.”
Applicants for grant funding must be members of the Norfolk Playing Fields
Association. North Norfolk District Council is a member. Grants are for small
amounts.
Meetings are essentially Member Forums and the Lead Officer believes that
NNDC should be represented by an Elected Member.
5.2
Norfolk Rural Community Council
The Norfolk Rural Community Council has not received funding from the
Council since January 2008. Its stated aims are:
35
•
Community Support - helping Communities all the way from identifying
needs to delivering solutions with friendly support and genuine
expertise.
•
Rural Advocacy - to provide a voice to rural communities to ensure
that decisions on services, policies and strategies do not discriminate
against them and adequately serve and reflect their needs.
•
Developing Solutions - to research, consult and develop initiatives to
solve the problems faced by our communities.
These aims are encapsulated in North Norfolk District Council’s Corporate
Plan 2012 – 2015, “To empower individuals and local communities to have a
greater say in their own futures” therefore the work of this organisation is
clearly in line with the aims of the Council. However Members are asked to
consider if the Council should continue to be represented on this body or
whether it would be sufficient to receive information by other methods, e.g.
the Members’ Bulletin.
5.3
Norfolk Tourism
Norfolk Tourism last received funding from the Council in 2003. The
Economic and Tourism Development Manager has explained that Norfolk
Tourism is the governing body for tourism in Norfolk and is under the
auspices of Norfolk County Council. The future of this organisation is under
review but, if a decision is taken for it to continue, the Council would be
represented by the relevant Portfolio Holder.
Norfolk Tourism is, therefore, not a Council appointment and should be
removed from the Council’s schedule of approved Outside Bodies.
5.4
North Norfolk Community Transport Partnership
The North Norfolk Community Transport Partnership has been dissolved. It
should, therefore, be removed from the Council’s schedule of approved
Outside Bodies.
5.5
North Norfolk Skills Partnership
The North Norfolk Skills Partnership last received substantial funding in
September 2011. It is the skills and training arm of the North Norfolk Business
Forum. Partners include schools, colleges, Job Centre Plus and Learning for
Everyone. The lead officer at NNDC is the North Norfolk Learning & Skill
Project Manager. Officers advise that, although there is no official
representative, the meetings are attended by a Member who has a specific
interest and whose expertise is valued. As a direct response to this report the
North Norfolk Learning & Skill Project Manager has sent a memo to
Corporate Leadership Team advising of the situation and suggesting that
representation should be formalised.
36
6.
Conclusions
Norfolk Tourism and the North Norfolk Community Transport Partnership
should be removed from the Council’s schedule of approved Outside Bodies.
Representation on the Norfolk Playing Fields Association, Norfolk Rural
Community Council and the North Norfolk Skills Partnership merits further
consideration.
7.
Implications and Risks
It is in the interests of the authority to ensure that the outside bodies that the
Council appoints Members to are relevant to the aims and objectives of the
Council.
8.
Financial Implications and Risks
Except for the North Norfolk Skills Partnership, the Outside Bodies under
review are not in receipt of funding from the Council.
9.
Sustainability
There are no sustainability issues in this report.
10.
Equality and Diversity
The Council’s schedule of approved Outside Bodies needs to reflect the
needs of all Residents of the District.
11.
Section 17 Crime and Disorder considerations
There are no Section 17 issues as a direct result of this report.
37
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
24 July 2012
Agenda Item No__17__
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY UPDATE
Summary:
This report updates the Committee on progress with
topics in its agreed work programme (attached at
Appendix A) and invites Members to identify any
arising items for future meetings. The Scrutiny
Committee’s working style and role is attached at
Appendix B.
Conclusions:
That progress is being made in some areas, others
need to be monitored and opportunities for scrutiny
should be discussed.
Recommendations:
That Members should consider any follow-up
actions required on these topics.
Cabinet Member(s)
Ward(s) affected
Mr T J FitzPatrick
All
Contact Officer, telephone number and email: Mary Howard, Democratic Services
Team Leader, Tel.01263 516047, mary.howard@north-norfolk.gov.uk
1.
Introduction
1.1
The Scrutiny Update report is a standing item on all Overview and Scrutiny
Committee agendas. The report updates Members on progress made with
topics on its agreed work programme and provides additional information
which Members may have requested at a previous meeting.
1.2
The report is prepared by the Democratic Services Team Leader whose role
includes that of Scrutiny Officer.
2.
Progress on topics since the last meeting
2.1
Credit Unions
James Bacon of Norfolk Credit Union will attend Overview and Scrutiny on 24
July 2012. An invitation has been extended, via the Members’ Bulletin, to all
Members to attend the meeting and submit questions in advance.
