Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Cllr Teakle and the Cabinet Member for Sport and Culture.

There were no declarations of interest.

To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2011

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2011 were signed and approved as a correct record.

Public questions must be received no later than 10am on the fifth working day before the date of the meeting

There were none.

There were none.

Cabinet Member Housing and Safety

Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development

Cabinet Member Sport and Culture

The Cabinet member Housing and Health updated the meeting on the second phase of the allocation of youth funding. Bids to the value of £56k had been received. Successful bids were focussed on where there had been little coverage to date, gender gaps and ethnic groups. It was hoped that the County Council would continue to provide £50 k funding in subsequent years. CBC was working closely with CCP in developing youth services in the borough.

In her capacity as a governor of Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Trust the Cabinet member Housing and Health informed members of the proposed changes to the hospitals trust in terms of how specialist services were being taken forward. Paediatric emergency assessment would be directed to Gloucestershire Royal hospital, outpatient breast care would be directed to Cheltenham General Hospital. The new proposals were for stroke based and major trauma services to be based in Gloucester and vascular care to be based in Cheltenham. The Trust was committed to keeping an accident and emergency at Cheltenham. Cllr Hall was the CBC representative on the County Health, Community and Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee (HOSC) and members should give their feedback on these proposals directly to her.

When asked whether the proposals would involve staff redundancies the Cabinet Member replied that she had not been informed that this would be the case. The details would be worked up with staff in terms of the suitability of particular wards. The strength of general older age medicine would be directed at Cheltenham as the town serviced an older population. Members highlighted the importance of maintaining the Accident & Emergency at Cheltenham due to the degree of older age people at Cheltenham, many of whom did not have transport.

The Cabinet Member was asked whether CBC was doing anything to respond to a campaign recently televised on encouraging local people to report housing voids. In particular it was asked whether CBC was intending to use its powers in taking over privately owned voids and bringing them in to use for those that are homeless. In response the Cabinet Member confirmed that she had raised this issue with the Private Sector Housing Manager and they would be examining this within the context of the developing housing strategy. This issue would also be discussed by the housing review group and via this means a briefing could be brought back to this committee.

Report of the Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development

The Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development explained that the budget process had been easier this year despite the continued recession. This was partly due to the targeted decisions that had been made in the last budget round but also due to the Icelandic bank decision which had been dealt with more expeditiously than expected. In addition £250 000 of New Homes Bonus had been built into the 2012/13 base budget and the impact of HRA self-financing was positive. In addition the projected overspend in 2011/12 of £476k had been avoided due to the immediate freeze on recruitment and supplies and services.

The Cabinet Member highlighted the following structural issues, which included low level investment interest. Car parking income continued to decline, as was the case nationally. Concessionary fares also played a role in this decline. The Garden Waste scheme had not generated as much income as envisaged and whilst the scheme funded itself the estimated revenue had been reduced in next year’s budget.

Whilst this year’s budget saw the continuation of the council tax freeze the Cabinet Member warned that the situation would be very difficult in the following financial year as there would effectively be 5 % uplift in the level of council tax.

In terms of the Housing Revenue Account the Cabinet Member stated that it was a huge year of transformation for housing revenue and capital would be liberated by coming out of the national subsidy system. He did however express concern for tenants who, as a result of government policy, would be faced with increasing rents whilst benefits would be decreasing. Officers would be monitoring this closely.

Sarah Didcote, Group Accountant, gave a brief presentation on the budget, which is attached to these minutes for information.

The following responses were given by the Cabinet Member Finance and Community Development and the Group Accountant, to questions from members of the committee :

• The grant to the Cheltenham Festival for the Performing Arts had been reduced last year.
• Funding for the Arts Council would no longer exist in 2012/13 but £6 k had been given as a one off grant in 2011/12.
• The budget for Cheltenham Festivals had been entirely cut in 2011/12 but the Festivals had been awarded £50 k in New Homes Bonus funds and they would be eligible to bid for the same funds in the coming financial year.
• Bids had been received and analysed for the renewed Single Advice Contract and the results would be made public in the very near future.
• CBC had a good record of financial management. Producing a balanced budget was a statutory requirement. Quarterly monitoring reports were produced to flag up any deviations so that remedial action could be taken.
• Usage of the concessionary fares scheme had increased and this had an impact on reduced income from car parking. Cheltenham had a higher percentage of over 60s who were eligible for the scheme.
• Rents from allotment sites had been built into the base budget.
• In the context  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Presentation by the Chief Executive, Everyman Theatre

Geoffrey Rowe, Chief Executive, Everyman Theatre, gave a presentation  to the committee which is attached to these minutes for information.

Members congratulated the Everyman for the success it had in putting on a wide variety of performances, the good value for money that it represented and its major contribution to the town.  They also congratulated the theatre for having completed its refurbishment works on time and within budget. Members also recognised the valuable work the theatre undertook with the community in terms of schools and community organisations. 

A member commented that some critics regarded a trip to the theatre as elitist but ticket prices did compare favourably with entry to local sporting events. The Chief Executive responded to this by saying in an ideal world there would be a funded scheme which would give every young person in the borough the opportunity to visit and experience a theatre performance for free.

