Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meetings held on 7th and 28th June 2016.

The minutes of the meetings of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel (Communities and Environment) held on 7th and 28th June 2016 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive from Members declarations as to disclosable pecuniary and other interests in relation to any Agenda item.

Councillor T Alban declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to Minute Number 20 as an employee of a company that engage in commercial activities with Peterborough Hospital.

Councillor Mrs P A Jordan declared a non-pecuniary interest in relation to Minute Number 20 as an employee of Cambridgeshire Community Service based at Hinchingbrooke Hospital.

A copy of the current Notice of Key Executive Decisions is attached. Members are invited to note the Plan and to comment as appropriate on any items contained therein.

The Panel received and noted the current Notice of Key Executive Decisions (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) which has been prepared by the Executive Leader for the period 1st July 2016 and 31st October 2016.

The Panel is to receive the Waste Round Reconfiguration Update.

With the aid of a report by the Waste Minimisation Officer (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) the Waste Round Reconfiguration Update was presented to the Panel. Members were informed that that the Waste Round Reconfiguration was last carried out in 2011. The project is an important piece of work to get right as the service visits every property within the District. The reconfigured rounds are expected to go live on 21st November 2016.

As the reconfiguration project is progressing, Officers will provide the Panel with regular updates. A progress report schedule and consultation timetable has been produced in order to assist the management of the project both of which will be made available to all Members.

In response to a question on would the service manage waste by putting it all in the same place, Members were informed that there is residential waste and trade waste and these would be managed differently.

Following a concern from a Member that there has been a lot of miscommunication and how would everyone be kept up to date, the Panel was informed that consultation timetable states how progress would be communicated to the residents.

The Panel was informed, following a question in regards to the realistic implementation of the timetable, that a substantial amount of work has already been completed.

In regards to a change of collection day, Members were advised it is difficult to predict how many residents would experience a change of collection day. The last time the reconfiguration was completed, 90% of the days had been changed however under this reconfiguration officers will endeavour to keep as many collection days the same. In addition Members were informed that once the scenario model had been completed, officers would have more of an idea how many collection days would be changed.

A Member was confused with the mentioning of different dates, however it was confirmed that: the ‘as is’ model will be created by the end of July 2016, the scenario modelling for the new round will be established by mid-August 2016 and the new round will be implement week commencing 21st November 2016.

The Panel noted the report with thanks and noted that officers will attend the September 2016 meeting of the Panel to present Members a further update.

The Panel is to receive the Voluntary Sector Grant Funding Working Group’s Final Report.

With the aid of a report by the Head of Community Services (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) the Voluntary Sector Grant Funding Working Group Final Report was presented to the Panel. The background information which subsequently led to the formation of the Working Group was outlined.

Members were informed that the Working Group had reviewed the existing funding arrangement and considered the following four options: option one is the termination of funding, option two is the continuation of existing arrangements, option three is a single contract award and option four is the award of two contracts.

The Panel was informed of the Working Groups opinions on each of the options and recommend that the Panel should recommend that Cabinet adopt option four of awarding two contracts along the lines of advice based services and infrastructure based services.

The Working Group recognises the value of the voluntary sector and did not support option one. Option two was rejected as it does not fit the commissioning and outcomes model and is not in line with National Association for Voluntary and Community Action guidance. Option three was found not to be cost effective as it would necessitate significant changes in the sector, which could prove costly; however it remains an option for future funding arrangements. The Working Group therefore decided that option four was the best option.

Members were pleased with the option presented as the report shows that the Working Group had carried out a lot of research and that the conclusions reached are well thought through.

Following a question regarding option one, Members were informed that option one still remains a possibility as the decision is Cabinet’s however the Working Group had considered other options but are recommending option four.

In response to a question regarding the funding of Shopmobility, the Panel was advised that the Working Group did not review funding arrangements with individual charities but reviewed the problems the voluntary sector are currently facing. In addition a procurement exercise would follow from the report and it is important not to show favour by naming individual organisations.

The Working Group informed Members of the three options they considered in relation to the duration of the contract. Option A is funding to 31st March 2020, Option B is alignment with the County Council contract which runs until 31st August 2017 and Option C is extending funding until 31st March 2021. The Panel was informed that the Working Group recommend Option C as the decision for awarding of funding beyond 2021 would be removed from the election timetable. Consequently this would mean that the voluntary sector funding could be considered and awarded apolitically.

Members supported the recommendation of Option C as a sensible idea as it means that the voluntary sector won’t be treated politically.

The Working Group considered how the funding should be allocated annually. Following the submission of the Voluntary Sector Grant Funding 2016/17 to 2019/2020 report at the Cabinet meeting in January 2016 the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 18.