38
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
2.2
24 July 2012
Sadler’s Wood, North Walsham
At the presentation of the Outturn Report on 26 June 2012 a question was
raised regarding delay to a playground programme at Sadler’s Wood, North
Walsham. A response has been received from the Countryside and Parks
Manager.
“I appreciate that the implementation of the play area has taken five
years from receipt of the contribution, but over this time the situation at
Sadler’s Wood has evolved and there have been other related issues to
consider.
When the Playbuilder schemes were being considered Sadler’s Way
was one of the possible locations and the £31K could have been used to
supplement the Playbuilder funding. Ultimately two other sites were
selected and time went into implementing these two schemes. During
this period it was not feasible to work on yet another play area scheme
because experience had shown that the provision of play areas was
time consuming and intense in terms of addressing resident’s
concerns.
There then followed a proposal that all or some of the money could be
used for the development of an area of the site into allotments to be
managed by the Town Council but after a period of consultation the
allotment plan had to be scrapped.
The funding for Sadler’s way is not time constrained but we have indeed
started spending it. I have now procured options from play area
providers and providing there is no serious opposition to the proposals
the scheme will be implemented in September.”
2.3
Treasury Management Reports
It was noted that the Council’s Constitution stated that the Annual Treasury
Management report should be reported to the Overview and Scrutiny
Committee. However, Members considered that it might more appropriately
be reported to the Audit Committee and asked that the matter should be
referred to the Constitution Working Party for review. This has since been
notified to the Constitution Working Party and Interim Monitoring Officer and
put on file by Democratic Services for inclusion in next review of the
Constitution, which is likely to be at the end of 2012.
2.4
Fly Tipping
When the draft Annual Report 2011/12 was discussed at the meeting of 26
June 2012, Members noted worsening performance regarding Fly-tipping
investigated within 2 working days and asked for a response from the relevant
service manager.
A response has been received from the Head of Environmental Services:
“For the majority of reports of fly-tipping we use Kier operatives as the
first stage of investigation; they look at the waste they are collecting
39
Overview and Scrutiny Committee
24 July 2012
and pass information to us for progressing. Unfortunately since the new
contract came in the response times by Kier to clearing fly-tipping have
dropped on a quarter by quarter basis.
The previous contractor used M3, the Environmental Health IT system,
which enabled effective communications and monitoring of each
worksheet. The new contract uses a system called Whitespace which
provides significant efficiencies in terms of the contract but there have
been some difficulties in the interface between the two systems.
Initial investigations pointed to an issue with the data transfer process
between M3 and Whitespace, the date the completed worksheets were
coming back into M3 was being entered and not the actual date of
clearance. However a more detailed investigation has highlighted that
jobs are not hitting the two day target.
We have asked for reports from the contractor on this on a monthly
basis on their response times for this area and these are being
monitored to ensure that the situation improves.
In addition we now have a regular meeting with Kier to look help
develop the relationship between Kier and the officers in the
Environmental Protection Team.”
If Members have further questions they can be addressed to the
Environmental Protection Team Leader who will be in attendance on 24 July
2012 to give the report on Animal Control.
3.
Public Transport Joint Scrutiny Panel
The Committee’s comments on the final report have been conveyed to the
Overview and Scrutiny Committee at Broadland District Council. The
recommendations will be taken back to Broadland District Council’s Overview
and Scrutiny Committee on 31 July when Members will consider some officer
suggestions on how the agreed recommendations could be fulfilled. It is
hoped that an officer from Norfolk County Council will be in attendance.
Members from North Norfolk District Council are welcome to attend this
meeting.
4.
Health Scrutiny
On 19 June 2012 Norfolk County Council’s Scrutiny Support Manager
(Health) made a report to the Norfolk Scrutiny Network on the future of Health
Scrutiny. This is attached at Appendix C.
40
Appendix A
OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME
2012/2013
GUIDANCE FOR REVIEWING THE WORK PROGRAMME
In setting future Scrutiny topics, the Committee is asked to:
a) Demonstrate the value any investigation would have to the Council’s Community
Leadership Role.
b) Consider the relationship any future topic may have with the work of the Cabinet’s Work
Programme and the Council’s Corporate Plan
c) Be mindful of the public’s priorities.
d) Provide reasons for the investigation (so that Officers/Witnesses can assist Members to
reach an outcome).
e) Consider the outcomes required before commencing an investigation.
f) Balance the need for new topics with existing items on the Scrutiny Work Programme.
g) Consider whether it would be helpful to time limit investigations or break down some topics
into smaller areas.
h) Provide sufficient notice, where possible, in order that the Cabinet Member with
responsibility for the subject, Officers and outside witnesses/attendees can fully assist the
Committee.
