ITEM No 7
Report of the Strategy and Regeneration Overview and Scrutiny.
TITLE:
Feedback from the meeting held on Monday 3rd November 2008.
Recommendations
Call-in - members referred the decision back to the Leader for reconsideration.
They agreed that if the leader is not mindful to change the decision this will be
referred to full council for consideration.
Older Peoples Scrutiny – members fully supported the piece of work and the
communication and marketing action plan.
Scrutiny support will investigate how to formalise the appointment of elected
members to the Older Peoples Forum.
Community Safety Strategy – members fully supported the action plan.
Members also requested that councillor Lancaster attend a future meeting to
discuss CCTV across the City.
Members wanted to place on record their support for the work of the Enviro. crime
officers.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
This report informs Members of the matters considered by the Strategy and Regeneration
Overview and Scrutiny on Monday 3rd November 2008. Issues considered were:The Call-in of an Executive Decision relating to the council’s publication LIFE in
Salford.
Marketing and Communications IN Salford: a scrutiny by older citizens and the
council’s response
Community Safety Strategy – Progress and Action Plan
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS:
Reports to Scrutiny can be found on SOLAR
CONTACT OFFICER: Peter Kidd, Senior Scrutiny Support Officer.
Tel: 793 3322 E-mail: peter.kidd@salford.gov.uk
1
WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S):
All
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES:
2
DETAILS
Issues considered
The Call-in of an Executive Decision relating to the council’s publication
LIFE in Salford.
As a part of the meeting, Scrutiny considered a request to Call-in a decision by the
Leader of the council. The decision concerned would increase the size of the council’s
residents’ magazine, LIFE IN Salford, to 24 pages and to increase the frequency of
publication from 6 to 12 issues per year.
There were several elected members present, along with members of the public and
representatives of the press.
At the beginning of the meeting it was clarified that the report shared with members was
the report from the Leader’s briefing on the 20th October on which the decision had been
taken and that previous reports on the topic, which had been to the LIFE in Salford
editorial board were not a part of the decision making process and therefore had not
been shared with members.
The Chair called upon the signatories to explain the reasons for the call-in.
Justification for the call-in
Councillor Karen Garrido representing the signatories of the call-in request thanked the
members for responding quickly to the request and allowing the opportunity to put
forward the reasons why the call-in was requested in line with the principles set down in
the constitution;
a) That it was impossible to calculate any benefits that would come from the decision.
Particularly because of increasing economical difficulties the last thing the council
should be doing is increasing spending.
b) That there had been insufficient consultation. Other than the reports to the editorial
board there didn’t appear to be any consultation with any committee, it was not on
any scrutiny workplan nor was it scrutinised any where else. There were no notes
or minutes kept of the editorial board meetings to record any discussions. A survey
report had not been circulated.
There appears to have been little consultation with officers. The report submitted
to members did not give any reference to consideration of the advice that there
was a high risk of external challenge.
c) The implication that job adverts would be only be seen by Salford residents was
against human rights and surely open to challenge from people across Greater
Manchester.
d) That the editorial control was not independent and perhaps the editorial board
should not be called that as did not have control over content.
e) That there was no clarity of aims and desired outcomes given in the decision
report. The report said it is recognised good practice to communicate with
3
residents on a regular basis. The signatories feel that 6 times a year is sufficient
and there is no need to increase the publication frequency.
f) No reference to an alternative option was considered in the report. It did not
consider leaving the publication as it is.
g) No reasons for the decision were given
h) That there was no proof that the decision was reasonable or even necessary
Councillor Garrido asked the committee to refer the decision back to the Leader and
that the option to keep the magazine to 6 copies a year be considered.
Several of the signatories supported Councillor Garrido;