The Corporate Enforcement Report is to be presented to the Panel.

With the aid of a report by the Head of Community Services (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) the Corporate Enforcement Report was presented to the Panel. In introducing the report Members were informed that Community Services are delivering three environmental campaigns in 2016/17: dog fouling, fly tipping and littering and graffiti and fly posting.

The Panel was informed that there had been three incidents of graffiti in June 2016 and two of them had been post EU referendum, with one incident taking place in Godmanchester and the other in Huntingdon.

Members were informed that all of the Council’s enforcement regime, with the exception of Planning Enforcement, fall within the remit of Community Services. The Council has adopted a fixed penalty approach instead of a criminal conviction approach which removes the criminal conviction liability and makes the process quicker. The Panel was informed that a report on the Council’s enforcement strategy will be submitted at the Panel’s meeting in October 2016.

In response to the question, could more signs be placed at the well know areas for fly tipping and dog fouling, the Panel were informed that the Council plan to resticker the lamp columns with dog fouling signs. This is because the County Council have been removing lamp post columns and replacing them. With regards to fly tipping, signs have an impact but not a significant impact.

Following the question of what can be done about estate agents using boards to advertise houses located streets away on the main road. The Panel were advised that if the sign is on highway then it is County Council issue however there are also specific exemptions in relation to estate agents. If the sign is causing an obstruction then the Council will pull it down.

The Panel was informed that cameras can be used to catch fly tippers, dog fouling and littering. The use of cameras is effective for fly tipping as usually people use a vehicle which can be traced. With regards to other offences, incidents can be reported and the Council will act upon any littering intelligence received. The link for reporting littering offences online is:

https://applications.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/forms/Operations/
New_Street_Cleaning_1.html

Members were informed that Community Services is currently undergoing a restructure, however after it has taken place the service will have four officers who can carry out all types of corporate enforcement, with the exception of planning enforcement.

A report on Huntingdonshire District Council’s response to the proposed merger of the Trusts running Hinchingbrooke Hospital and Peterborough and Stamford Hospitals is to be presented to the Panel.

With the aid of a report by the Democratic Services Officer (Scrutiny) (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) a report outlining Huntingdonshire District Council’s response to the Hinchingbrooke and Peterborough Hospitals merger proposal was presented to the Panel.

In regards to the £9m savings that both hospitals are expected to make, Members were informed that approximately £4m would be saved at Hinchingbrooke and £5m would be saved at Peterborough.

The Panel recognised that it was important for the Trust Board to review all the options and that Members had to let the process take its course. There was frustration expressed as Mr McCarthy is one of a number of Chief Executives over the course of 10 years and that he failed to provide information of any substance to the Panel.

There was a suggestion that as the full business case was not going to be fully developed until September 2016, the Panel should not submit a response before then, however Members were reminded that the response represents the current observations of the Council in respect to the process the Trust Boards have adopted for the development of the full business case. If the response was not sent until September then it would be rendered irrelevant.

In response to the questions regarding the effect of the letter and could the Trust Boards carry on with their plans, Members were informed that the letter would inform the Trust Boards whilst they are developing the full business case. If the full business case highlighted that merger was the best option then the Trust Boards would implement the option which was best for them.

A minority of Members were concerned that the letter had already been published and questioned why. The Panel was informed that at its special meeting on 28th June 2016, Members agreed that a response would be drafted for the Panel to review at its meeting in July 2016. In addition there is no provision, under section 12a of the Local Government Act 1972, to exempt the letter from publication. Members were reminded that as the letter is a draft, it is not the final version that could be sent as the Council’s response.

A couple of Members expressed that they were pleased with the content of the draft letter as it flagged up the concerns expressed by the Panel at the special meeting held on 28th June 2016 and that they would be pleased to see the letter sent to the Chairman of the Hinchingbrooke Health Care NHS Trust.

The Panel discussed the sentence ‘welcome the strong action being taken to explore options and the clear commitment to continuity of ongoing provision of healthcare services at Hinchingbrooke’. Members thought that this sentence should be deleted as they thought it misrepresented their views and could be interpreted as support for the proposed merger.

Members agreed to recommend to Cabinet that the letter at Appendix A should be sent subject to the following amendments:

1)  that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 20.

To consider the work programmes of the Economy and Growth and Performance and Customers Overview and Scrutiny Panels.

The Panel received and noted a report by the Democratic Services Officer (Scrutiny) (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) which contained details of studies being undertaken by the Overview and Scrutiny Panels for Economy and Growth and Performance and Customers.

To consider a report on the Panel’s activities.

With the aid of a report by the Democratic Services Officer (Scrutiny) (a copy of which is appended in the Minute Book) the Panel reviewed the progress of its activities since the last meeting.