Date of
Meeting
Topic
Organisation/
Officer/
Responsible
Portfolio Holder
Links with
Corporate Plan
Notes
July 24
2012
Presentation –
Norfolk Credit
Union
RIPA/
Surveillance
Nick Baker/John
Lee
Coast,
Countryside and
Built Heritage A
Annual – deferred from
June
Animal Control
Nick Baker/ John
Lee
Delivering the
Vision D, E
Briefing paper
Waste Contract
John Lee/Barry
Brandford
Coast,
Countryside and
Built Heritage A
6 monthly
update
Review of
Outside Bodies
Mary
Howard/Tom
FitzPatrick
Delivering the
Vision A - E
Referred from Full
Council
Shared Services
including ICT
procurement for
Revenues and
Benefits
replacement
systems
Wyndham
Northam/Louise
Wolsey
Delivering the
Vision E
6-monthly
review
41
Appendix A
Date of
Meeting
Topic
Sept 25
2012
Health Strategy
Organisation/
Officer/
Responsible
Portfolio Holder
Angie FitchTillett/Sonia
Shuter
Links with
Corporate Plan
Notes
All
Norfolk County Council
to make a presentation
on the work of the
Health and Wellbeing
Board.
Delivering the
Vision E
Cyclical
Budget
Monitoring
Period 4 (April –
July)
Karen Sly/
Wyndham
Northam
Community
Asset Transfer
Policy
Wyndham
Northam/Martin
Green
Performance
Management
Helen
Thomas/Keith
Johnson
Tom
FitzPatrick/Estelle
Packham
Delivering the
Vision A - E
Our Intended
Approach to
Coastal Issues
Angie FitchTillett/Rob Young
Coast,
Countryside and
Built Heritage B
Budget
Monitoring
Period 6 (April –
September)
Karen Sly/
Wyndham
Northam
Delivering the
Vision E
Performance
Management
Helen
Thomas/Keith
Johnson
Delivering the
Vision A - E
Planning
Application
Performance
Steve
Oxenham/Keith
Johnson
Housing and
Infrastructure
A, B,D
Dec 18
2012
2012/13
Revised Budget
Karen
Sly/Wyndham
Northam
Delivering the
Vision E
Cyclical
January
23 2013
Planning Fees
Keith
Johnson/Steve
Oxenham
Housing and
Infrastructure A
Review after 9 months,
requested by Members
Customer
Access Strategy
Nov 21
2012
Members requested
that this topic returns to
the Work Programme.
Delivering the
Vision B
Coast,
Countryside and
Built Heritage A
42
Figures for first quarter.
Cyclical
Appendix A
Date of
Meeting
Topic
January
23 2013
Waste Contract
Organisation/
Officer/
Responsible
Portfolio Holder
John Lee/Barry
Brandford
Links with
Corporate Plan
Notes
Coast,
Countryside and
Built Heritage A
6 monthly update
Shared Services
including ICT
procurement for
Revenues and
Benefits
replacement
systems
Wyndham
Northam/Louise
Wolsey
Delivering the
Vision E
6-monthly update
Environmental
Sustainability
Update
John Lee/Helen
Dixon
Delivering the
Vision E
Annual update
Budget
Monitoring
(October –
December)
Karen
Sly/Wyndham
Northam
Delivering the
Vision E
Cyclical
Performance
Management
Helen
Thomas/Keith
Johnson
Karen
Sly/Wyndham
Northam
Delivering the
Vision A - E
Delivering the
Vision E
Cyclical
Budget
Monitoring
Period 10
(January –
March)
Karen
Sly/Wyndham
Northam
Delivering the
Vision E
Cyclical
Health Strategy
Update
Angie FitchTillett/Sonia
Shuter
All
6 monthly update
April or
May 2013
Car Park
Charges
Wyndham
Northam/
Corporate Asset
Management
Delivering the
Vision E
Review requested by
Members
May 2013
Performance
Management
Delivering the
Vision A - E
June 2013
Complaints,
Compliments
and
Suggestions
Helen
Thomas/Keith
Johnson
Tom
FitzPatrick/Estelle
Packham
February
20 2013
2013/2014 Base
Budget and
Projections for
2014/15 to
2016/17
March 20
2013
43
Delivering the
Vision B
Appendix A
Date of
Meeting
Topic
June 2013
(Outturn Report)
Final Accounts
2011/12
TBA
Planning
Performance
Possible
topics for
future
meetings subject to
further
scoping by
a Task
and Finish
Group
Big Society
Leisure Services
Building Control
Information and
Media
Legal Services
The Commercial
Team
Property
Services/Asset
Management
Plan
Economic
Development/
Regeneration
Performance of
Annual Plan
Learning for
Everyone Team
Community
Transport Joint
Scrutiny – final
outcomes
Item on
All
Scrutiny
agendas
Scrutiny
Committee
Work
Programme
Organisation/
Officer/
Responsible
Portfolio Holder
Karen Sly/
Wyndham
Northam
Steve
Oxenham/Keith
Johnson
Links with
Corporate Plan
Notes
Delivering the
Vision A - E
Annual
Coast,
Countryside and
Built Heritage A
Further review
requested by Members
Topics identified at
Overview and Scrutiny
Committee Workshop
17 April 2012
Tom FitzPatrick/
Mary Howard
44
All
At Committee
APPENDIX B
Working Style of the Scrutiny Committee
Independence
Members of the Scrutiny Committee will not be subject to whipping arrangements by party groups.