Councillor Cheetham, speaking on behalf of Councillor Gray, was disappointed
that there was no strong business case for the decision and because the council
budget was under pressure, we should be seeking economies.
He also queried whether the increased publications would enhance the
magazine’s usefulness since job seekers look in other places rather than LIFE
and in fact even if all 11,000 jobs came up every year then the majority of the
Salford population of over 200,000 would not benefit.
Councillor Turner was horrified at the lack of justification for the decision. He
doubted that LIFE went to every household, what evidence is there to show who
reads it is it monitored and if so how accurate is this?
He asked, how confident are the predictions that the advertising revenue will be
achieved, and if we are supporting local companies would we not be taking
advertising revenue away from them.
He reaffirmed that job seekers would be looking in other publications unless there
is research to show otherwise.
He asked why we need to increase the size and frequency of the publication, that
now is not the time because of the costs and stressed that 6 times a year was
pretty good and inline with good practice.
Councillor Robin Garrido, who is also a member of the editorial board, was
frustrated at the lack of editorial control. Infrequent meetings held at short notice
were not, he felt, conducive to democracy.
He was also concerned about the extra cost of LIFE at a time when we will shortly
be consulting with the public over the budget; we are asking then to pay more and
likened this to an additional tax.
The leader’s response
The Chair then asked Councillor Merry to respond.
 He pointed out that the case for the call-in did not query financial control it was
not mentioned as a reason on the information provided by the signatories.
 Also it was in fact the role of the signatories to provide justification for the callin not his to justify reasonableness in making the decision.
 Advice had been taken from a variety of officers.
4
 The argument about job adverts in LIFE could be also argued about similar
adverts in local papers.
 Editorial control is not independent, but if it is a weakness it exists whether
LIFE is published 12 times or 6 times. If it is an issue then Councillor Merry is
prepared to meet with members to discuss this further.
 The consideration of alternatives is the basis of the case for the decision, there
is evidence to refute the claim that the cost of increasing frequency will be
substantial; in fact it will save money.
 A communication based on 6 times a year is inadequate if you consider the
publication of public notices and recruitment adverts.
 The illustrated budget shortfall is more than made up by savings on legal
advertising. Waltham Forest and Bolton councils have already gone down this
route.
 The belief that we can save money overall makes the decision viable.
 On the human rights issue other publications are not distributed as widely as
LIFE therefore more citizens will see actually see the job adverts.
 There is evidence of high levels of reader satisfaction.
 That the decision will make overall savings and the LIFE magazine will be seen
by more satisfied readers is justification of the right decision. The Leader is
happy to discuss the structure of editorial control.
The Chair then welcomed questions, comments or observations from scrutiny
members.

How this decision could be made on the basis of the brief report shared with
members. Also whether the anticipated savings for recruitment advertising
would be realised as we could still need to go to the press with job adverts in
addition to those in LIFE.
 Councillor Merry commented that the size of the budget for recruitment
advertising and legal notices means use of the LIFE magazine would ensure
an overall saving and should extra pages be justified they would be available.
He would also be prepared to report back to the committee on progress with
the savings.

The issue of increased font size of publications as recommended by the older
people’s forum was mentioned, which could increase costs.

Are there any plans to merge local community newsletters with LIFE? The
LIFE magazine could not claim to be local to the different communities across
Salford.
 There are no plans to merge newsletters at this stage and the larger font size
is something that marketing will be looking into.
5

Would public notices in an in-house run magazine meet legal requirements?
 Other authorities who have gone down this line have not been challenged.

A further issue on the statutory notices, whether the publication in LIFE
magazine would fall within the definition of public notice.
 The city solicitor’s view is that it would be appropriate for some but not all
public notices, for example because of the frequency of publication or because
of a requirement to publish in specified magazines. The risk of a legal
challenge is low; authorities using this approach have not been challenged so
far.

The distribution of LIFE is not 100% across Salford and job seekers would not
use LIFE to find a job. also a query about extra staffing costs in the design,
print and distribution of additional publications of LIFE and the editorial costs,
which are not mentioned but surely are significant increases to costs.
 Councillor Merry replied that additional costs would not be incurred but that
staff would be more productive and cost effective.

What was the predicted cost of increasing the frequency of LIFE
 The increased cost would be met from the additional advertising.

