27 October 2015 Dear Sir or Madam, Your attendance is...

Steven Mason – Chief Executive

County Hall, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE61 2EF

(T) 0345 600 6400 (F) 01670 626030 (W) www.northumberland.gov.uk

Our Ref: Your Ref: Contact: Jackie Roll

Direct Line: (01670) 622603

E-Mail Address: [email protected]

27 October 2015 Dear Sir or Madam, Your attendance is requested at a meeting of the COUNTY COUNCIL which will be held in

the Council Chamber, County Hall, Morpeth on WEDNESDAY 4 NOVEMBER 2015 at

3.00 pm to transact the business mentioned in the accompanying agenda paper.

Yours faithfully,

Chief Executive To the members of the County Council

2 County Council, 4 November 2015

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL

4 NOVEMBER 2015

AGENDA PAPER

Business to be transacted at a meeting of the County Council, to be held on the 4th day of November 2015.

1. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE 2. MINUTES

Minutes of the following meetings of the County Council to be signed by the Chair and sealed with the Common Seal of the Council:- (a) Wednesday 7 October 2015 3.00 pm (see pages 7-21). (b) Wednesday 7 October 2015 4.55 pm (extraordinary meeting) (see pages 23-25).

3. DISCLOSURES OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

Unless already entered in the Council’s Register of Members’ interests, members are required to disclose any personal interest (which includes any disclosable pecuniary interest) they may have in any of the items included on the agenda for the meeting in accordance with the Code of Conduct adopted by the Council on 4 July 2012, and are reminded that if they have any personal interests of a prejudicial nature (as defined under paragraph 17 of the Code Conduct) they must not participate in any discussion or vote on the matter and must leave the room NB Any member needing clarification must contact the principal lawyer for governance, Liam Henry, on 01670 623324. Please refer to the guidance on disclosures at the rear of this agenda letter.

4. ANNOUNCEMENTS by the Chairman, Leader and Head of Paid Service. 5. CORRESPONDENCE (if any) to date of meeting. 6. QUESTIONS to be put to the Chair, a member of the Cabinet or the Chair of any

Committee or Sub-Committee, in accordance with the Constitution’s Rules of Procedure No. 10.

County Council, 4 November 2015 3

7. TO RECEIVE THE MINUTES OF CABINET MEETINGS HELD ON:

(a) Tuesday 29 September 2015 (see pages 27-31) (b) Tuesday, 13 October 2015 (see pages 32-37) AND TO APPROVE the following resolution as it involves budget and policy framework matters requiring Council approval:-

(i) Minute No. 35 of the 13 October 2015 relating to the adoption of the flood risk management strategy (pg 36)

8. TO RECEIVE AND CONSIDER MINUTES from the following Committees:-

(a) Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC (see pages 39-43)

(b) Family and Children’s Services OSC (see pages 45-49)

(c) Care and Wellbeing OSC (see pages 51-57)

(d) Communities and Local Services OSC (see pages 59-66)

(e) Corporate Performance OSC (see pages 67-72)

(f) Arts, Leisure and Culture OSC (see pages 73-77)

(g) Audit Committee (see pages 79-85)

(h) Standards Committee (see pages 87-98) 9. REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Delegation of approval of the council tax base The report asks Council to consider delegation of approval of the annual council tax base to Cabinet from 2016-2017 onwards (see pages 99-101). This matter will be considered by Cabinet at its meeting on 3 November, and the outcome of that will be reported to Council.

10. REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

Council Tax Support Scheme Update and Approval of the scheme for 2016-17 The report asks Council to consider the Council Tax Support Scheme for 2016-17, and to approve its adoption. In addition the report also discusses and forecasts the potential impacts on the scheme as a result of the Budget 2015 (see pages 103-109). This matter will be considered by Cabinet at its meeting on 3 November, and the outcome of that will be reported to Council.



Community Governance Reviews – Ellington and Linton Parish Council To consider the outcome of a Community Governance Review in the County (see pages 111-114).


IF YOU HAVE AN INTEREST AT THIS MEETING, PLEASE:

Declare it and give details of its nature before the matter is discussed or as soon as it becomes apparent to you.

Complete this sheet and pass it to the Democratic Services Officer.

Name (please print):

Meeting:

Date:

Item to which your interest relates:

Nature of Registerable Personal Interest i.e. either disclosable pecuniary interest (as defined by Annex 2 to Code of Conduct or other interest (as defined by Annex 3 to Code of Conduct) (please give details):

Nature of Non-registerable Personal Interest (please give details):

Are you intending to withdraw from the meeting?


1. Registerable Personal Interests – You may have a Registerable Personal Interest if the issue being discussed in the meeting:

a) relates to any Disclosable Pecuniary Interest (as defined by Annex 1 to the Code of Conduct); or b) any other interest (as defined by Annex 2 to the Code of Conduct)

The following interests are Disclosable Pecuniary Interests if they are an interest of either you or your spouse or civil partner: (1) Employment, Office, Companies, Profession or vocation; (2) Sponsorship; (3) Contracts with the Council; (4) Land in the County; (5) Licences in the County; (6) Corporate Tenancies with the Council; or (7) Securities - interests in Companies trading with the Council. The following are other Registerable Personal Interests: (1) any body of which you are a member (or in a position of general control or management) to which you are appointed or nominated by the Council; (2) any body which (i) exercises functions of a public nature or (ii) has charitable purposes or (iii) one of whose principal purpose includes the influence of public opinion or policy (including any political party or trade union) of which you are a member (or in a position of general control or management ); or (3) any person from whom you have received within the previous three years a gift or hospitality with an estimated value of more than £50 which is attributable to your position as an elected or co-opted member of the Council. 2. Non-Registerable Personal Interests - You may have a non-registerable personal interest when you attend a meeting of the Council or Cabinet, or one of their committees or sub-committees, and you are, or ought reasonably to be, aware that a decision in relation to an item of business which is to be transacted might reasonably be regarded as affecting your well being or financial position, or the well being or financial position of a person described below to a greater extent than most inhabitants of the area affected by the decision. The persons referred to above are: (a) a member of your family; (b) any person with whom you have a close association; or (c) in relation to persons described in (a) and (b), their employer, any firm in which they are a partner, or company of which they are a director or shareholder. 3. Non-Participation in Council Business When you attend a meeting of the Council or Cabinet, or one of their committees or sub-committees, and you are aware that the criteria set out below are satisfied in relation to any matter to be considered, or being considered at that meeting, you must : (a) Declare that fact to the meeting; (b) Not participate (or further participate) in any discussion of the matter at the meeting; (c) Not participate in any vote (or further vote) taken on the matter at the meeting; and (d) Leave the room whilst the matter is being discussed. The criteria for the purposes of the above paragraph are that: (a) You have a registerable or non-registerable personal interest in the matter which is such that a member of the public knowing the relevant facts would reasonably think it so significant that it is likely to prejudice your judgement of the public interest; and either (b) the matter will affect the financial position of yourself or one of the persons or bodies referred to above or in any of your register entries; or (c) the matter concerns a request for any permission, licence, consent or registration sought by yourself or any of the persons referred to above or in any of your register entries. This guidance is not a complete statement of the rules on declaration of interests which are contained in the Members’ Code of Conduct. If in any doubt, please consult the Monitoring Officer or relevant Democratic Services Officer before the meeting.


Council Minutes – 7 October 2015 3.00 pm


At a meeting of Northumberland County Council held at County Hall, Morpeth on Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 3.00 p.m.

PRESENT

S. Dickinson (Business Chair, in the Chair)

COUNCILLORS

Arckless, G.R. Bawn, D. Bridgett, S.C. Burt, E. Cairns, H. Cairns, K. Campbell, D. Cartie, E. Castle, G. Dale, P.A.M. Daley, W. Davey, J.G. Davey, S. Dodd, R.R. Douglas, M.I. Dungworth, S. Flux, B. Foster, J.D. Gallacher, B. Gibson, R. Gobin, J.J. Graham, K.O. Grimshaw, L. Hepple, A. Homer, C. Hunter, E.I. Hutchinson, J.I. Jackson, P.A. Johnstone, T. Jones, G.W.

Jones, V. Kelly, P. Lang, J.A. Ledger, D. Lindley, I.P. Murray, A.H. Nisbet, K. Parry, K. Pidcock, B. Pidcock, L. Purvis, M. Reid, A.W. Reid, J. Richards, M.E. Rickerby, L.J. Riddle, J.R. Robson. T. Sambrook, A.G. Sanderson, H.G.H. Simpson, E. Smith, J.E. Swithenbank, I.C.F. Tebbutt, A. Thorne, T.N. Tyler, V. Wallace, A. Watson, J.G. Webb, G. Woodman, J.


OFFICERS

Hadfield, K. Henry, L. Mason, S. Roll, J.

Committee Services Manager Legal Services Manager Chief Executive Democratic Services Manager

46. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies were received from Councillors Armstrong, Cessford, Fearon, Horncastle, Sharp, Watkin and Wilson.

47. MINUTES

With regard to Minute No. 41 (Notice of Motion), Councillor Dodd queried what progress had been made. Councillor Dungworth responded that an event was planned on 4 November during SAFE week, an annual initiative undertaken with North Tyneside and Newcastle Councils to raise the profile of the safeguarding service. This would include a cold call information session from 2pm to 3pm in the restaurant involving presentations and market space areas, and the police and fire brigade would also be in attendance. Invitations would be sent to all members, as well as town and parish councils. Also, a cross party letter was in the process of being drafted calling for the government to take action. RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the County Council held on Wednesday, 2 September 2015, be signed by the Chair, and sealed with the Common Seal of the Council.

48. DISCLOSURES OF MEMBERS' INTERESTS

With regard to Minute No. 12 of the Audit Committee minutes (Allegations regarding Berwick planning matters and ARCH), Councillor Ledger highlighted that all ARCH Board members would have a personal interest in that matter.

49. QUESTIONS to be put to the Chair, a member of the Cabinet or the Chair of any Committee or Sub-Committee, in accordance with the Constitution’s Rules of Procedure No. 10.

Question 1 from Councillor K. Cairns to Councillor S. Dungworth “It is reassuring to note that this Council has a comprehensive Equality and Diversity Policy that applies to every elected member and employee of this Council, and that the Council is participating in the Stonewall Workplace Equality Index 2016.


During my first year in office I have not found in any paper a response other than ‘Not Applicable’ in relation to Equality Impact Assessment, even on a paper discussing concerns of and provision for the visually impaired. Whilst it is no longer a legal requirement that all key decisions and policies should include an EIA, Northumberland County Council has made an admirable policy decision to retain such assessments to promote equality in making key decisions. How is the effectiveness of such a policy measured? What percentage of the Council’s existing officers who have the role of completing an EIA have received training? Is such training, or reading of the policy, part of the induction process for new employees? How many elected members have been offered EIA training or Unconscious Bias training?” Councillor Dungworth responded that it was Council policy that equality issues should be taken into account for all key decisions. However this did not mean that all decisions should be accompanied by an EIA. Recently more emphasis had been given to a considered and focused approach in training and guidance, specifically that EIAs were required only when screening identified that a decision involved potentially significant equality issues. Where an EIA was needed, it had to be proportionate to the decision, eg a full EIA on each protected group would not be necessary in every case, so the EIA format itself included an initial screening stage to decide which protected groups might potentially be significantly affected. Because EIAs were linked to significant decisions, they were most likely to be required for Cabinet decisions or budget proposals. A check of the 15 reports considered by the Cabinet since June 2015 identified that in only one case was the issue of an EIA described as not applicable. Three reports had an EIA attached, and six of the others that hadn’t were progress reports/updates that made reference to earlier EIAs produced when the proposal was originally developed. Four reports related to technical organisational issues, such as the Review of Housing Management where no equality impacts had been identified, or the report contained a reference to being screened. In one case, the report stated that the Council’s duties under the Equality Act had been considered without a full EIA. The report about issues connected with visual impairment was one about Street Furniture Obstructions, which was considered by the Local Services Rural CAG. While this report did not include an EIA, the report itself did discuss equality issues and described consultations which had taken place with the local visual impairment group NAG and with RNIB, as well as audits of major town centres. The report recommended that a draft policy be presented in the autumn. The question of whether a full EIA is needed would be considered again at that point. Given the current requirement for the Council to make austerity savings, there had been more emphasis in the last few years on ensuring that budget proposals were assessed for their equalities impacts. In each recent year, all budget proposals had been screened to see if there were potential equalities issues, with a coordinated process for monitoring this screening and the resulting EIAs. On the basis of these


EIAs for specific proposals, a summary EIA was prepared and considered alongside the budget report to Council. For some major budget proposals which had clear negative impacts for protected groups, such as increases in social care charges, a separate specific EIA was also considered by full Council. There was not a fixed list of officers who may have to complete an EIA as part of their role, since this depended on the specific budget and policy decisions at the time, but 26 officers had attended group training sessions covering EIAs in the last two years, and in autumn 2015 eight officers attended one-to-one briefing sessions about the Council’s expectations from EIAs for budget savings proposals. On induction, all staff members were assigned a statutory/mandatory learning programme which included a requirement to complete an eLearning module on equality and diversity covering the Council’s Equality and Diversity policy. EIA authors were also able to access support and advice from officers in the Wellbeing Directorate when they were considering the impact of a change in policy or a proposal. EIA training was part of the corporate programme. Members had not been specifically targeted for this, but additionally E and D training was included within the member development programme. A Report Writing group training session was available to officers and members, which included coverage of the EIA requirements. There had not to date been any member training about Unconscious Bias, however the Learning and Development team was currently reviewing some Unconscious Bias resources for possible future use. Councillor Cairns then queried whether the EIA carried out on the recent proposals for public toilet provision had recognised that public houses might not be appropriate for a number of groups to use including the elderly, those who did not drink for religious reasons and the disabled. Councillor Dungworth responded that the proposals did not just relate to pubs but also to restaurants, cafes and shops, adding that some vulnerable groups did not like using public toilets. Councillor H. Cairns asked that the response to the question be circulated to all members, which the Business Chair confirmed would be done. Question 2 from Councillor R. Dodd to Councillor D. Ledger “Who within the Council, either Officer or Councillor, has access to Councillors’ e- mail traffic?” Councillor Ledger advised that the Council had strict guidelines on who had access to users’ email accounts which were reflected in the Council’s E Mail and Internet Usage Policy detailed on the Councils Intranet site. The Policy complied with various legislation, including the Data Protection Act 1998 and the Freedom of Information Act 2000.