Member leadership
Members of the Committee will take the lead in selecting topics for scrutiny and in questioning
witnesses. The Committee will expect members of Cabinet, rather than officers, to take the main
responsibility for answering the Committee’s questions about topics, which relate mainly to the
Council’s activities.
A constructive atmosphere
Meetings of the Committee will be constructive, and not judgmental, accepting that effective
scrutiny is best achieved through challenging and constructive enquiry. People giving evidence at
the Committee should not feel under attack.
Respect and trust
Meetings will be conducted in a spirit of mutual respect and trust.
Openness and transparency
The Committee’s business will be open and transparent, except where there are sound reasons
for protecting confidentiality. In particular, the minutes of the Committee’s meetings will explain
the discussion and debate in a balanced style, so that they could be understood by those who
were not present.
Consensus
Members of the Committee will work together and, while recognizing political allegiances, will
attempt to achieve consensus and agreed recommendations.
Impartial and independent officer advice
Officers who advise and support the Committee will give impartial and independent advice,
recognizing the importance of the Scrutiny Committee in the Council’s arrangements for
governance, as set out in its Constitution.
Regular review
There will be regular reviews of how the scrutiny process is working, and a willingness to change
if it is not working well.
Programming and planning
The Committee will agree the topics to be included in its published work programme and the
extent of the investigation to be undertaken in relation to resources, and the witnesses to be
invited to give evidence.
Managing time
The Committee will attempt to conclude the business of each meeting in reasonable time. The
order of business will be arranged as far as possible to minimize the demands on the time of
witnesses.
45
26
Appendix C
Norfolk Scrutiny Network
19 June 2012
Health scrutiny and the Health and Social Care Act 2012
Note by Scrutiny Support Manager (Health)
This note explains current health scrutiny arrangements and the implications
of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 for the future.
1.
Current arrangements
1.1
Norfolk Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee (NHOSC) was
originally established under the Health and Social Care Act 2001 and
the Local Authority (Overview and Scrutiny Committees Health
Scrutiny Functions) Regulations 2002, which introduced health
scrutiny powers for upper tier local authorities.
1.2
The powers were vested directly in the health overview and scrutiny
committees, who could exercise them without recourse to or approval
from their local authorities.
1.3
The health scrutiny powers are:a) The right to be consulted by local NHS organisations about
proposals for substantial change to local services.
b) The power to call in and question local NHS managers.
c) The power to refer proposals to the Secretary of State for
Health for review (during which period the proposals cannot be
implemented).
1.4
NHOSC is a committee of Norfolk County Council with 8 county
councillors and 7 co-opted district council members, 1 from each
district in Norfolk, all with equal rights. Its constitution requires the
chairman to be a county councillor and the vice chairman to be a
district councillor.
1.5
All NHOSC councillors have the opportunity to suggest items for
scrutiny at each meeting and the chairman and full committee
decides whether or not to put them on the forward work programme.
District councillors can and do suggest items that have been raised
by their colleagues / councils.
1.6
Immediately after each meeting of NHOSC the district council
members are given a brief note of the outcomes and actions from the
46
Appendix C
meeting. This is intended to help them report back to their councils.
It is understood that some district councillors report back formally and
others do not.
1.7
NHOSC has the ability to delegate health scrutiny powers to district
councils and has done so on occasionally in the past, for review of
specific local subjects.
2.
Implications of the Health and Social Care Act 2012 for health
scrutiny
2.1
Under the new Act, health scrutiny powers continue to be held by
upper tier local authorities only. The ability to delegate health scrutiny
powers to district councils still exists as before.