Members requested a breakdown of concessions as 52 % of all tickets were sold as concessions. It was also asked whether concessions included group discounts. The Chief Executive undertook to send members this information.

Members commented that whilst the Chief Executive had identified 2017 as being a tough financial year for the theatre where difficult decisions would have to be made, profit was significant in 2010/11 and it was asked whether the theatre could meet its losses without external help. In response the Chief Executive replied that the surplus was one off and the anticipated loss this year would be more than £200 000 due to the closure for refurbishment.

The Chair thanked the Chief Executive for his presentation and wished the theatre well.

Information/Discussion paper from the Community Safety Manager

The Community Safety Manager outlined his report and explained that at this stage it was a little premature to link the closure of youth facilities to any rise in anti-social behaviour committed by young people. He was however working closely with the police to obtain the information in the coming 12-24 months and this issue had also been raised countywide.

Members understood that statistics may take time to be formulated but were concerned that youth related anti social behaviour was not captured in some form. This was a vital issue and a failure to record what was going on on the ground must mean there was a lack of understanding of what was actually happening. They made reference to the Community Orientated Police Scheme (COPS) and asked whether they provided any such data in terms of records of COPS resolutions. In response the Community Safety Manager explained that he had consulted widely but to date there were no figures coming through.

Members were also concerned that the safeguarding young people work previously carried out by the youth service was no longer being undertaken. They asked whether monitoring and signposting was still being done bearing in mind that there was now only one dedicated youth worker in the borough.

 The Community Safety Manager responded to Members by saying that CBC worked closely with the Police. The County Council ran an Anti Social behaviour strategy group which was seeking funds to set up a database to record issues. It was however not just a question of finding an IT solution. He also reported that in Cheltenham the Crime and Disorder partnership facilitated information exchange between stakeholders and intervention was starting to be put in place before enforcement.

Members could not understand why it was possible on the Gloucestershire Constabulary website to access the number and nature of particular crimes in a particular area and that neighbourhood watch leaflets also reported crime statistics yet it was not possible for a report to be provided to Councillors.

The Community Safety Manager acknowledged that it was difficult to get the information down to the right level. It was suggested by members to invite an officer from Gloucestershire Constabulary to a future meeting to explain why incidences were not being recorded properly.

When asked how the Committee could take forward its strong views the Director of Commissioning suggested that the Committee submit a recommendation to Cabinet expressing its concerns with regard to the lack of reporting figures and that Cabinet should take this issue up directly with the Police. Members felt that this was the correct approach but that in addition to this the wider issue of lack of youth provision in the town and the lack of coordination of new projects being undertaken should be raised with Cabinet.

The Director Commissioning explained that the Cheltenham Strategic Partnership had a Positive Lives Partnership under its umbrella which should capture the impact of the cuts to youth activity. The Community Safety Manager added that if there was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Leader

Richard Gibson, Strategy and Engagement Manager, explained that early views were being sought from scrutiny on the first version of the draft corporate strategy and the 2012-13 draft action plan. He highlighted that SLT had introduced a change to last year's strategy which included adding value for money as a core objective running across all outcomes. Given the resource challenge the draft strategy recognised that commissioning should also help to deliver outcomes and the strategy reflected the commissioner-provider split. Section 4 of the report outlined a list of 6 priority areas that partners had identified where there was scope for more collaborative working. A number of improvement actions had been identified in the draft strategy and views were sought on these.

Members questioned whether officers had the capacity to deliver all the outcomes identified in the draft strategy and wondered whether there was duplication of the work being undertaken by the partnerships. In response the Strategy and Engagement Manager explained that CBC was working alongside the partnerships and the priorities were aligned to those of the partnerships as opposed to duplication. Even in partnership members still commented whether the council could achieve these outcomes.

Members commented on the consideration for 2012-13 on how best the council can work in partnership to tackle burglary in the town through the burglary task and finish group. Members believed that the council should commit to this work as burglary was a high issue of community concern and the council should be seen to be taking the lead on this. The partners involved should be clear on what they are doing with tangible milestones and performance indicators.

The Strategy and Engagement Manager thanked members for their input. The issue of capacity and resources would be taken on board and a clearer, more specific document would be taken to full Council at the end of March.

The Chair informed members that the February meeting of Social & Community would be the last meeting in this format before the new scrutiny arrangements were introduced following the elections.

The cooptees were unaware of the scrutiny changes. The Director of Commissioning apologised for this oversight and undertook to send them the report which had gone to December council and the excerpt of the minutes from that meeting.

Karl Hemming, cooptee, commented on Cheltenham Tenants and Leaseholders Voice (CTLV) which was on the agenda for the February meeting. He reported that by the February meeting members of that committee would have only just finished their training. The Director of Commissioning understood this but felt that it was important for members to understand what arrangements had been put in place by Cheltenham Borough Homes for liaising with its tenants.

None.

27 February 2012

Monday 27 February 2012