Details of an individual’s emails/email traffic were only provided to an Investigating Officer or Senior Manager where there was suspicion that an individual had breached the guidelines of the Council’s policy. Only a small number of staff within Information Services (3) had sufficient access rights to be able to view other users’ emails, and this was only allowed with the express permission of Information Services Manager. If access to an individual's emails was required, initially view only access was provided to the Investigating Officer/ Senior Manager. This would always be supervised by a member of the Information Services E mail team. If after an initial investigation, it was felt necessary to provide copies of emails as evidence, then the Email Team Leader would provide an extract of the relevant data for the Investigating Officer/ Senior Manager. Councillor Dodd sought reassurance that no member had access to member emails, and Councillor Ledger confirmed this was the case. Question 3 from Councillor G. Sanderson to Councillor I. Swithenbank “On how many occasions over the past six months to 1 August 2015 have NSRI mobile speed camera units been deployed in Northumberland? Which sites were visited, how many speeding offences were recorded at each, and what criteria was used to justify the locations chosen?” Councillor Swithenbank responded that information has been provided by Northumbria Police Force which summarises the mobile safety camera activity across Northumberland between 1st February and 31st July 2015 (inclusive). This showed that there were 192 separate visits across 18 sites resulting in 4,301 recorded offences and he could share a breakdown of the sites and recorded offences with Cllr Sanderson after the meeting. Cameras were deployed at 9 core sites and 9 community speed concern sites. Core sites were identified following analysis of clusters of high numbers of speed related collisions. These sites continued to exist until collisions ceased to occur, or until the local authority requested the site to be decommissioned following road safety engineering schemes. Community Speed Concern sites were identified following initial complaints from local residents of illegal speeds at places with no significant collision history, which were then confirmed by the local authority conducting a speed survey as a place where enforcement would be warranted by high numbers of illegal speeders. These sites then continued to exist until traffic speeds reduced to acceptable levels, or until the local authority requested the site be decommissioned following road safety engineering schemes etc. More information on the location and justification of the mobile (and fixed) safety camera sites in Northumberland was publically available on NSRI’s website: www.safespeedforlife.co.uk

Councillor Swithenbank added that, having looked at the sites and recorded offences, he was concerned that the sites with the 2nd and 3rd highest number of

http://www.safespeedforlife.co.uk/


convictions were community speed concern sites with no accident record. The offer for Councillor Sanderson to have briefings with the Chief Fire Officer remained, which he would also attend if required. Councillor Sanderson felt that the Council could do more to ensure speed cameras were used in areas where they would be most effective in reducing speeds in order to protect communities. He reminded Councillor Swithenbank that he had agreed the previous year to look at removing speed restrictions where they were not necessary, and insisting that the NSRI used its resources more effectively. Councillor Swithenbank advised that he would have the Chief Fire Officer respond on this point, but he did share the concerns being expressed.

50. CABINET MINUTES

The Leader moved, duly seconded, the following minutes: (a) Tuesday 8 September 2015 and asked members to approve the following resolutions as they involved budget and policy framework matters requiring Council approval:-

(i) Minute No. 25(a) relating to the Private Sector Housing Strategy (pg 21) (ii) Minute No. 25(b) relating to the Garage Allocation Policy (pg 21) Councillor J. Reid reiterated the concerns he had expressed at the Cabinet meeting (Minute No. 27 (Capital Works Programme CAG), on the regeneration programme given the number of houses which were out of local authority control. RESOLVED that the minutes be received, and the resolutions, detailed above, be endorsed.

51. COMMITTEE MINUTES

(a) Audit Committee

These were presented by Councillor Dale, RESOLVED that the minutes of the Audit Committee be received.

52. NOTICE OF MOTION

Motion No.1


In accordance with Council Rules of Procedure No.10, Councillor J.G. Davey moved the following motion, received by the Democratic Services Manager on 14 September 2015:- “On 30 July 2015, the NHS Blood and Transplant Board agreed to progress a proposal to reduce the number of blood manufacturing departments from five to three. This would mean the closure of the Sheffield and Newcastle manufacturing departments and see the two facilities relocated in Manchester from 2017 at the earliest. The Board cites that reducing the number of manufacturing departments will help make the best use of every voluntary donation, maximise the use of equipment and enable flexibly to respond quickly to changes in volume and component specification. This Council: (a) acknowledges plans are being considered to close the blood supply chain manufacturing facility at Newcastle, along with a facility in Sheffield; (b) acknowledges the plans would see these two facilities relocated and merged into a single facility in Manchester; (c) acknowledges that the single site in Manchester would provide services to the whole of the North West, North East and Yorkshire regions of the country; (d) expresses concern that this could potentially put around 38 jobs in Newcastle and 60 in Sheffield at risk; (e) expresses concern about a single location in Manchester being a base to cover the whole of the North West, North East and Yorkshire regions, because:

(i) this is a physically large geography; (ii) travel disruption; (iii) the strategy fails to make it clear where blood stores would be located

outside of the manufacturing centre in Manchester; and (iv) it is unclear how the operation of the service under these proposals

would cope with a major incident; (f) therefore, believes that more work needs to be done before these proposals are put into place, and that scrutiny of these proposals is necessary to ensure that any changes are both workable and effective; and (g) directs that a copy of this motion be forwarded to all North East MPs, the Secretary of State for Health, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and the Chair of the Health Select Committee, with a request for consultation with local health stakeholders prior to the matter to be considered by the relevant Select Committee”. The Leader introduced the motion by highlighting the very particular different needs of the County in terms of blood supply, especially for the rarer blood groups. It was of great concern that blood would have to be transported from Manchester, and every effort should be made to retain services in the region.


Councillor Dungworth seconded the motion, adding that there were concerns for public health also. She felt that a full risk assessment of geography was needed and traffic disruption was also a factor. Councillor Jackson supported the motion and the need to keep such services in the region for local people. He suggested that Health and Wellbeing Board look at the detail of the issue so they could help influence the outcome. The Business Chair confirmed the issue could be raised at the next meeting. Councillor J. Reid agreed with this approach and suggested that a representative from the Blood Transfusion Service be questioned about the impact of the reorganisation on the delivery of the service. On the motion being put to the vote, there was unanimous support. It was therefore RESOLVED as follows:- This Council: (a) acknowledges plans are being considered to close the blood supply chain

manufacturing facility at Newcastle, along with a facility in Sheffield; (b) acknowledges the plans would see these two facilities relocated and merged

into a single facility in Manchester; (c) acknowledges that the single site in Manchester would provide services to

the whole of the North West, North East and Yorkshire regions of the country;

(d) expresses concern that this could potentially put around 38 jobs in Newcastle

and 60 in Sheffield at risk; (e) expresses concern about a single location in Manchester being a base to

cover the whole of the North West, North East and Yorkshire regions, because:

(i) this is a physically large geography; (ii) travel disruption; (iii) the strategy fails to make it clear where blood stores would be located

outside of the manufacturing centre in Manchester; and (iv) it is unclear how the operation of the service under these proposals

would cope with a major incident; (f) therefore, believes that more work needs to be done before these proposals

are put into place, and that scrutiny of these proposals is necessary to ensure that any changes are both workable and effective; and

(g) directs that a copy of this motion be forwarded to all North East MPs, the

Secretary of State for Health, the Shadow Secretary of State for Health and the Chair of the Health Select Committee, with a request for consultation with local health stakeholders prior to the matter to be considered by the relevant Select Committee.


Before consideration of the next motion began, Councillor J. Reid sought guidance on the acceptability and relevance of the motion to the County Council. Councillor Bawn also queried whether councillors who were trade union members should declare personal and prejudicial interests. The Monitoring Officer advised that it was reasonable to judge that the residents of Northumberland would be concerned about this issue, and other local authorities had considered similar motions. He could see no reason to suggest that any interests would be anything other than personal. Councillor Bawn advised that as a member of the Law Society, he had a personal and prejudicial interest to declare and he left the chamber, as did Councillors Riddle and Sanderson. Motion No.2 In accordance with Council Rules of Procedure No.10, Councillor L. Pidcock moved the following motion, received by the Democratic Services Manager on 27 September 2015:- Defending the right to strike Northumberland County Council UA notes:

• In February 2015 the United Nations agency the International Labour Organisation (ILO) reaffirmed its belief that ’without protecting a right to strike, Freedom of Association, in particular the right to organise activities for the purpose of promoting and protecting workers’ interests, cannot be fully realised.’

• In July 2015 the Conservative government announced its intention to change legislation affecting trade unions and their members to make it harder to win ballots for industrial action. This will only be lawful if there is a 50% turnout among trade union members entitled to vote in addition to a simple majority voting for industrial action

• The Conservatives seek a further requirement for those working in ‘important public services’ to secure the support of 40% of all trade union members. Non-voters will be counted as ‘against’ industrial action which is contrary to ILO guidance. This means that on a 50% turnout, 80% will have to vote for industrial action for it to be lawful in many public services

• No such thresholds apply to elections in local government, for police and crime commissioners, or in European or Westminster elections

• The government has refused the request of trade unions to make electronic balloting or secure workplace balloting legally permissible to increase turnout this way

Northumberland County Council UA further notes:

• The proposed Conservative legislation will also introduce greater restrictions for picketing. These include requirements on unions to inform the police of the name of a picket supervisor and ensure they have a letter of authorisation they must be required to carry, inform the police of how many will be expected to attend a picket line and what banners or materials will be used as well as notify the police of details of how trade unions intend to use social media during a dispute

• The Conservative government wants to remove the ban for employers to employ


agency workers during a period of lawful industrial action • The government wants to grant Ministers the power to reduce the amount of

facilities time agreed by employer and the workforce which is in place to ensure adequate workplace representation

• Trade unions take industrial action for a wide range of reasons including defending wages and pensions, conditions at work and safety Northumberland County Council UA believes:

The right to strike and protest are fundamental rights which should be respected in a free and democratic society

• The Conservative government’s bill will undermine constructive employment relations and that harmonious industrial relations are achieved by meaningful engagement and not additional legal restrictions to trade union members

• Workplace representation ensures access to justice and has benefits across whole organisations

• The government’s Trade Union Bill is part of a disturbing trend to erode civil liberties and inhibit the right to speak out or protest against the government

• The Conservative government’s Trade Union Bill is a politically-motivated attack on trade unions and could have negative consequences for wider civil society

Northumberland County Council UA resolves:

• To write to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills stating the council’s opposition to their Trade Union Bill and to participate in any consultations

• Support the Northern TUC and civil liberties groups in campaigning to defend the right to strike and oppose the Trade Union Bill

• Continue to value the importance of meaningful workforce engagement and representation through trade unions”.

In moving the motion, Councillor L. Pidcock informed members that she was proud to be a member of Unite. She valued the security this provided in her position as an employee against unfair discrimination and attack on terms and conditions, and for many others who could not afford expensive solicitors and tribunal fees such protection was essential. Councillor Pidcock then set out what some of what she felt were the most concerning parts of the Bill:-

Plans to allow agency workers to replace striking workers and a proposal for 14 days’ notice of strike action which had been banned in the UK since 1973. This fundamentally undermined the right to strike and the impact of industrial action. She urged members to remember that for a worker to withdraw their labour, there had to be no other option.

Unions would be required to appoint picket supervisors who would have to carry a letter of authorisation and must be identifiable by an armband or badge. Unions may have to report protest plans publicly to employers and regulators 14 days in advance or face significant fines. This was excessive as there were already strong restrictions on picketing.

A minimum turnout of 50% would be required for valid industrial action, and


certain public services would require the support of 40% of those eligible to vote, equating to 80% of those voting on a 50% turnout. She suggested that if the government was really interested in greater democracy in the workplace, then they should do more to ensure secure workplace or online balloting instead of imposing barriers to people exercising their democratic right.

The proposal to cap the time public sector employers allowed union representatives to spend representing their members, and the proposal to restrict how unions collected money through Check off and how they spent it were of great concern.

She asked members to consider why a government would want to pass such draconian measures when the country already had some of the most restrictive trade union practices in the western world, and she asked in whose service it was, other than the government’s own.

Councillor Ledger seconded the motion, adding that the government was attempting to impose restrictions that it would not adhere to itself, which was not right or justifiable. He urged all members to support the motion in order to support the ordinary people of the country. A number of members spoke on the motion as follows:-

Councillor Jackson did not think it was an appropriate motion for Council to discuss and urged members instead to focus on issues relevant to Northumberland. He agreed with the government proposals regarding a majority ballot because of the effect on services when people did strike, and the disruption caused. There were consequences to strike action and he cited the recent example of the Tube drivers’ strike and the effect on the city of London.

Councillor J. Reid felt that no member would support the notion of removing a worker’s right to strike, but he could not support the motion. He applauded the reason behind it, but did not feel it was right to bring it to Council for debate as it did not fall within the definition of an appropriate motion as set out in the Council’s Constitution.

Councillor B. Pidcock thanked the mover of the motion for its clarity and sincerity and reminded all members about the origin of the trade union movement by farm labourers in Dorset. Many members had felt the effects of anti-trade union legislation directly.

Councillor Kelly cited an example of successful trade union action from his early career which had benefitted the pupils in his school. Strike action was always a moral dilemma and those who participated lost out financially, but it was action taken by ordinary people for the greater good.

Councillor Tebbutt supported the motion but felt it did not go far enough, and argued that it should include the check-off issue, which was the right of employees to have union subscriptions (and other deductions) automatically deducted at source, which the Government proposed to stop. Councillor L. Pidcock confirmed that she would accept inclusion of this as an alteration to her motion. He also referred to the importance of adequate time off for trade union officials which could save the employer hours of time and problems.

Councillor H. Cairns advised that she had been a trade union member all of her working life and had received valuable support from them. She would support the motion.


Councillor Arckless referred to the hypocrisy of a government elected by less than 25% of the electorate. He feared what was behind the proposals and he called on all members to support the motion as it was very relevant to the people of Northumberland.

Councillor Campbell agreed and felt that the government was using the ordinary hard working person to its advantage.

Councillor Bridgett supported the motion because it did affect Northumberland and, in terms of its relevance, he drew comparisons to the recent events at the Harbottle GP surgery, advising members that thousands of junior doctors were considering industrial action because of the contracts being offered to them.

Councillor A.W. Reid commented that there was no need for further legislation as there was not a problem to be dealt with. The government appeared to have issues in the south east of the country which did not apply elsewhere. He was concerned about the Bill because the proposals for political funding were destructive, would increase bureaucracy in business and deflect police resources away from crime to trade union action.