2.2
The Act introduced two immediate changes :• Health scrutiny powers are now vested directly in the local
authority rather than in the health overview and scrutiny committee.
• There does not have to be a designated health overview and
scrutiny committee as the health scrutiny powers can be
discharged through any overview and scrutiny committee of the
upper tier local authority.
2.3
Other potential changes under the Act are dependent upon
regulations that have not yet been made. The two significant ones
are:• Extension of health scrutiny powers to all commissioners and
providers of health services, not just NHS organisations as in the
past.
• Restricting the power of referral to the Secretary of State for Health
to the local authority itself rather the overview and scrutiny
committee to which the health scrutiny powers are delegated.
The second one is significant because it would remove NHOSC’s
strongest power and put it in the hands of the County Council. It is,
however, worth noting that NHOSC has never yet needed to make a
referral.
3.
Other relevant implications of the Act
3.1
The Health and Wellbeing Board
3.1.1
The Act introduces the Health and Wellbeing Board as an
overarching strategic body responsible for developing the Joint
Strategic Needs Assessment and the Health and Wellbeing Strategy
for Norfolk, overseeing that commissioners act in accordance with the
47
Appendix C
agreed strategy and promoting the integration of health and social
care. It does not have health scrutiny powers.
3.1.2
The Health and Wellbeing Board will be fully established as a
committee of the County Council from April 2013. In 2012 it is
operating in shadow form, with quarterly meetings and the following
membership (* denotes statutory membership):Derrick Murphy (Chair)
Alison Thomas
David Harwood
Jenny Harries
David White
Lisa Christensen
Harold Bodmer
Patrick Thompson
Clinical Commissioning Groups
(5)
District Council leaders
Andrew Morgan
Sheila Childerhouse
Representation from the NHS
Commissioning Board
Voluntary/third sector
representatives
Simon Bailey
Norfolk County Council Leader*
Cabinet Member Children
Cabinet Member Community
Director of Public Health*
Chief Executive
Director Children’s Services*
Director Community Services
Chairman of LINK*
Representatives to be agreed
with CCGs*
All 7 District/City/Borough
Councils
Norfolk and Waveney PCT chief
executive
Norfolk and Waveney PCT chair
The arrangements for this will be
determined during the shadow
year
Three representatives from the
voluntary and third sector.
Deputy Chief Constable, Norfolk
Police
3.2
New NHS structures
3.2.1
The new local NHS structures are as follows:• Clinical commissioning groups (CCGs) – subject to
successful authorisation Norfolk will have 5:o North Norfolk
o South Norfolk
o Great Yarmouth and Waveney (cross border with
Suffolk, currently known as HealthEast)
o West Norfolk
o Norwich
These replace the two former Primary Care Trusts (PCTs),
which are currently clustered into one (NHS Norfolk and
Waveney). CCGs will commission most local NHS services,
with the exception of primary care (GPs and dentists). The
national process for authorisation of CCGs is currently
underway. HealthEast is in the first wave, which should be
48
Appendix C
completed by October 2012. The other 4 are in the third wave
which should be completed by December 2012. Those that are
successfully authorised will take on their statutory
responsibilities in April 2013.
• NHS Commissioning Board – is a national body that will have
a local presence. It will be responsible for commissioning
primary care and some other NHS services.
• Commissioning Support Service (CSS) – there will be one
CSS for Norfolk from which CCGs will purchase commissioning
support. CSSs will start life as NHS bodies but are expected to
move into the private sector by 2015.
3.2.2
NHOSC has previously focused primarily on the two PCTs as their
commissioning decisions affected services right across the county. In
future commissioning responsibility will rest with the CCGs and the
NHS Commissioning Board under the strategic influence of the
Health and Wellbeing Board. This means that there will be 7 bodies
active in the local commissioning process where there were 2 before.
4.
Future arrangements for health scrutiny
4.1
NHOSC, with its district council representation, is generally regarded
within the County Council as a successful and influential overview
and scrutiny committee.
4.2
The new Act positively encourages integration of health and social
care, which is already underway in Norfolk in both commissioning and
delivery of services. This raises the question of whether
arrangements for scrutiny of health and social care should also be
combined.
4.3
The forthcoming transfer of public health functions to the County
Council in 2013 also raises the issue of how these services will be
scrutinised in future. Currently NHOSC, with its district council
element, can scrutinise public health as an NHS service. It has yet to
be decided how public health will be scrutinised when it becomes a
County Council function.
4.4
Arrangements for scrutiny of the Health and Wellbeing Board’s
strategic decisions also need to be established.
4.5
All of these matters will be discussed by the County Council’s
Overview and Scrutiny Strategy Group in July 2012.
49