Concern that any financial support of the PCT may be diverting money from
other areas.
 This was not the case and the PCT shared the goal of securing value for
money, from the LIFE magazine.
 Councillor Merry added that he would continue to defend the decision as it increased
the opportunity to communicate to residents about services the overall additional net
savings and the low risk makes the decision worth taking.
Members of the public raised issues



Whether LIFE could be politically neutral?
Was the council not obliged to put the process out to tender to the 3 rd sector?
Was the decision taking account of what the community wanted? – The
community committee in East Salford had voted against any increase in LIFE.
 The voters on this occasion referred to were given inaccurate information and
the leader would happily defend the decision and as a counter argument
council wouldn’t want to privatise this service.

Another member of the public said it that 6 issues were adequate, that ¾ of
people don’t read it, they just recycle it.
 Evidence from the Big Listening survey suggests that 84% of people asked,
receive LIFE and 62% of those were happy with it.
6
Summing up
Councillor Garrido, didn’t take lightly the decision to request a call in but felt strongly
that the decision had not been properly discussed anywhere not even with the
editorial board and there was no mention of the sums required in the budget. She had
tried to make the debate non political and was baffled how it could be claimed that
this decision will make a saving.
The Leader was positive that the decision does not represent a waste of money that it
is a sensible one. However he is prepared to discuss further editorial control and how
progress could be monitored in the future.
The vote
The scrutiny members were then asked to vote.
Eight members voted to refer the decision for further consideration, 2 members voted
against. Members then unanimously voted to refer the decision to full council should
the leader be minded not to change the decision.
7
Marketing and Communications IN Salford: a scrutiny by older citizens and the
council’s response
Agnes Thorpe, Derek Thorpe, Beryl Murray, Daisy Shenton Joan Hall and Mary Murphy,
representatives of the Older People’s Forum attended to deliver a presentation on a
piece of scrutiny work they had carried out with regard to Marketing and Communications
in Salford.
Marketing and Communications was chosen as a subject because of the relevance in
achieving several elements of the Wellbeing Strategy ‘Growing Older IN Salford’,
including;
- Combating ageism and enabling older people to continue to be involved in the
life of the community.
- Access to information and
- Increasing the involvement of older people
They have produced a focused piece of work looking at the magazines ON IN Salford
and LIFE in Salford and several information leaflets produced by the Marketing and
Communication division. Members of the forum also visited the Salford Tourist
Information Centre, which is based at the Lowry and talked to several members of staff,
including the division’s director and the manager of the events team.
As a result of this piece of work several recommendations were made, which were all
considered by Marketing and Communications in the production of an Action Plan. Some
of the recommendations, such as transport improvements are beyond the control of the
division but they will actively pursue such recommendations with colleagues and partner
organisations.
Susan Wildman, director and Andrea Blower, senior marketing officer attended Scrutiny
to present the action plan, the response to the scrutiny work.
Members raised several issues.
Comments on transport will be shared with the disability forum and, through member’s
links, with the Greater Manchester Passenger Transport Authority. A former Forum
member was previously a representative on the Executive body, but since then there had
been no direct contact.
Members asked about links with other groups. For example had the Older Peoples
Forum linked with the retired Trade Unionist organisation in Salford?
The Forum are planning to develop linkages with other forums, such as the disability
forum, the mental health forum and the carers forum, and hope to share agenda items
and hold a common event and possibly work together which will give an issue a higher
profile and stronger impact.
The Forum mentioned that Transport is a possible subject for the next piece of scrutiny
work. Transport is also an issue for Overview and Scrutiny, which was identified as an
issue of concern in the public consultation exercise; it is perhaps an area that we could
work on together.
The Forum does not currently have any members who are councillors. Members want to
support the Forum and suggested that there could be a formal procedure to nominate 2
representatives from council in the same way councillors are nominated to “outside
bodies”. Scrutiny Support will investigate this.
Members supported the recommendations and recognised that they could do more
themselves to take them on board when looking at other work. We must not lose sight of
8
the fact that older people are normal and need the same things as everybody else, but
that efforts can be made, small adjustments can be adopted, to ensure that it is easier for
them to access things and benefit from life in Salford.