A number of other members spoke in support of the motion. Councillor G. Davey called for a named vote on the motion. This was supported by the required number of members. Councillor L. Pidcock did not understand how the relevance of the motion could be questioned when it was very important to the residents of Northumberland. It was not just about the right to strike, but about the right to be represented at work and to provide support to those people who had no other option but to go to their trade union for help. It was clear that the Conservative members of the Council felt unable to defend their government’s position. On the motion, as altered by Councillor Tebbutt’s suggestion, being put to the vote, the votes were cast as follows:- FOR: 41 as follows:-

G.R. Arckless P. Kelly

S.C. Bridgett J.A. Lang

E. Burt D. Ledger

H. Cairns I.P. Lindley

K. Cairns K. Nisbet

D. Campbell K. Parry

E. Cartie B. Pidcock

J.G. Davey L. Pidcock

S. Davey M. Purvis

S. Dickinson A.W. Reid

M.I. Douglas M.E. Richards

S. Dungworth A. Sambrook

J. Foster E. Simpson

B. Gallacher J.E. Smith


J.J. Gobin I.C.F. Swithenbank

K.O. Graham A. Tebbutt

L. Grimshaw V. Tyler

A. Hepple A. Wallace

E.I. Hunter G. Webb

T. Johnstone J. Woodman

G.W. Jones

AGAINST: 13 as follows:-

G. Castle P.A. Jackson

W. Daley V. Jones

R.R. Dodd A.H. Murray

B. Flux T. Robson

R. Gibson T.N. Thorne

C. Homer J.G. Watson

J.I. Hutchinson

ABSTENTIONS: 3 as follows:-

P.A.M. Dale L.J. Rickerby

J. Reid

It was therefore RESOLVED that:- (a) the following be noted:

• In February 2015 the United Nations agency the International Labour Organisation (ILO) reaffirmed its belief that ’without protecting a right to strike, Freedom of Association, in particular the right to organise activities for the purpose of promoting and protecting workers’ interests, cannot be fully realised.’

• In July 2015 the Conservative government announced its intention to change legislation affecting trade unions and their members to make it harder to win ballots for industrial action. This will only be lawful if there is a 50% turnout among trade union members entitled to vote in addition to a simple majority voting for industrial action

• The Conservatives seek a further requirement for those working in ‘important public services’ to secure the support of 40% of all trade union members. Non-voters will be counted as ‘against’ industrial action which is contrary to ILO guidance. This means that on a 50% turnout, 80% will have to vote for industrial action for it to be lawful in many public services

• No such thresholds apply to elections in local government, for police and crime commissioners, or in European or Westminster elections

• The government has refused the request of trade unions to make electronic balloting or secure workplace balloting legally permissible to increase turnout this way

(b) the following be further noted:

• The proposed Conservative legislation will also introduce greater restrictions for picketing. These include requirements on unions to inform the police of the name of


a picket supervisor and ensure they have a letter of authorisation they must be required to carry, inform the police of how many will be expected to attend a picket line and what banners or materials will be used as well as notify the police of details of how trade unions intend to use social media during a dispute

• The Conservative government wants to remove the ban for employers to employ agency workers during a period of lawful industrial action

• The government wants to grant Ministers the power to reduce the amount of facilities time agreed by employer and the workforce which is in place to ensure adequate workplace representation

• Trade unions take industrial action for a wide range of reasons including defending wages and pensions, conditions at work and safety (c) the County Council believes that:

The right to strike and protest are fundamental rights which should be respected in a free and democratic society

• The Conservative government’s bill will undermine constructive employment relations and that harmonious industrial relations are achieved by meaningful engagement and not additional legal restrictions to trade union members

• Workplace representation ensures access to justice and has benefits across whole organisations

• The government’s Trade Union Bill is part of a disturbing trend to erode civil liberties and inhibit the right to speak out or protest against the government

• The Conservative government’s Trade Union Bill is a politically-motivated attack on trade unions and could have negative consequences for wider civil society;

(d) the County Council writes to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation

and Skills stating the Council’s opposition to their Trade Union Bill and to participate in any consultations;

(e) the County Council supports the Northern TUC and civil liberties groups in campaigning to defend the right to strike and oppose the Trade Union Bill;

(f) the County Council supports the Scottish Councils to retain the right of

employees to have union subscriptions (and other deductions) automatically deducted at source; and

(g) the County Council continues to value the importance of meaningful

workforce engagement and representation through trade unions.


Treasury Management Annual Year Report 2014-15 The report presented the Authority’s Treasury Management performance to members for scrutiny in compliance with CIPFA’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice, (Revised 2011) and the Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities 2003, revised 2011. The report advised members of Treasury Management activity and performance against prudential indicators during the period 1 April 2014 to 31 March 2015.


RESOLVED that:- (a) the report be received and the performance of the Treasury Management

function noted; (b) the performance against Prudential Indicators and limits be noted; (c) the changes to the Credit and Counterparty Criteria List be approved; and (d) the report be approved.


Renewal of Appointment of Independent Chair of Standards Committee

The report asked Council to agree to renew the appointment of the current Chair of Standards Committee, Mr Joseph Jackson, for a further period of three years. RESOLVED that the re-appointment of Mr Joseph Jackson as the Independent Chair of the Council’s Standards Committee for a further three years from the date of the meeting be agreed.

The Common Seal of the County Council of Northumberland was hereunto affixed in the presence of ..............................……………………………… Chairman of the County Council …………............................................…………. Duly Authorised Officer


Council Minutes – 7 October 2015 4.55 pm

NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY COUNCIL At an extraordinary meeting of Northumberland County Council held at County Hall, Morpeth on Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 4.55 p.m.

PRESENT

S. Dickinson (Business Chair, in the Chair)

COUNCILLORS

Arckless, G.R. Bawn, D. Bridgett, S.C. Burt, E. Cairns, H. Cairns, K. Campbell, D. Cartie, E. Castle, G. Dale, P.A.M. Daley, W. Davey, J.G. Davey, S. Dodd, R.R. Douglas, M.I. Dungworth, S. Flux, B. Foster, J.D. Gallacher, B. Gibson, R. Gobin, J.J. Graham, K.O. Grimshaw, L. Hepple, A. Homer, C. Hunter, E.I. Hutchinson, J.I. Jackson, P.A. Johnstone, T.

Jones, G.W. Jones, V. Kelly, P. Ledger, D. Lindley, I.P. Murray, A.H. Nisbet, K. Parry, K. Pidcock, B. Pidcock, L. Purvis, M. Reid, A.W. Reid, J. Richards, M.E. Rickerby, L.J. Riddle, J.R. Robson. T. Sambrook, A.G. Sanderson, H.G.H. Simpson, E. Smith, J.E. Swithenbank, I.C.F. Tebbutt, A. Thorne, T.N. Tyler, V. Wallace, A. Watson, J.G. Webb, G. Woodman, J.

OFFICERS

Hadfield, K. Henry, L. Mason, S. Roll, J.

Committee Services Manager Legal Services Manager Chief Executive Democratic Services Manager


55. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

RESOLVED:

(a) That under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item on the Agenda as it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the 1972 Act, and

(b) That the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public

interest in disclosure for the following reasons:-

Agenda Item Paragraph of Part I of Schedule 12A

2 1, 3 and 4 Information relating to any individual, information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information), and information relating to any consultations or negotiations, or contemplated consultations or negotiations in connection with any labour relations matter arising between the authority or a Minister of the Crown and employees of, or office holders under, the Authority.

The public interest in maintaining this exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosure because of the fact that decisions regarding individual employees needed to be taken in private.


Officer Leadership Arrangements Members were provided with individually marked copies of the report which were returned at the end of the meeting. The Chief Executive highlighted recommendations 12 and 13 in the report which were the issues Council needed to agree in accordance with the Council’s Pay Policy, and he provided some background to the proposals, which would both save money and provide effective leadership. Members raised a number of points and queries, including:-

Queries around reporting structures within Local Services and Housing Delivery.

The position and reporting mechanisms of ARCH and Active Northumberland within the Council and the importance of clear accountability.

A request that senior management team contact information and detail be made available to members.

Concerns about the length of time members had to consider the proposals.


The valuable contribution played by the Executive Director of Wellbeing and Community Health which had been recognised.

The right of the administration to organise the officer structure as it saw fit and the expectation of further proposals being brought forward.

Members were reminded that the only recommendations for Council to agree were recommendations 12 and 13 in the report. The rest of the detail in the report was for members’ information. On the recommendations being put to the vote there voted FOR: 44; AGAINST:0; ABSTENTIONS: 17. It was therefore RESOLVED that:- (a) in line with the Council’s Pay Policy the salaries of the Director of Corporate

Resources, Director of Adult and Community Care Services and the Director of Local Services and Housing Delivery be agreed as detailed in the report; and

(b) in line with the Council’s Pay Policy, the exit packages of the Head of

Financial and Customer Services and the Head of Planning and Housing be agreed as detailed in the report.

The Common Seal of the County Council of Northumberland was hereunto affixed in the presence of ..............................……………………………… Chairman of the County Council …………............................................…………. Duly Authorised Officer


Cabinet Minutes – 29 September 2015


CABINET

At a meeting of the Cabinet held at County Hall, Morpeth on Tuesday 29 September 2015 at 10.00 am.

PRESENT

Councillor D. Ledger (Deputy Leader of the County Council in the Chair)

CABINET MEMBERS

Arckless, G.R. Dungworth, S. Hepple, A. Jackson, P.

Reid, J. Swithenbank, I.C.F. Tyler, V.

OTHER COUNCILLORS

Dale, P.A.M. Dickinson, S. Douglas, M.I. Grimshaw, L.

Sambrook, A. Simpson, E. Wallace, A.

OFFICERS

Garrick, J. Hadfield, K. Henry, L. Lally, D. Ledger, K. Mason, S. Paul, G.

Senior Manager Strategic Planning and Housing Committee Services Manager Legal Services Manager Executive Director – Wellbeing and Community Health Head of Planning and Housing Services Chief Executive Director of Planning, Housing and Economy


Apologies were received from Councillor Davey and Kelly.


29. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on Tuesday 8 September 2015, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

30. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF WELLBEING AND COMMUNITY HEALTH

Proposed Closure of Herdley Bank Church of England Primary School

The report outlined the consultation being undertaken by the Governing Body of Herdley Bank CE Primary School on their proposal to close the school with effect from 30 April 2016. The report also set out the reasons for the decision of the Governing Body to undertake consultation and an overview of the consultation process (copy attached to the signed minutes as Appendix A). The report was presented by Councillor Arckless who reminded members that this was a consultation by the Governing Body, and that Cabinet was being asked to authorise the Executive Director to respond; no decision was being requested. The Council was in law responsible for the final decision which would be taken in December, taking into account the recommendation from the governors and the consultation response. The Cabinet would also need to bear in mind statutory guidance before approving closure of a rural school as detailed on page three of the report. The Executive Director’s response to the consultation would simply confirm the advice already given to the Governing Body about the issues to consider, and the arrangements to be made if closure was confirmed. It would not express a view about the proposal to close since it would not be procedurally acceptable to pre-judge the recommendation to be made to Cabinet in December. He added that whilst all schools received a standard annual lump sum on top of per-pupil funding, all funding above that level was based on pupil numbers, and the rapid decline of pupils was clearly an issue for the sustainability of the school. RESOLVED that:- (a) the statutory consultation being undertaken by the Governing Body of

Herdley Bank CE Primary School on a proposal to close the school with effect from 30 April 2016 be noted;

(b) authority be delegated to the Executive Director of Wellbeing and Community

Health to respond on behalf of the Council to the consultation on the closure of Herdley Bank CE Primary School, as well as to any possible subsequent Statutory Notice; and


(c) should the Governing Body of Herdley Bank CE Primary School agree to the publication of a Statutory Notice proposing the closure of the school, it be noted that the Cabinet will be required to make the final decision on whether or not to approve the closure of the school.


Northumberland Local Plan Pre-Submission Core Strategy and Associated Documents The report sought approval for the publication and consultation on the Northumberland Local Plan Pre Submission Core Strategy and associated documents (copy attached to the signed minutes as Appendix B, along with the report of the Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC). The report was presented by Councillor Hepple who thanked officers for their many hours of work and commitment. He drew members’ attention to a number of points:-

The significant engagement undertaken since 2012

The government announcement that it wanted a million new homes built by 2020

The NPPF demanded a planning policy which supported and helped to grow the economy

The Strategy supported the aspiration for Northumberland to grow and prosper – which required more jobs, more residents of working age to fill those jobs and a greater choice in the housing market

Without economic, housing and jobs growth as proposed in the Strategy, there was a real concern that many towns and settlements would become unviable and unsustainable.

The Strategy had been amended in the light of comments, for example on the release of green belt land, and further significant work had been undertaken since the last consultation

He felt the Strategy was ambitious but deliverable Councillor Wallace presented the Scrutiny report, and conveyed the Committee’s appreciation of the planning staff. Most concerns had been addressed, and the Committee looked forward to having the Strategy in place by this time next year. Jo-Anne Garrick referred to the additional information circulated at the meeting (copy attached to the signed minutes), which consisted of a list of minor amendments to the pre-submission draft, amended maps and amended sections 3 and 4 of the Ponteland Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). She then referred to the key issues in the report as follows:-

The completion of the Employment Land and Premises Study had updated the employment land requirements and distribution of land. The allocation and de-allocation of land would be controversial but would provide a strengthened policy approach to economic growth.


The housing section had been informed most significantly by the Strategic Housing Market Assessment, amongst others. She stressed that the housing numbers were indicative.

The updated SHMA had reassessed the affordable housing need to 15% of new planning permissions within the Strategy. This took into account what had already been delivered, the level of net need and the number of units forecast to be delivered in future. This would be kept under review.

Further work had been done on the green belt and concerns taken into account, particularly around safeguarded land, and care had been taken to provide a consistent approach to the treatment of smaller settlements.

It had been felt appropriate to develop an SPD for Ponteland which would provide more detailed investigation than the Core Strategy would allow. There may be a need for further consultation as the SPD evolved.

Councillor Jackson then made a number of points including the following:-

He recognised the amount of work which had gone into the document and supported the environmental proposals which would protect large parts of Northumberland.

He had concerns around the proposed housing numbers. Northumberland had very limited population growth and the suggested number of new homes of 12,500 over the Plan period was drawn from DCLG figures. However, the Strategy proposed almost twice that figure which would have a significant impact on communities. He understood this was based on the consultant’s report which he looked forward to seeing.

He also had concerns about the economic strategy and that the workforce figures were not as robust as they should be. He felt that the employment situation in Northumberland was healthier than the Strategy suggested, and was concerned about the implication within the report that there was a need to import workers.

He did not agree with the concentration of economic development on the main towns and felt it should be more evenly spread.

The proposals would vastly change the character of both Ponteland and Morpeth which was not supported by residents.

Ponteland did not have the characteristics of a main town and the number of additional dwellings could end up much higher than originally proposed – potentially 2,000 for the area involved, which would destroy its character. Nor had the Town Council been sufficiently involved.

Councillor Hepple responded that the 2012 DCLG figures were only a baseline figure from which to start, and Councillor Jackson’s comments appeared to be out of sync with the government’s aspirations to help communities grow and prosper, which he felt the Core Strategy would facilitate. Councillor Swithenbank supported the proposals for housing. Traditional employment had changed immensely in the County, leading more people to travel to the Tyne and Wear area to work. It would be unwise to sit and wait for industry to come to the County and then build houses.


Councillor Reid spoke in support of the Strategy. On the recommendations being put to the vote, there voted FOR: 6; AGAINST: 1 (PAJ). It was therefore RESOLVED that:-

(a) the Northumberland Local Plan Pre Submission Core Strategy be approved

for consultation;

(b) the Draft South East Ponteland Supplementary Planning Document be approved for consultation;

(c) authority be delegated to the Director of Planning, Economy and Housing, in

consultation with the Cabinet Member for Economic Growth, to approve any non-material amendments to the final text of the consultation documents prior to commencement of the formal consultation; and

(d) the report of the Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC be noted.

CHAIR DATE


Cabinet Minutes – 13 October 2015


CABINET

At a meeting of the Cabinet held at County Hall, Morpeth on Tuesday 13 October 2015 at 10.00 am.

PRESENT

Councillor G. Davey (Leader of the County Council in the Chair)

CABINET MEMBERS

Arckless, G.R. Dungworth, S. Hepple, A. Jackson, P. Kelly, P.

Ledger, D. Reid, J. Swithenbank, I.C.F. Tyler, V.

OTHER COUNCILLORS

Dickinson, S. Gallacher, B. Grimshaw, L.

Pidcock, B. Sambrook, A. Simpson, E.

OFFICERS

Dixon, T. Hadfield, K. Henry, L. Lally, D. Laux, D. Mason, S. McNaughton, S.

Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Manager Committee Services Manager Legal Services Manager Executive Director – Wellbeing and Community Health Head of Technical Services Chief Executive Principal Policy Officer

32. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Cabinet held on Tuesday 29 September 2015, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.


33. REPORT OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE Review of Traffic Issues in Blyth

The report provided a summary of the outcomes of the Blyth Transport Study Report which has reviewed existing and future transport problems in the town, and recommended a proposed way forward for developing preferred options (copy attached to the signed minutes as Appendix A, along with the report of the Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC. The OSC report was presented by the Vice Chair Councillor Lynne Grimshaw who drew members’ attention to the main points of the report and highlighted its findings. Councillor Hepple confirmed that the report had been amended since consideration by Scrutiny to take on board their comments on recommendation (b). A number of members made comments including:-

Councillor Dungworth was concerned that the ongoing traffic situation was affecting business and supported the report. She felt that the impact of any initiatives however, would only be felt in the medium to longer term.

Councillor Ledger supported detailed examination of the issues in order to identify a credible solution. Lack of access to Blyth because of inadequate infrastructure was a serious issue which needed to be addressed.

Councillor Reid queried whether there was any correlation or set formula between the spend on the survey and the expected spend on the solution. He welcomed the idea for an in-depth investigation but stressed the need for an evidence based solution.

Councillor Swithenbank commented that if Blyth was to grow and prosper the long term solution needed to be bigger and go further than ever before, which would inevitably be expensive.

Councillor Jackson queried why the proposals for Blyth were not being encompassed within the LTP process. Mr McNaughton advised that the medium term options would be achieved through the LTP. However, any major, long term scheme would be of too great a scale to be delivered through the LTP, and external sources would have to be involved.

Councillor Jackson queried how these proposals fitted with the Council’s ambitions for the reinstatement of the Ashington, Blyth and Tyne line, and the aims of taking pressure off the roads and improving accessibility. He did not feel that focus should be taken away from that initiative as it would alleviate many of the problems identified in the study.

Councillor Swithenbank reminded members about the concentration of population in the south east of the county, and the loss of quality jobs in that area which had not been replaced. A three strand approach of improving access to Blyth, the reinstatement of the Ashington, Blyth and Tyne line and the A1 to SE Northumberland link road was needed to revitalise the economy.

The Leader reminded members that Blyth was one of the major ports on the north east coast. It was therefore vital that it was accessible.


On the recommendations being put to the vote there voted FOR: 9; AGAINST: 0; ABSENTIONS: 1 (PAJ). RESOLVED that:- (a) the process of developing the feasibility design of medium term options for

mitigating the existing traffic problems in Blyth using the 2015/16 LTP allocation be approved;

(b) the approach set out in paragraph 25, which recommends that a report is taken

through the Capital Strategy Group (CSG) and Capital Works Programme Working Group process, be approved. This will request additional funding of £150,000 for surveys, modelling and business case development for the long term options to alleviate future traffic problems and facilitate delivery of the Core Strategy; and

(c) the report of the Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC be noted.

. 34. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF WELLBEING AND COMMUNITY

HEALTH Formula Funding of Schools from April 2016

The report set out the proposed revised funding arrangements for schools and Early Years from April 2016, as well as the outcomes of the consultation with schools Early Years settings and the Schools Forum (copy attached to the signed minutes as Appendix B, along with the report of the Family and Children’s Services OSC which had been circulated at the meeting). The Chief Executive apologised to members that there had been a lack of clarity and full explanation of one of the categories of the formula around PFI. It was the officer view that recommendation 4 in the report, (which had been recommended for deletion by Scrutiny), should be agreed as it would facilitate future opportunities for funding. He asked members not to adopt that recommendation, and to agree that an explanation be given to the Schools Forum to explain its importance and potential benefits.

Councillor Pidcock advised that Scrutiny had focussed on the unfairness of new schools receiving additional funding for maintenance at the cost to other schools in the county. He felt that a very good explanation had been given to members at the meeting of the relevant issues.

Councillor Arckless understood the concerns which had been expressed about the principles of PFI. However, the authority was not doing well financially under the new funding formula, and he supported the Chief Executive’s view to retain as much flexibility as possible for future investment in schools. He supported the retention of recommendation 4, subject to monitoring and review, and he moved all of the recommendations which was seconded by Councillor Dungworth.


Councillor Kelly referred to the number of free schools and academies which were failing and the Prime Minister’s statement that all schools would eventually go out of local authority control, though they would still be responsible for their performance. He had concerns about PFI and felt it would be a burden on those schools which remained non-PFI, though the only way to get a new high school now was through PFI. He queried whether consideration should be given to buying out existing PFI schemes, as had been done by Northumbria Healthcare Trust as the costs became a significant burden in the later stages, and questioned the position regarding the latest school building schemes for Ponteland and Morpeth.

The Leader advised that he would have the Chief Executive respond in more detail to Councillor Kelly after the meeting.

The Chief Executive reiterated to members that leaving in the PFI factor in the formula funding in principle would leave the authority with more flexibility for the future. There were potential PFI options and investments in future where the level of overhead costs were much less, and maintaining a flexible funding position would allow the Authority to deal best with future challenges.

Business cases were still being developed for Ponteland and Morpeth schools so no decisions had been taken regarding PFI, but in the longer term top ups might be necessary and delivered through the mechanisms just discussed.

Councillor Ledger expressed concern at the low response rate from schools to the consultation and felt that all head teachers and chairs of governors should be written to expressing the authority’s concern at this.

Councillor Jackson advised that he would abstain from the vote as he felt the funding for the sparsity factor had not been sufficiently acknowledged.

Councillor Reid sought clarity about the information which had been provided to Scrutiny. Members were advised that they had not been provided with sufficient information on which to reach an informed view. Further information would be provided to the Schools Forum and the scrutiny committee by way of explanation.

Councillor Dungworth reminded members about the Authority’s responsibility to improve the life chances of all young people in Northumberland by providing a quality learning environment.

On the recommendations being put to the vote there voted FOR: 9; AGAINST: 0; ABSENTIONS: 1 (PAJ).

RESOLVED that:-

(a) it be noted that the funding from the DfE for schools for 2016/17 is expected to be at the same level as in 2015/16, although the Government is still likely to introduce a National Funding Formula later this year;

(b) the outcomes of the consultation with schools and the Schools Forum about the formula for 2016/17 be noted;

(c) the criteria and principles set out on page 2 of Appendix A be used to make any necessary minor changes to the funding of schools for 2016/17;


(d) a new factor be introduced into the formula (with a nominal amount indicated in the return to the Department for Education) for 2016/17 to allow flexibility around future potential costs incurred by schools in relation to Private Finance Initiative (PFI) buildings and investments;

(e) the notional funding for SEN in 2016/17 be calculated as detailed on page 3 of Appendix A;

(f) it be noted that, in consultation with the Schools Forum, the Executive Director for Wellbeing and Community Services may need to make some modifications to the cash values of the various formula factors consistent with the agreed principles and criteria once the October 2015 pupil data and the final DSG settlement are received from the DfE in December;

(g) it be noted that funding from the DfE for Early Years for 2016/17 is expected to be at the same level as in 2015/16, although the Government is committed to reviewing this as part of its Spending Review;

(h) the outcomes of the consultation with schools; with Private, Voluntary and Independent (PVI) settings; and with the Schools Forum about the Early Years formula for 2016/17 be noted; and the reduced formula funding factors as set out on page 3 of Appendix B be used in the funding of Early Years for 2016/17, although should the Government’s Spending Review result in additional funding any additional funding, then the Executive Director for Wellbeing and Community Health, in consultation with the Schools Forum, will review the Early Years Block when the exact funding is known; and

(i) the report of the Family and Children’s Services OSC be noted, and the Schools Forum be provided with further information as indicated earlier.

35. REPORT OF THE HEAD OF TECHNICAL SERVICES

Adoption of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy for Northumberland Members were presented with the final draft of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (the Strategy) for Northumberland, which sought comments on the Strategy and the results of the formal consultation process. The report also sought Cabinet’s endorsement of the Strategy to full Council for approval and adoption (copy attached to the signed minutes as Appendix C, along with the report of the Communities and Local Services OSC. RESOLVED that:- (a) Council be recommended to approve and adopt the Local Flood Risk

Management Strategy; and (b) the report of the Communities and Place OSC be noted.

36. CAPITAL WORKS PROGRAMME CABINET ADVISORY GROUP

Members were asked to receive the following notes of the Capital Works Programme CAG, and to agree a number of recommendations highlighted in the 17 Sept 2015 notes (copy attached to the signed minutes as Appendix D).


(a) 9 July 2015 (b) 17 September 2015

RESOLVED that the notes be received, and the recommendations highlighted in the 17 September 2015 notes be approved.

CHAIR DATE


Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC Minutes – 22 September 2015


ECONOMIC GROWTH & CORPORATE SERVICES

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE At a meeting of the Economic Growth & Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee held in Committee Room 1, County Hall, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE61 2EF on Tuesday 22 September 2015 at 10.00 am

PRESENT

Councillor A Wallace (in the Chair)

MEMBERS

Cairns, L.H. Douglas, M.I. Grimshaw, L. Nisbet, K

Sambrook, A.G. Sanderson, H.G.H. Tebbutt, A.

OTHER COUNCILLORS

Hepple, A,

OFFICERS

Garrick J.A. Henry, L. Ledger, K. Little, L. McNaughton, S. Nicholson, S.

Senior Manager, Strategic Planning & Housing Legal Services Manager Head of Planning & Housing Democratic Services Officer Principal Policy Officer Scrutiny Officer


Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Castle, Riddle and Ledger.

28. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Councillor Tebbutt and Douglas declared an interest in the Local Plan Pre-

Submission Document as they were both Members of the Local Development Framework Working Group. Councillor Tebbutt also declared a personal interest when the current situation of the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan was discussed as


part of the Pre-Submission report as his wife was Chair of the Neighbourhood Plan Committee. When the item on the Proposed Closure of Morpeth County Court was introduced Councillor Sanderson advised that whilst he was a Magistrate he did not sit at Morpeth and therefore had no interest to declare.

29. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the Minutes of the Economic Growth and Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 21 July 2015 be agreed as a true record and signed by the Chair. K Ledger, Head of Planning and Housing agreed to provide information on the number of planning applications being considered by Planning Committees.

30. FORWARD PLAN

The published Forward Plan had been circulated with the agenda and would be attached to the signed minutes as Appendix A. The Scrutiny Officer advised that

an additional meeting of this Committee had been arranged for 18 November 2015 to consider proposals for the development of new corporate headquarters to replace County Hall which would be reported to an additional meeting of Cabinet on 19 November, 2015. Councillor Sanderson requested that updates be provided to this Committee on the Combined Authority and the proposals for Joint Working with Durham County Council. The Scrutiny Officer would report this request to Chairmen’s Group. RESOLVED that the information be noted.

REPORTS PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED BY CABINET 31. REPORTS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

The Committee was requested to note the decisions of Cabinet (attached as Appendix B to the signed minutes) in respect of the following reports previously considered by this Committee:-

1. Private Sector Housing Strategy for Northumberland 2. Garage Allocation Policy 3. Planning Protocols on Major Developments, Section 106 Obligations, the

Pre-Application process and Development Liability.

RESOLVED that the decisions be noted.


REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED BY CABINET

32. REPORT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE

(a) Northumberland Local Plan Pre Submission Core Strategy and associated documents.