Members mentioned the building schools for the future programme and whether the
Forum could link with children’s services to consider how the hubs could be used as a
base for leaning for older people and potentially promote intergenerational work.
Marketing and Communications have an important role to play in getting information to
people; they can really make a difference. The engagement and awareness raising
prompted by this work has benefitted the division. Andrea now has the role of older
peoples champion for the division. It is already evident that future marketing materials will
improve following the use of the age-proofing toolkit and the learning that has taken
place.
Community Safety Strategy.
Don Brown, Head of Community Safety, and Roselyn Baker, Principal Community Safety
Officer, attended the meeting accompanied by David McNulty from Greater Manchester
Passenger Transport Executive (GMPTE), one of the council’s partners in the Crime and
Disorder Reduction Partnership.
Members were brought up to date with progress and were presented with the Community
Safety / Local Area Agreement (LAA) Action Plan, as previously requested by the
committee. The strategy is due before council shortly.
Roselyn briefly highlighted the key issues in the report, the trends in different types of
crime and the measures being employed by the partnership to combat these.
David’s area of work is reducing crime and increasing safety on public transport.
David is part of a dedicated task group working with the bus and tram operators to good
effect. There are gateway checks, dedicated patrol response units and bus station patrols
in place, which have significantly reduced criminal damage and anti social behaviour and
contribute to the reduction in the fear of crime.
Bus shelter CCTV has proved very effective as has the protocol to allow police officers
free public transport whether in uniform or not. Working with partners has increased
cooperation and the sharing of data.
Over 12 months bus related crime has decreased by 21%. It still happens and measures
continue to reduce it. There is though an ongoing battle to reduce perceptions of crime
and the fear of crime.
On the railway British Transport Police have reduced crime significantly by 8.2& this has
been achieved by working together with partners.
Members raised a number of issues
Details of one problem site will be shared with David who will try and resolve the related
problems.
CCTV across the city was identified by members as a major concern. There is no
citywide policy; it is up to individual community committees to fund some installations
from their devolved budgets. Other installations are funded from special grants.
Members agreed to ask Councillor Lancaster lead member for community safety to
attend a future meeting and discuss the potential for a citywide strategy for installations,
associated costs and funding issues.
9
Members asked about the current policy of replacement of damaged bus shelters.
Repairs are initiated within 48 hours of a report. There is a limit to the number of time
glass will be replaced before sheet metal is used to replace windows but this also varies
dependant on location. The policy on shelter will be shared with the committee. GMPTE
keep records of hot spots but if members know of any particular problems associated
with shelters they should share them via Don’s community safety team.
A question was raised about the reporting of bus related crime. David assured members
that a rigorous incident reporting system was in place and that it was regularly reviewed
and acted up on by GMPTA.
A recent article suggested there is some miscounting of crimes. An issue on reporting of
crime and its classification was raised. It is sometimes the case that a serious crime will
be recorded with a less serious code when a conviction can be assured by doing so.
Members have previously raised an issue on environmental crime and were concerned
that the funding of posts is temporary at the moment. The area based grant is not
allocated yet. The cabinet budget efficiency working group will be prioritising projects
soon and will decide whether to fund the posts or mainstream the posts. Members
agreed to support the project by writing to the working group.
Roland Howard, Scrutiny development manager from GMPA spoke on behalf of Pamela
Taylor, independent member of GMPA and co-opted member of scrutiny, the action plan
is a good example of its kind, it is comprehensive and the work of partners across greater
Manchester, not only in Salford, is delivering on the reduction of crime and beginning to
reduce the fear of crime.
Report from the last meeting
The report was accepted.
Work Programme
The report was accepted.
The December meeting of scrutiny will be brought forward to a 1pm start.
Scrutiny Support will attempt to get the strategic economic development plan to the next
meeting. The timing is important as it is linked with the core strategy which is currently
out to public consultation.
Forward Plan
Nothing arising.
Any other business
None raised.
10
Next Meeting. - Monday 1st December 2008
Members Attendance
Councillor
September
October
November
Cllr Smyth
Cllr R. Garrido
Cllr McIntyre
Cllr Ainsworth
Cllr Bramer-Kelly
Cllr Heywood
Cllr Wilson
Cllr Jolley
Cllr B. Lea
Cllr Macdonald
√
√
A
√
√
√
A
√
A
√
√
√
√
√
A
√
√
√
N/A
N/A
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
√
11