The report (attached as Appendix C to the signed minutes) was introduced by Councillor Hepple, Cabinet Member along with K Ledger, Head of Planning and Housing Services and J.A. Garrick, Senior Manager, Strategic Planning & Housing. The Committee was advised that the Council was now required to consult on a Pre Submission version of the Core Strategy in advance of formal submission to Government. The report summarised the key issues and the main policy changes that had been proposed following both the consultation of the Full Draft Plan and the significant further evidence work. The significant input of the Local Development Framework Working Group along with the substantial amount of evidence based studies and hard work of staff was highlighted. Additional documents entitled “Northumberland Local Plan Ponteland SPD (Sections 3 and 4)” and “Safeguarded Minerals Infrastructure” were provided at the Committee and would be filed with the signed copy of the Minutes. The Chair and Committee welcomed the report and complimented Officers and staff who had worked incredibly hard and would continue to do so until the Plan had been formally approved. Councillor Tebbutt advised that he had been pleased to see that concerns regarding links between towns had been recognised and specific reference to the ways in which they impact on each other had been included. In response to a question on the current situation with regard to the Morpeth Neighbourhood Plan, the Committee was advised that the Examiner’s report was expected at the end of the week. Local Ward Members would be advised of the outcome. It was confirmed that for the Neighbourhood Plan to become a part of the Development Plan it has to be adopted by the County Council. It was clarified that delegated powers to the Portfolio Holder was being requested so that minor non-material issues such as typing mistakes in the document could be rectified and was not intended for significant issues which would have to go through due process. Councillor Sanderson advised that he had concerns regarding housing and Green Belt within his own local area and therefore could not agree the recommendations. RESOLVED that Cabinet be advised that this Committee supported the recommendations as outlined in the report. (b) Review of Traffic Issues in Blyth The report (attached as Appendix D to the signed minutes) provided a summary of the outcomes of the Blyth Transport Study Report which reviewed existing and future transport problems in the Town and recommend a proposed way forward for developing preferred options. Councillor Hepple and S. McNaughton, Principal Policy Officer, were in attendance to introduce the report and answer any questions from the Committee.


In response to questions from Members it was clarified that the Combined Authority had identified Blyth as a one of the key linkages to feed the Northern Powerhouse and any funding bids would be managed through the Combined Authority. £50,000 had already been allocated through the Local Transport Plan for this year with the report requesting an additional £150,000 Capital Funding for development of a traffic model and major scheme business case for a preferred longer term option to facilitate delivery of the Core Strategy. The Committee sought an assurance that such a request be subject to further member examination. It was agreed that recommendation (b) be amended to reflect that the request for additional funding be considered by the Capital Strategy Group and the Capital Works Programme Working Group. RESOLVED that, subject to the amendment of recommendation (b), as set out above, Cabinet be advised that this Committee supported the recommendations contained in the report.

REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED BY SCRUTINY


Proposed Closure of Morpeth County Court

Councillor Sanderson advised that whilst he was a Magistrate he did not sit at Morpeth and therefore had no interest to declare.

The report (attached as Appendix E to the signed minutes) advised of the Government’s proposals to close Morpeth County Court and the Council’s proposed response to the formal consultation exercise. The Legal Services Manager was in attendance to answer any questions from Members.

Members expressed their concern that a decision to close the Court had already been made and the results of the consultation exercise would not affect this. Notwithstanding this, they fully supported the report and advised that Council’s strong objection to the proposed closure for the reasons outlined be registered.

RESOLVED that the County Council register a strong objection to the proposed closure of Morpeth County Court on behalf of all Northumberland residents.

34. REPORTS OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER

Economic Growth & Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme

The Scrutiny Officer advised that he would action the points raised under the Forward Plan item. RESOLVED that the information be noted.


INFORMATION REPORT

The following report was for information only and could be accessed through Northumberland County Council’s Website. If a member of the Committee would like further explanation of the report, or had questions they wished to put to the relevant Policy Board Member, he/she should contact Democratic Services Section in order that appropriate arrangements could be made.

35. POLICY DIGEST The report gave details of the latest policy briefings, government announcements and ministerial speeches which may be of interest to members. RESOLVED that the report be noted.

CHAIR DATE


Family and Children’s Services OSC Minutes – 8 October 2015


FAMILY AND CHILDREN’S SERVICES OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

At the meeting of the Family and Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee held in the Council Chamber, County Hall, Morpeth on Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 2.00pm.

PRESENT

Councillor B Pidcock (Chair)

COUNCILLORS Burt, E Cartie, E Dale, P.A.M Foster, J.D

Murray, A.H Smith, J.E Thorne, T

CHURCH REPRESENTATIVES Lennox, Rev. D.

TEACHER UNION REPRESENTATIVES Lyst, R.

Woolhouse, R.

PARENT GOVERNOR REPRESENTATIVES

Bickmore, A. Elliott, L.

CABINET MEMBER Arckless, G.R. Children’s Services

OFFICERS PRESENT Bird, M.D. Johnson, A. Nicholson, S.

Team Leader (Scrutiny/Regulatory), Director of Education and Skills Scrutiny Officer, Democratic Services Officer



Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Homer and Rickerby, Ms L Atkin and Mr Cunningham (church representatives), and Mr Lyst (teacher union representative).

19. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Family and Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held on Thursday, 23 July 2015, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

20. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Thorne declared that he had an interest as he was a governor of Shilbottle First School but had received legal advice confirming that he was entitled to participate in the discussion. Other committee members including Councillors Fearon and B Pidcock and Mr Dyson also declared that they were school governors.

REPORT FOR CONSIDERATION BY CABINET 21. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR WELLBEING AND COMMUNITY

HEALTH

Formula Funding of Schools from April 2016

The report set out the proposed revised funding arrangements for schools and Early Years from April 2016, as well as the outcomes of the consultation with schools Early Years settings and the Schools Forum (copy of report attached to the official minutes as Appendix A). Andy Johnson, Director of Education and Skills presented the report providing full details regarding three key areas:

1. the general position with schools funding; 2. issues in relation to Bedlingtonshire and Duchess’ High School and the PFI

contracts; and 3. the position with Early Years funding for 2015/16 and 2016/17.

Following the presentation, the committee discussed the report. The following key points concerning recommendation 4 in the report to the Cabinet, to “agree that a new factor should be introduced into the formula for 2016/17 to reflect the costs incurred by schools with new Private Finance Initiative (PFI) buildings” were discussed

the costs of maintaining existing older buildings were high and the contribution from all schools towards additional PFI payments although


low, was a concern and in addition concerns were expressed about the PFI factor possibly increasing in future years

the Schools Forum’s discussion and opposition to the proposed formula for 2016/17 in terms of the PFI contract. The School Forum considered that the new schools would save from the reduction in their running costs from having new efficient buildings and therefore a PFI factor was unnecessary

concern about the setting of any precedent in Northumberland despite the fact that a significant number other Local Education Authorities included a PFI factor in their formulas

whether it was fair for the two schools to pay for the additional PFI costs or whether it was fair to spread the cost between all schools through the formula

if agreed, this arrangement should only apply for one year and be reviewed, due to uncertainty about the future level of conversions into academies

PFIs for hospitals involved different arrangements. In this case, the schools would be responsible for any losses made and have to be run like a business

the cost of the Prudhoe High School redevelopment was not through PFI funding

sympathy with the position that Bedlingtonshire and The Duchess’ High Schools were in during 2010, in that the only way the two new schools could be funded at that time was through PFI contracts

concern about possible exposure of the two schools and whether they should be disadvantaged as a result of having taken out the PFI route; they should not be penalised as a result of needing new buildings

all schools faced financial pressures, whereas Bedlingtonshire and the Duchess’ High Schools would achieve savings from getting new buildings and could generate funding through other means

although the cost would be split between all 179 schools, the amount incurred to some small schools would be significant for their budgets.

In conclusion, the committee felt that it was unfair to impose a levy on all other schools in the county to cover their repair and maintenance costs, particularly as many of those schools had significant repair and maintenance issues themselves. Although members noted that the proposed new factor could be reviewed annually, they were not content with the precedent that this would set. The committee therefore voted to reject recommendation 4 in the report.

Discussion then followed about recommendation 8 in the report, concerning the Early Years funding. Reference was made to the low number of responses received and the Schools Forum’s suggestions and comments about extra resources possibly being required. The committee expressed concern at the notion of making savings in the area. However they discussed the options presented to them in Appendix B of the report. They felt that it would be counterproductive to reduce central staffing, as they believed that schools/settings needed as much support as was available. They were also reluctant to move funding from elsewhere in the Dedicated Schools Grant, as this would just shift the problem where there were already significant pressures. Although members had misgivings as to how the savings would affect children in areas of deprivation, and stressed the need for funding for preventative measures for young people who needed support during early years, they agreed the proposed


reductions in the Basic Funding Rate and the Funding for Deprivation as set out in tables 3 and 4 in Appendix B, if required.

It was therefore: RESOLVED that the Cabinet be advised that recommendation 4 to the report should be deleted; the reductions in the Early Years Formula in recommendation 8 be agreed, and the remaining recommendations, as set out in the report, be supported.

REPORT FOR CONSIDERATION BY SCRUTINY 22. Director of Education and Skills - Presentation on Schools

The committee received a presentation from Andy Johnson, Director of Education and Skills on the latest data from schools (copy attached to the official minutes of the meeting). Key details included:

information about early years take up and details of reception, year 1 and year 2 schooling

areas for improvement

GCSE results and school improvements but the range in attainment levels; predicted results for 2015 by school and current trends

progress in years 6 – 11 for English and maths

post 16 performance

special education needs requirements

recent Ofsted inspection outcomes

comparisons with other schools in the North East

issues with schools which had recently gone into special measures

key priorities going forward.

Discussion took place of which the key points raised and officer responses were as follows:

the presentation provided accountability; the Local Education Authority was accountable for GCSE results of maintained schools and academies, but had no direct power to intervene in academies

the Government intended to remove powers to intervene in schools away from Local Authority control and give them to the Regional Academies Commissioner and the Department for Education (DfE). Local Education Authorities were the accountable bodies for some statutory duties but this remit was unlikely to be extended

Ofsted had inspected a number of local academies recently. Blyth Academy had been rated as requiring improvement, and Cramlington Learning Village categorised as special measures; the next steps were subject to the DfE’s decision and Regional Academies Commissioner, the Local Authority was powerless to intervene. The Local Education Authority had put an Interim Executive Board in for Ashington High School, which had gone into special measures and served warning notices on several maintained schools.


around 50 schools were categorised as vulnerable to being judged as not good enough. Governing bodies had a crucial role in having discussions with headteachers about required improvements

it was essential that schools’ management teams recognised any problems early and intervened before they developed otherwise their school’s situation would continue to worsen. The Director of Education and Skills, council officers, partnership co-ordinators and school improvement partners had visited 179 schools to discuss these issues

if schools’ performances deteriorated, warning letters were served and discussions then took place with their chair of governor and headteacher to assess why achievement levels had gone down

outcomes were much improved in secondary schools in 2015, however only 62% of secondary schools had an overall effectiveness of good or better, and High Schools’ rate was 38%

Members were advised that a discussion about structures across Northumberland for example in Alnwick and more recently in Berwick was a distraction to the main purpose of improving standards

To conclude, thanks and support were expressed for Mr Johnson for his open and honest presentation, his achievements and difficult challenges faced and how his work supported students. The Chair added that the committee was on his side, was proud of what he had achieved and believed in the work he was doing. It was then: RESOLVED that the presentation be noted.

CHAIR

DATE


Care and Wellbeing OSC Minutes – 15 September 2015


CARE AND WELL-BEING OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

At a meeting of the Care and Well-being Overview and Scrutiny Committee held in Committee Room 1, County Hall, Morpeth on Tuesday, 15 September at 10.00am

PRESENT

Councillor A Sambrook (Chair)

MEMBERS

PAM Dale J Fearon

JA Lang A Sharp

OFFICERS

DP Allen MD Bird J Bowie

Scrutiny Officer, Democratic Services Team Leader (Scrutiny/Regulatory, Democratic Services Head of Safeguarding and Strategic Commissioning

ALSO PRESENT Councillor S Dungworth

ALSO IN ATTENDANCE

T Ashford – HealthWatch Northumberland

J Coe – Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust A English - Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust J Ross – Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group A Turner - Northumbria Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust L Walker - Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group


Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Bawn, Campbell, Cessford, Hunter and Nisbet.


14. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of Care and Well-being Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on Wednesday, 16 June 2015, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

15. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Dale declared an interest in relation to the ‘Primary Care Psychological Therapies Procurement’ report as she sat on the governing body of Northumberland, Tyne and Wear (NTW) NHS Foundation Trust as a County Council appointee.

16. FORWARD PLAN OF KEY DECISIONS The committee considered the Forward Plan of key decisions for September to

December 2015 (filed with the signed minutes as Appendix A). Members were advised that two changes had been made to the Forward Plan since

the agenda had been published, but neither concerned reports within this committee’s remit.

RESOLVED that the information be noted. 17. HEALTH AND WELL-BEING BOARD MINUTES

The minutes of the Health and Wellbeing Board meetings held from June – July 2015 (filed with the signed minutes as Appendix B) were presented to the committee for the scrutiny of any issues discussed at the meetings. RESOLVED that the information be noted.

REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION BY SCRUTINY

18. REPORTS OF THE NORTHUMBERLAND CLINICAL COMMISSIONING GROUP

Primary Care Psychological Therapies Procurement With the agreement of the Chair, the ordering of the consideration of reports on the agenda was changed, and the Northumberland Clinical Commissioning Group’s (NCCG) report was taken first. The report (filed with the official minutes as Appendix F) provided details about primary care psychological therapies and their procurement. The therapies were a method of treating psychological disorders or emotional difficulties that usually involved working with a therapist or counsellor, in either individual or group sessions.


NCCG Chief Operating Officer Ms J Ross introduced the report by providing further details about the engagement process undertaken to assess what services people wanted and the production of a four step model. A tendering process had followed and the contract had been awarded to Talking Matters Northumberland. It had been a substantial and robust process. In response to a question, Ms Ross would follow up where Talking Matters Northumberland’s Hexham area base was. Responding to a question about communications about the availability of and access to the service and ensuring that those who needed it were informed, members were advised that existing service users had been informed by letter, and information had been placed in GP practices and on websites. Communications to patients and key stakeholders had been good but some further work was in progress for informing medical practices. However the expected number of referrals had been received so far. A member queried how the new process would work for child and adolescent mental health services (CAMHS), to which Ms Ross advised that CAMHS was for younger people only but Talking Matters Northumberland had engaged with all relevant service providers. The Health and Well-being Board had recently discussed the CAMHS service. The CAMHS service had improved, with waiting times down to 12 weeks and on course to reduce to nine. RESOLVED that the report be noted.

19. REPORTS OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF WELL-BEING AND COMMNITY HEALTH

(a) Safeguarding Adults Annual Report 2014/15

The attached report (filed with the official minutes as Appendix E) provided an overview of the work carried out under the multi-agency arrangements for safeguarding adults in 2014/15. The portfolio holder thanked staff for their work, particularly Anna English, and all services across all agencies involved. There had been an increase in notifications, mostly to the police, but this was a positive change due to improved communications with the police rather than an increase in cases. The Care Act placed an important role in safeguarding and Northumberland had had an established Safeguarding Board. A demonstration of the Jack and Josephine safeguarding model was provided at the meeting. The Jack and Josephine models were used to involve service users, people with learning difficulties for example, about a number of key issues including their rights, personal hygiene and health matters including healthy eating and exercise. It helped keep them safe and also could be used in one to one scenarios such as to discuss sensitive matters like bereavement and behavioural issues. Sessions using the models were arranged through a strict referral process.


Members asked questions to which answers were provided, of which the key details were:

the Jack and Josephine models were initially designed for adults with learning disabilities, but were beginning to be used by the children’s and transition teams; there were also Desmond and Daisy models

the models were anatomically correct and could be used to explain topics such as pregnancy and relationships

Northumberland was one of few local authorities to use this innovative approach with safeguarding

a series of sessions had taken place at Pottergate at Alnwick.

Members thanked and congratulated officers on their work and presentation and were very impressed at the originality of the scheme. Further to the safeguarding report, members were advised that there were two separate routes for reporting a service user assaulting another service user, and service users assaulting nurses/other social care staff. Cases were assessed, for example to investigate whether patients needed more care and / or if there was an underlying medical cause. Issues were not looked at in isolation. There was a significant amount of joined up working, and the police were very engaged partners. Random spot checks were organised and cases were brought to the Safeguarding Board for consideration. Joint meetings took place with the police and the Care Quality Commission (CQC); there was regular contact with the CQC. Immediate safety was the paramount concern. Replying to another question about the reasons for the restricting of admissions, members were advised that over 70 older people’s care homes were registered. There had been problems with some services’ record keeping which had had an impact on the level of care provided in certain cases, and admissions had been restricted for a time to enable the service to recover. Work had taken place to resolve issues and keep the services safe. There were limited financial resources now for care services. It was then: RESOLVED that the report be noted.

(a) Update on the former Supporting People Programme The report (filed with the official minutes as Appendix C) explained how the Council’s budget for 2015/16 included a saving of £3m to be achieved by withdrawing funding for support schemes outside core statutory Council functions. The schemes affected were formerly funded through the national Supporting People grant programme. This report described how the saving has been achieved. The portfolio holder further introduced the report with reference to the savings and areas that continued to be supported and how some providers had managed to find alternative solutions.


A member praised the approach of the warden scheme through which people could stay in their community with a warden overseeing them. Members were advised that options for warden schemes had been discussed with a range of housing providers. This had included consideration about accessing Housing Benefit support. A flexible approach was required for warden schemes and there were different ways to provide them. Consideration would be given to the extent to which wardens were managed and the alignment between the levels of support provided and the levels of need. Consultation had taken place with tenants. A member added that any cutbacks did affect people, but was pleased that savings had been made with a minimum impact and little impact on frontline services. The portfolio holder stressed that the credit should go to the staff in the county who provided the service for residents in the face of resources ever decreasing. RESOLVED that the report be noted.

(b) Customer Experience: Joint Children’s and Adult Services Customer

Compliments and Complaints Annual Report 2015/15 The report (filed with the official minutes as Appendix D) updated members of the

committee of the activities of the Children’s and Adult Services complaints services; how customer experiences were sought and to provide an overview of what people have said about the services; how complaints were handled and statistical information from 2014/15; matters of general note that arose out of those complaints; decisions made by the Local Government Ombudsman in respect of complaints they received about children’s and adult’s services; and other feedback from people who used the services.

The portfolio holder added that complaints provided an opportunity to improve

services, and people complained in order to be heard. The numbers of compliments had increased, and as compliments were less likely to be received, it demonstrated that people had had a very good experience to take time to feed back their views. It was important that both complaints and compliments were used as learning tools. It was also reported that the postponement of the next phase of the Care Act meant that further proposed rights to appeal against local authority decisions would be delayed until 2020.

In response to a question, members were advised that there was no statutory time

requirement in adult services to acknowledge cases. The target figure for children’s services would be checked. Members were also informed of work organised to pull together the themes of complaints and compliments. In many cases, there had been a breakdown in communication and most cases matters could be resolved if there was dialogue at an early stage. It was then:

RESOLVED that the report be noted.

20. THEMED SCRUTINY

Members were recommended to agree a new themed scrutiny topic: “How to achieve dementia friendly services in Northumberland”. In summary, the scope would be to gain an understanding of current Northumberland County Council and


partners’ work to counter the onset of dementia. A fuller scoping document had been drafted and would be circulated. Discussion followed in which a member queried if the theme would be limited to being just informative, or whether the aim instead was to achieve an outcome/ positive recommendation for change. Another member expressed concern that another proposed themed scrutiny topic for the committee, ambulance response times, had not been agreed by the Chairmen’s Group to be taken forward. Members were advised that details of the Chairmen’s Group’s decision had been circulated to the committee; Chairmen’s Group had considered that as the North East Ambulance Service would be attending another meeting of the committee, it was appropriate for all members to be invited to attend and ask questions there instead of at a themed scrutiny meeting. Members discussed and agreed that ambulance response times was not just a rural issue as ambulances could be diverted from some urban areas into neighbouring larger conurbations. It was further stressed that discussion about response times should not be about individual cases, but about working towards a constructive framework at a high level. Reference was made to the request for ambulance response times to be considered by the Council’s area committees, to which it was noted that the next Area Chairs Briefing meeting would take place on 29 September and this proposal could be discussed there. The portfolio holder added that ambulance times was not something within the Council’s remit to change, and was keen to focus on and give support with issues for which the Council could influence. It was then: RESOLVED that (1) the scoping document for the proposed dementia theme be emailed to

committee members for their consideration of whether to agree it as a piece of themed scrutiny; and

(2) the committee’s request for themed scrutiny of ambulance response times be raised further with the Chairmen’s Group.

REPORTS OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER 21. CARE AND WELL-BEING OSC WORK PROGRAMME 2015-16 Members considered the committee’s work programme for the 2015-16 year (filed

with the official minutes as Appendix E). The following were noted/requested:

an update on the Care Act being presented to the next meeting in November

bringing forward the Ambulance Services’ Winter Plan item to November’s meeting.

RESOLVED that the work programme and changes made be agreed.


INFORMATION ITEMS 22. POLICY DIGEST

The report, available on the Council’s website, gave details of the latest policy briefing, government announcements and ministerial speeches which might be of interest to members. RESOLVED that the report be noted.

CHAIR DATE


Communities and Local Services OSC Minutes – 23 September 2015


COMMUNITIES AND LOCAL SERVICES OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

At a meeting of the Communities and Local Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee held in Committee Room 1, County Hall, Morpeth on Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 10:30 am.

PRESENT

Councillor B Gallacher (Chair, in the Chair)

COMMITTEE MEMBERS

E Armstrong D Campbell L Grimshaw

L H Cairns G W Jones V Jones

CABINET MEMBERS

I C F Swithenbank (Cabinet Member for Local Services)

OTHER COUNCILLORS

E Simpson (Deputy Business Chair) V Tyler (Cabinet Member for Arts, Leisure and Culture) J C Woodman

OFFICERS

R Bendell H Clear Hill T Dixon P Jones K Norris S Nicholson

Infrastructure Manager Sustainability Programme Manager Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Manager Head of Neighbourhood Services Democratic Services Officer Scrutiny Officer


Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Foster, Graham and Horncastle.


21. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Communities and Local Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

22. FORWARD PLAN OF KEY DECISIONS

Members received the latest Forward Plan of Key Decisions for the period September – December 2015 (copy attached to the official minutes as Appendix A). In addition, it was noted that a special meeting of Cabinet would be held on 19 November 2015 to consider proposals for the development of new corporate headquarters to replace County Hall. The issue would also be considered by Economic Growth and Corporate Services OSC on 18 November 2015. RESOLVED – that the information be noted.

REPORTS PREVIOUSLY CONSIDERED BY CABINET 23. REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PUBLIC PROTECTION

Food and Feed Service Plan 2015/16 The report and comments from this committee were considered by Cabinet on 8 September 2015 and an extract from the minutes was attached for information (Appendix B). The Chair stated that he had contacted the Legal Services Manager regarding the Declarations of Interest made and he was comfortable that Councillors Grimshaw and G Jones could have remained in the room so long as they did not comment. RESOLVED - That the information be noted.

REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED BY CABINET 24. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF LOCAL SERVICES

Adoption of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy for Northumberland Trevor Dixon, Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Manager, introduced the above report which presented the final draft of the Local Flood Risk Management Strategy (the Strategy) for Northumberland. Comments made by this Committee would be taken to the Cabinet on 13 October 2015. (Report enclosed with the official Minutes as Appendix C.)


Members were advised that a report had been presented to Communities and Place OSC in November last year where the format and content of the draft Strategy was presented prior to undertaking the formal consultation process. Consultation had taken place and since then officers had been refining and updating the Strategy in order to produce the final document. Response to the consultation had been disappointing, with only 7 formal responses having been received on the Strategy itself and 2 more with specific emphasis on environmental issues. Those responses had been generally positive and, given the opportunities to comment on the Strategy and lack of any objections, it had been deemed that the Strategy was appropriate for the Council. Officers had worked closely with the Environment Agency and other key stakeholders to develop the plans. The Cabinet Member for Local Services said it was a very comprehensive report and would need to be kept up to date. Members asked questions and made comments as follows:

It was good to see that dialogue had taken place with Planning and Housing Services to provide advice on local flooding matters as set out on page 14 of the report.

A member stated that she lived in a very small village and residents had chosen not to comment as they felt it was a strategic issue. They had, however, found the dialogue with Aaron McNeill, FCERM Programme Officer (Flood & Coastal Erosion Risk Management), very useful and asked that their thanks be passed on to him.

In response to queries regarding the consultation, it was stated that there had been a very comprehensive approach, it was published on the website, posted on social media and press notices were issued. In addition all Parish/Town Councils had been approached as well as every elected member and a range of strategic partners.

In response to concerns regarding the cutting of highway verges, it was stated that discussions were underway regarding the possibility of outsourcing the cutting of verges. There would be an overview of all grounds maintenance work carried out over the summer in order to consider how improvements could be made.

It was acknowledged that certain gullies were problematic and changes in traffic management guidance made some of the day to day maintenance more difficult.

With regard to new developments, dialogue should take place through planners and developers to ensure water was displaced correctly. The SuDS Officer had a role in new development to make sure the development would not be subject to flood risk and that it would not increase flood risk elsewhere. Officers worked closely with planners and developers to make sure development schemes were suitable for purpose. It was pointed out that some of the problems were due to increased car ownership as there were more drives which resulted in less soakaway.

Local knowledge was of major importance and that was not reflected in the report.

The Chair requested that information be circulated to members on how often gullies were cleaned.


RESOLVED – that (a) The Strategy be recommended for approval and adoption by the Cabinet and full

Council.

(b) Information be circulated to members on how often gullies were cleaned. REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION BY SCRUTINY

25. REPORT OF THE HEAD OF TECHNICAL SERVICES

Northumberland County Council Energy Programme – Progress Report

The purpose of the report was to update the committee on the progress of the Council’s Energy Programme and related activity regarding energy efficiency and alleviation of fuel poverty. (Report enclosed with the official Minutes as Appendix D.) The Cabinet Member for Local Services congratulated officers on their terrific success in accessing funding from the Central Heating Fund (CHF), an England wide £25 million project supported by the Department of Energy and Climate Change, as detailed in the report. The Head of Neighbourhood Services referred to recent policy announcements and consultations launched by the Government which indicated there would be significant cuts in supporting the installation of renewable energy. He stated that the consultation had been challenged and meetings arranged with potential contractors to explore options for the proposed Ashington Solar Farm. Whilst funding might affect the business case for the scheme in the short term, officers would continue to monitor the situation to establish the best options for developing the project. The Sustainability Programme Manager summarised the report providing background information, details of current activity, energy efficiency, energy procurement, renewable energy generation and future plans. Members commented as follows:

Members thanked officers for the comprehensive report which was welcomed and officers were congratulated on moving forward.

It was hoped that the Council would be a net producer of electricity by 2020 as highlighted in the report.

It was requested that the committee receive further reports to monitor the situation.

Thanks were conveyed to the Sustainability Programme Manager for energy advice he had given to the elderly.

In response to comments regarding the Central Heating Fund (CHF) programme, clarification was provided on the criteria for funding. Further information on the CHF programme would be provided to members once some details had been finalised with the Department of Energy and Climate Change. It was emphasised that the funding was not available for making big strategic links to the gas


network but CHF may allow new gas heating systems to be installed where short gas connections were supported by other funding.

With regard to comments regarding storage heaters in Council buildings, it was stated that officers were looking at the Council’s heating systems and energy use to determine what was appropriate.

Investment was not worthwhile in buildings proposed for sale.

RESOLVED that the information be noted and the committee receive further reports at future meetings.

26. REPORT OF THE HEAD OF NEIGHBOURHOOD SERVICES Review of Public Conveniences The purpose of the report was to provide members with the opportunity to comment

upon the proposed changes to the provision of public conveniences following the review of the service as part of the Council’s revenue budget savings for 2015/16. (Report enclosed with the official Minutes as Appendix E.)

The Cabinet Member for Local Services advised members that a great deal of

dialogue with Parish/Town Councils had taken place regarding public conveniences located in their area. The Council continued to operate a ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme whereby, for a financial incentive, commercial premises made their toilet facilities available to the public. Discussions had taken place regarding the expansion of the scheme as that could be done at a relatively low cost and facilities were often cleaner and of a higher standard.

It was noted that even if approval was given to the proposed changes, required cost

reductions would not be met. The Head of Neighbourhood Services referred to initial proposed savings of £240 k

but said, as the result of discussions with Town and Parish Councils, it had been envisaged to reduce those revenue budget savings to £120 k. It was emphasised that it was not a strategic requirement for the Council to provide public toilets and, because of financial constraints, service levels would have to be reduced. It had been a difficult and challenging process and dialogue was on-going. There would need to be a consistent approach and further meetings with Parish/Town Councils would take place.

Details of options were outlined in the report and discussion took place regarding facilities in particular areas.

The Head of Neighbourhood Services provided an update from the joint meeting of the Local Services (Urban and Rural) Cabinet Advisory Groups which had taken place on 16 September. Feedback would usually have been reflected in the report but that had not been possible due to the meeting having been delayed for the Aviva Tour of Britain cycle race. The Working Group had supported the proposals subject to the outcome of further dialogue with the affected Town/Parish Councils and had recommended that local members be invited to take part in those discussions. The Group had also emphasised that publicity of the ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme and signage to direct people to the nearest toilet provision was very important.


Members commented and asked questions as follows:

How did officers identify suitable premises for the ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme? In response it was stated that officers had contacted Parish/Town Councils to seek local knowledge to determine if there were suitable alternatives in the area. There was a ‘knock on doors’ approach which would be done in a targeted way and publicity would be increased. Although there were financial incentives, it was not purely cost driven as it was a way for businesses to enhance their footfall.

Concerns were expressed regarding the proposed closure of the toilets in the Ranch Car Park at Blyth beach.

Reference was made to the existing lack of toilets in Wansbeck Riverside Park which was a place of natural beauty and it was felt there should be at least temporary toilets for summer months in order to encourage tourism. In response it was stated that the review had concentrated on existing provision and the toilet block at Riverside Park had been closed for several years and had been part of the caravan park which had been transferred to Arch. At that point the Chair stated that the land on which the toilet block was located had not been transferred to Arch, although Arch had initially agreed to take it, it had not happened. The Cabinet Member for Local Services said the issue would be investigated.

It was acknowledged that there was no statutory obligation for the Council to provide toilets but there was an economic benefit as tourism was a major industry and there were concerns that closures were not driven by usage. In response it was stated that dialogue was on-going with Parish/Town Councils and Active Northumberland to ascertain if there was an alternative solution. Officers fully recognised the wider economic benefits of toilet provision which was why they had agreed to reduce revenue budget savings to £120 k.

There were concerns regarding toilet provision in Bamburgh during winter months. It was stated that it was not a case of there being no provision, it was about providing alternative provision and it was expected to provide 3 ‘You’re Welcome’ schemes in Bamburgh.

It was pointed out that Bamburgh had less than 100 homes, the number of tourists dominated the village and winter tourism was encouraged. There was no toilet provision at the Grace Darling museum which was the subject of numerous school trips.

The final decision regarding closures should be made in conjunction with Northumberland Tourism.

Toilet provision was very important, particularly for the elderly. The ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme should be in addition to, rather than instead of, toilet blocks.

Problems in Hexham and Bedlington were discussed as well as venues which were considered to be unsuitable and concern was expressed that suggested venues in other areas may also be unsuitable. In response it was stated that the ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme had been devised in conjunction with colleagues in Health and Well-being and officers were happy to look at other facilities in Hexham. With regard to Bedlington, dialogue was taking place with the Town Council to provide toilet facilities on an event basis. It was suggested that officers contact the G.P. practice about the ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme.


It was felt by some Councillors that pubs were not suitable alternatives and it was suggested that officers contact Councillors in surrounding areas for their views regarding other alternatives.

Financial constraints were acknowledged but each area should have at least one strategic toilet block.

Members of the public should be informed of the reasons for closure.

Parish/Town Councils should look at provision and increase precepts if necessary.

There were areas where the number of houses meant the precept was low and it would not be sufficient to increase it.

When promoting tourism, toilet blocks should not be closed. Areas such as Low Newton had hundreds of visitors and the provision was totally inadequate.

Reference was made to bowling clubs where members would not allow the public to use the facilities. In response it was stated that officers would look into the legalities and leasing arrangements.

Reference was made to the dangers of putting people at risk due to the lack of toilet facilities.

The Chair referred to provision in Ashington and expressed concern at closures in Milburn Road and Station Road as facilities should be provided to encourage visitors to the shopping areas. He agreed that pubs were not always a suitable alternative but said that some were very accessible and friendly. However, he queried if there was a contingency plan as pubs were continuously being closed down. Queries were also raised regarding the financial incentive and damage limitation.

In response to comments regarding provision in Amble, it was stated there were currently two toilet blocks. One was mainly used by tourists, hence there was a bigger demand in the summer. The Town Council had expressed concern regarding the quayside market in winter so talks had taken place regarding a venue for the ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme. It was intended that the toilets at the harbour would be closed in the winter period but the Harbour Commissioners would be approached to determine if they wished to fund opening for the Sunday market during the winter.

Consultation and agreement with Northumberland Tourism should take place before any changes were implemented.

The Cabinet Member for Local Services said there were changes in the report that had been agreed and these should be implemented as soon as possible. The changes which had not been agreed would be subject to further dialogue and officers would continue to promote the ‘You’re Welcome’ scheme. The Chair stated that the issue should be looked at from a strategic, not local, point of view. A member reiterated his concerns regarding tourism and how it impacted on the economic plan. He asked for a commitment from the Council that Northumberland Tourism would be consulted and involved. Economic development was an important driver within the County and must be taken into account when looking at a cost cutting exercise. The Chair suggested that an update be provided at October’s meeting.


The Head of Neighbourhood Services stated that if Parish/Town Councils were happy with the proposals, in conjunction with Ward Members, they would be signed off. Where further issues had been raised, further dialogue would take place. A member asked for clarification that Northumberland Tourism would be consulted. In response the Cabinet Member for Local Services said their comments would be considered. Further discussion took place regarding what members were being asked to agree. Councillor V Jones asked for it be recorded that she was against the proposals. RESOLVED that (a) Members support the proposed changes to public conveniences as outlined in the

report where they had been accepted by Town and Parish Councils and those which had not been accepted be subject to further dialogue.

(b) A further report to address the issues raised be brought to the meeting of

Communities and Local Services OSC on 21 October 2015.

REPORT OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER 27. Communities and Local Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work

Programme Members considered the Communities and Local Services Overview and Scrutiny

Committee Work Programme (enclosed as Appendix F).

As previously agreed, a further report regarding the review of public conveniences would be brought to the meeting on 21 October. A number of important issues had been raised regarding green energy and these would be progressed for the work programme.

RESOLVED that the information be noted.

INFORMATION REPORT

28. POLICY DIGEST

The report, available on the Council’s website, provided details of policy developments that might be of interest to members.

RESOLVED that the information be noted. CHAIR DATE


Corporate Performance OSC Minutes – 24 September 2015


CORPORATE PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE

At a meeting of the Corporate Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee held in Committee Room 2, County Hall, Morpeth on Thursday, 24 September 2015 at 10.00 a.m.

PRESENT

Councillor K. Cairns (Chair, in the Chair)

MEMBERS

Burt, E. Dale, P.A.M. Dickinson, S.J. (part)

Gibson, R.M. (part) Jones, G.W. Reid, A.W.

OFFICERS

Allen, D.P. Elsdon, A. Lawson, S. Todd, A.

Scrutiny Officer Head of Corporate Services Project Officer, Corporate Services Democratic Services Officer


Apologies for absence were received from Councillors G. Castle, G. Davey, D. Ledger and K. Parry.

8. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the Corporate Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee, held on Thursday, 25 June 2015, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chair.

9. FORWARD PLAN OF KEY DECISIONS The Committee considered the Forward Plan of key decisions for September to

December 2015. (A copy of the Forward Plan has been enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix A).

RESOLVED that the Forward Plan, be noted.


REPORTS FOR CONSIDERATION BY SCRUTINY 10. REPORTS OF THE HEAD OF CORPORATE SERVICES 10.1 State of Northumberland and Corporate Plan progress

S. Lawson, Project Officer presented a report which provided the Committee with updates on information on the state of Northumberland; and on progress in delivering the Corporate Plan. (Report enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix B). The Committee discussed the State of Northumberland update which covered a framework of around 45 key indicators reflecting the Corporate Plan’s key priorities and provided a picture for the context of Northumberland. The data showed Northumberland’s current position and compared that both with previous data and with comparative information at a regional and national level. Following on from the update a number of comments were made including the following:-

Confirmation that data provided regarding the number of households occupied had been sourced from the Census in 2001 and 2011 but specific information regarding Northumberland’s current position against the number of new builds could be sought from the relevant service, if required.

Members were informed that a vast amount of work was continuing to be done to tackle key indicators and drive performance to improve the state of Northumberland and deliver the objectives set within the Corporate Plan.

A comment was made regarding the number of unoccupied households, second homes and holiday homes and how these impacted on communities and Council Tax.

The positive improvements made in tackling high street vacancy rates.

Concern regarding the percentage increase in the level of homeless and the strong possibility that the figure could rise further due to Government changes such as Welfare Reform and Universal Credit.

With regard to the low number of business start-ups a query was raised as to whether the Council had a role in encouraging and supporting growth in this area perhaps through the development of small business hubs in towns. Comments were made regarding previous agencies no longer in existence that would have played a role in encouraging a stronger business base. However, it was reported that a number of initiatives had taken place to promote the area to external businesses and Arch – Northumberland’s Development Company had undertaken work to improve the county. It was stated that it was hoped that this recent work would result in an increase in the performance indicator.

With regard to page 8 of the document it was suggested that the following amendment be made; ‘The number of permanent exclusions from school has doubled…’.

Concerns were raised by the Committee regarding the number of children in need within Northumberland. At 31 March 2014 Northumberland’s children in need had risen by 528 from the previous year equating to 3,381. The report stipulated that this figure was significantly higher than either


equivalents for other North East areas or England. It was stated that these figures should be made widely available to enable the public to better understand and recognise the problems faced in Northumberland.

The issues of poverty, deprivation and troubled families in Northumberland and the possible link to the number of children in need were discussed. It was suggested this information be made available to Members when budget and policy setting. However, it was also commented that there could be other factors resulting in children classified as in need and the Council should ensure these drivers were not missed when scrutinising the issue.

A suggestion was made to monitor the impact of recent welfare changes on residents in order to collate a portfolio of evidence to present to Government to demonstrate why more funding was needed in this area.

Comments on the rise in the number of food banks in the North and the high number of children affected by malnutrition.

The need to support struggling families to get back on their feet before circumstances escalated and impacted further on those concerned.

The need to remind all when budget setting that the people mostly affected by the decisions taken were the elderly, children and young people.

Clarification of the figures produced regarding greenhouse omissions and how this performance indicator was measured.

A comment that although the Council was promoting tourism a number of public conveniences were proposed to be closed across the county.

Concerns regarding the number of children classed as obese and the possible correlation with areas of deprivation in the county. In response, Members were advised of a number of recent initiatives which had taken place with families to educate and promote on healthy eating, exercise and cooking on a budget with the overall aim to improve health and wellbeing.

The aspiration to bring about a cultural change in order to improve everyone’s lives and the county for all.

Overall, the Committee agreed the issue regarding the high number of children in need within the county needed further scrutiny (possibly by the Family and Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee) to enable Members to fully understand the numbers produced within the report. Members acknowledged that a number of key successes had taken place to improve areas within supporting families but the numbers of children in need was continuing to rise which was a concern for the Committee. Also, due to the effect this rise would be placing on budgets within Children’s Services it was suggested a breakdown detailing how the figures were aligned to budget headings for both this year and the previous financial year also be produced. The Committee then discussed the Corporate Plan. Members welcomed the key successes that had been highlighted in Years One and Two and suggested that all be informed of the good work achieved during this period. Members were advised that Cabinet was scheduled to review progress in November 2015 on both the State of Northumberland and the Corporate Plan. RESOLVED that:-


(a) comments made on the State of Northumberland and Delivery of the Corporate Plan documents, be noted,

(b) the issue concerning the high number of children in need in the county be

referred to Chair’s Group, for possible consideration by Scrutiny. If referred the report would examine why there is a high number of children in need and include those budget headings within Children’s Services (2014/15 and 2015/16 financial years) affected by the rise.

10.2 Financial Monitoring to July 2015

The Committee received a detailed presentation about financial monitoring for up to July 2015 by A Elsdon, Head of Corporate Services (a copy of the presentation has been enclosed with the signed minutes). The key details were:-

The overall position for July 2015-16 for Corporate Resources, Local Services and Wellbeing and Community Health directorates.

A breakdown of expenditure to date within each directorate.

Value forecast to be achieved within each directorate detailing non achieved and unallocated targets.

Discussion followed in which a number of points were raised and responses from officers were:-

A recovery plan had been requested by the Director of Planning, Economy and Housing following the loss of the homelessness grant and inflation of contracts relating to concessionary travel fares. Regarding concessionary travel fares a query was raised as to the percentage of funds allocated from the Council to provide this provision and the costs involved in running the current extended service in Northumberland.

Following the fire at Cowpen Crematorium it was reported that the facility was due to reopen in November 2015 but there would only be a partial service in operation. Insurance investigations were currently taking place and an answer as to whether insurance would cover the projected loss of income forecast was agreed to be sought after the meeting.

Confirmation that risks/pressures across the three directorates would continue to be closely monitored throughout the year.

The number of looked after children in independent placements had reduced although the number of out of county placements had risen.

The number of clients within the Health and Wellbeing Directorate with complex needs was continuing to rise resulting in overspends in some areas.

Confirmation the Council ensured that that Continuing Health Care funding was reclaimed from the NHS.

An update regarding the reviews taking place in Business Support (Local Services) would be provided at a future meeting.


An explanation on how budget savings were identified and the mechanism for ensuring those identified were realistic and in line with the Medium Term Plan were reported.

The need for the Council to ensure the best value of services was being achieved across all directorates particularly those involving young children and vulnerable groups.

RESOLVED that:- (a) the presentation and comments made, be noted, (b) a response to the Cowpen Crematorium query and concessionary travel fares

be sought; and (c) the Committee continue to receive regular updates regarding financial

monitoring.

10.3 Update on Corporate Performance System

The Committee received a presentation which provided an update on the Corporate Performance System, following the demonstration of the system given at the Committee’s last meeting in June 2015. (A copy of the presentation has been enclosed with the signed minutes). There was discussion on how the system might be used to differentiate between statutory and non statutory services to help in considering priorities. It was recognised however, that there remained discretion in the level of statutory services the Council provided and that non-statutory services often supported service delivery. Members were informed that a full six month review of the data held within the System would be presented to the next meeting of the Committee. Members were invited to review the System and provide feedback to officers. RESOLVED that the presentation, be received.

11. REPORT OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER

Corporate Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme 2015-16

Members considered the Corporate Performance Overview and Scrutiny Committee’s Work Programme (a copy of which had been enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix C). RESOLVED that the Work Programme, be noted.

INFORMATION REPORT


The following report was for information only and can be accessed through Northumberland County Council’s Web site. If a member of the Committee would like further explanation of the report, or has questions they wish to put to the relevant Policy Board Member, he/she should contact Democratic Services Section in order that appropriate arrangements can be made.

12. POLICY DIGEST

The report gave details of the latest policy briefings, government announcements and ministerial speeches which may be of interest to members. RESOLVED that the report, be received.

CHAIR DATE


Arts, Leisure and Culture OSC Minutes – 23 September 2015


ARTS, LEISURE & CULTURE

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE At a meeting of the Arts, Leisure & Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee held in Committee Room 1, County Hall, Morpeth, Northumberland, NE61 2EF on Wednesday 23 September 2015 at 2.00 pm

PRESENT

Councillor T Johnstone (in the Chair)

MEMBERS

Cairns, K. Dodd, R.R. Gallacher, B. Jones, G.W.

Lindley, I.P. Pidcock, B Reid A.W. Woodman, J.

OTHER COUNCILLORS

Tyler, V.

OFFICERS

Allen, D.P. Beattie, L. Bracken, M.R. Ledger, B. Little, L.

Scrutiny Officer Leisure Strategy & Development Manager Democratic Services Apprentice Chief Executive, Active Northumberland and Head of Leisure Democratic Services Officer

ALSO PRESENT

Leitch J.

Director of Northumberland Tourism


Apologies for absence were received from Councillor C. Homer and N Walsh.


9. MINUTES RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting of the Arts, Leisure and Culture

Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on Wednesday 24 June, 2015, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and be signed by the Chair.

B Ledger explained that the restructure of Active Northumberland had not been

finalised and a who’s who directory would be produced as soon as possible after it had been finalised. The Committee asked that the Staff of the Ashington Leisure Centre be thanked for hosting a visit by the Committee.

10. FORWARD PLAN

The published Forward Plan had been circulated with the agenda and would be attached to the signed minutes as Appendix A.

RESOLVED that the information be noted.

REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED BY SCRUTINY

11. REPORTS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE, ACTIVE NORTHUMBERLAND

(a) Cultural Strategy Update

The report (attached as Appendix B to the signed minutes) provided an update on the development of a Cultural Strategy for Northumberland. V. Tyler, Cabinet Member and B. Ledger, Chief Executive of Active Northumberland and Head of Leisure were in attendance to introduce the report and answer any questions from the Committee. Members of the Committee were invited to attend the consultations scheduled for 28 and 29 September.

The requirement to include all aspects of the history, heritage and needs of the different communities across Northumberland was discussed by Members. The Officer advised that their comments would be taken on board, however the document also needed to state what the Council was doing to help bring in resources and would a blue print for how the County delivered services in the future. In response to a concern that no Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) had been included with the report the Committee was advised that this would be included when the final report and Strategy was presented to Cabinet. The Chair asked that the issue be raised with the appropriate Members and Officers so that EIA’s could be prepared and included with reports at an earlier stage. Councillor Tyler advised that this was the first Cultural Strategy for the Council and would be a base to build upon to become the best in the region, however this would take time and issues would be identified throughout the process.

A discussion took place regarding the timescale involved in the Strategy going through the Council’s Committee process and Members requested that the Strategy be reported at this Committee in November prior to being considered by Cabinet on 8 December.


RESOLVED that the content of the report which outlined the process and timescales as amended above for the development of a countywide Cultural Strategy be noted.

(b) Financial Contribution to County Arts Centres

The report (attached as Appendix C to the signed minutes) provided an overview of the financial support provided to Queens Hall Arts Centre, Berwick Maltings Theatre and Cinema, Alnwick Playhouse and the Phoenix Theatre by the Council. An additional paper circulated provided information on performance indicators which would be filed with the signed minutes. The Committee was advised that in addition to funding from the Council, the Queens Hall and Maltings Theatre were in receipt of three year funding packages directly from the Arts Council for £354,000 and £529,000 respectively. The Alnwick Playhouse and Phoenix Theatre relied on the support of the Council and donations. The Arts Council also directly funded the following organisations within Northumberland:

Berwick Film Festival

November Club

Blood Axe Books

It was noted that this was the first time any review of payments which had been inherited on re-organisation had been undertaken. Discussions took place surrounding the requirement to keep the level of Arts Council funding within Northumberland; the level of funding provided by the Council to the organisations and Value for Money (VFM); the possibility of encouraging more theatre groups from Tyneside to provide outreach programmes and workshops within Northumberland and the collection of customer data for each organisation where possible. A discussion also took place regarding support for Woodhorn Museum, although it was stressed that did also include funding the Northumberland Archives and Modern Records sections based at the Museum. It was agreed that a comprehensive list of organisations involved in the Arts within Northumberland be provided to include as much information as possible on usage and customer profiles. The expansion the overall agenda was suggested with information being passed electronically to Members on a regular basis so that any concerns could be addressed by Officers prior to being raised at Scrutiny. If necessary a Task and Finish Group could be set up to look at different projects or aspects of the County’s Arts Centres.

RESOLVED that the contents of the report be noted

12. NORTHUMBERLAND TOURISM – PRESENTATION

Jude Leitch, the Director of Northumberland Tourism was in attendance to provide a power point presentation, a copy of which would be filed with the signed minutes. She advised that the organisation was no longer a traditional tourist board but worked by lobbying and working with businesses both on a national and international basis. She highlighted the recent success of the Tour of Britain and the attraction of the Weeping Window Poppies display at Woodhorn Museum. The latest statistics had shown that visitor numbers to the County had increased with a related increase in the economic impact and employment within the industry.


Examples of the return of investments in different campaigns/promotions were provided and the planned activities for 2016 were outlined.

The importance of encouraging young people to undertake training/ apprenticeships in the tourism industry as a viable career option was noted along with the vision of the creation of a Rural Tourism Academy. The necessity for a high speed access to the internal for rural businesses was highlighted with businesses being encouraged to offer free WiFi to visitors where it was available. Better mobile phone coverage across the whole of rural Northumberland was also of major importance.

In response to questions from Members it was noted that increasing visitor numbers from China was not a target at present due to the intense training resources required. The difficulty in attracting overseas visitors out of London and the necessity for good flights and ferry routes into the region were noted along with the need for better cross-country road and rail links.

The Chair thanked Ms Leitch for her presentation.

13. REPORT OF THE SCRUTINY OFFICER

Arts, Leisure & Culture Overview and Scrutiny Committee Work Programme

The work programme was attached as Appendix B to the signed minutes. In order to allow the Cultural Strategy Report to be added to the agenda for 25 November, the Production of Active Northumberland Business Plan Update and Management Agreement Update would be moved to 27 January. Also included for the January agenda would be feedback from the County Arts Centres and feedback from the Tour of Britain. RESOLVED that the information be noted.

INFORMATION REPORT

The following report was for information only and could be accessed through Northumberland County Council’s Website. If a member of the Committee would like further explanation of the report, or had questions they wished to put to the relevant Policy Board Member, he/she should contact Democratic Services Section in order that appropriate arrangements could be made.

14. POLICY DIGEST The report gave details of the latest policy briefings, government announcements and ministerial speeches which may be of interest to members. RESOLVED that the report be noted.

15. URGENT BUSINESS


The Committee were advised that it was expected that the new Ashington Leisure Centre would open on 9 November 2015 and a visit would be arranged prior to this date for Committee Members.

CHAIR DATE


Audit Committee Minutes – 30 September 2015


AUDIT COMMITTEE

At a meeting of the Audit Committee held at County Hall, Morpeth on Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 10.15 a.m.

PRESENT

Councillor Mrs. P. A. M. Dale (Chairman, in the Chair)

COUNCILLORS

Reid, A. W. Wallace, Mrs. A.

Watson, J. G. Woodman, J.

CO-OPTED MEMBERS

Haywood-Smith, A. N. Walker, Mrs. I.

OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE

Mrs. D. Lally S. Mason Mrs. A. Elsdon Mrs. B. J. McKie Ms. A. Mitchell P. Thomson Ms. D. Wright Ms. H. Taylor B. Haigh Mrs. L. Papaioannou

Executive Director of Wellbeing & Community Health Services Chief Executive Head of Corporate Services Group Assurance Manager Chief Internal Auditor Deloitte, External Auditor Deloitte, External Auditor Deloitte, External Auditor Corporate Fraud Manager Democratic Services Officer


Apologies for absence were received from Councillors A. Hepple and G. Castle.


14. MINUTES

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting of the Audit Committee held on Wednesday, 22 July 2015, as circulated, be confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

15. KEY STRATEGIC RISK UPDATE

The Executive Director of Wellbeing and Community Health Services was invited to give a presentation on Risk No. 5 in relation to Ofsted inspection reports. Mrs Daljit Lally gave a presentation on the corporate risk relating to school improvement. She outlined the background and context since the Ofsted focussed inspection of 17 schools in Northumberland at October 2013, the risks, progress made so far and the continuing challenges. In addition, Deloitte’s had been invited to provide an external auditor’s perspective and had acknowledged that:

The LA had increased the level of challenge to schools;

The Education Data Unit had been strengthened and reformed;

The introduction of 16 Educational Partnerships had improved communication with schools; and

The restructure of a staffing team that placed its focus on raising educational achievement and a healthy relationship had taken place.

The Executive Director confirmed the action she was taking to focus on:

A significant restructure of the staffing team to have more experienced and expertise in the partnership co-ordinators;

Working with 35 School Improvement Partners and to improve the calibre of work of those officers;

A robust approach being taken on performance management, with the result being that HR advice was becoming less risk averse;

Issuing a form of Warning Notice letters to those schools that were considered to be under-performing and taking appropriate action, at the right time, to challenge Headteachers and Governing Bodies to improve.

The Executive Director also responded to members’ queries, as follows:

It takes a while for the remarking of exam papers to be validated and included in the statistics before publication, therefore, it is unlikely that the national picture about comparison of LA’s performance is published before November 2015;

It is known that Northumberland is 9th in the Region by comparison, and that Northumberland had performed better than the national average, but there was still a lot more improvement work to be achieved over the next 2 years;


There was a further need to communicate the message that Governing Bodies had the responsibility for school performance and needed to challenge Headteachers;

Having undertaken a full review of pupil premium support, future work should target the pupil premium perspective and raising aspiration in schools;

The difficulties were acknowledged in respect of Academies, as the Academies Commissioner was accountable for their performance;

Having undertaken a full restructure of the school improvement and education staff, key priorities for the year ahead included a targeted leadership programme in terms of succession planning for Headteachers, and to undertake a skills audit of governing bodies so that they may be strengthened to assume their responsibilities for raising standards of performance in schools, and improving constructive communication between Headteachers and governing bodies;

In terms of financial responsibilities, it was noted that the Dedicated Schools’ Grant (DSG) had been ring-fenced to give some protection to schools in recent years, and Northumberland had received an injection of £12.9m last year to support school budgets, but the issue remained that Northumberland had too many small, disparate schools that were unsustainable, along with the fact that many larger schools replicated the business manager and support staff positions to the detriment of engaging teaching staff.

The Chair thanked the Executive Director of Wellbeing and Community Health Services for her presentation and requested an update to the Audit Committee in 12 months’ time.

RESOLVED that the presentation be received and that an update be provided to the Audit Committee in 12 months’ time.

16. REPORTS OF THE EXTERNAL AUDITOR

(1) ISA 260 Northumberland County Council 2014/2015 Report and Accounts The Committee considered Deloitte’s report on the 2014/2015 Audit of the Northumberland County Council Accounts (a copy of the report is enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix A). Referring to the two ISA 260 reports, Mr Paul Thomson of Deloitte commented that overall it had been a good audit process, and he expressed his appreciation of the co-operation of the Head of Corporate Services and her team for the standard of working papers. He confirmed that all issues had been resolved satisfactorily and taking comfort in the actions being taken, he was pleased to give an unqualified opinion and agreed to sign the formal management letter of representation and the accounts at the end of this meeting. It was considered that an unqualified opinion was very positive, and that not all local authorities received such an outcome. It was noted that a number of adjustments had been identified, that were not material. Ms Deborah Wright of Deloitte updated the Committee on the Big Picture, in particular the outstanding items on page 3 of the report that had all been completed satisfactorily, apart from the completion of WGA procedures, which would be


completed within the deadline of the week. Some adjustments were to be made, that were all considered to be technical accounting points, and would have no impact on the bottom line of the accounts. The net impact of uncorrected mis-statements amounted to around £2m, which was not material. The External Auditor had focussed on the extent to which the Council has proper arrangements in place to secure value for money and concluded that the Council has financial resilience in terms of holding a good level of reserves and being in a strong position financially in order to meet the challenges of the budget reduction measures identified in over the next two years. The Medium Term Financial Plan had identified required targets and profiles over the next two financial years and there had been good progress in the areas of work followed up by Deloitte’s. In addition to the work to support the Value for Money Conclusion, Deloitte had been asked to undertake areas of locally agreed work, and provided comments on the following: Update on the response to the 2013 Ofsted Report - It was evident that a number of measures had been implemented in response to the concerns expressed by Ofsted. Whilst it was too early to assess the effectiveness of the measures, given that the local authority estimated it would take three years to be fully embedded and yield results, nevertheless, Deloitte’s considered the measures implemented, such as the school partnerships and in relation to communications with schools, to be a positive step. It was recommended that the authority should continue to focus on this area of work in future years. Review of the Planning Service – The Chair commented on the performance of the Planning Service since implementing the changes recommended in the review, and highlighted that following the restructure, planning applications were now being processed more quickly, resulting in staff feeling better motivated. It was noted that this was the final report of Deloitte’s as external auditors, following a period of ten years, and the Committee expressed their appreciation of Paul Thomson and his team.

RESOLVED that (a) the unadjusted mis-statements identified within the ISA 260 Report be noted;

and (b) it be agreed that the accounts not be amended for these adjustments on the

grounds of materiality. (2) ISA 260 Northumberland County Council Pension Fund 2014/2015 Report and Accounts A copy of Deloitte’s final report on the 2014/2015 Local Government Pension Fund Audit was considered (a copy of the report is enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix B).


Ms Helen Taylor of Deloitte confirmed that the ISA 260 Report had been considered by the Pension Fund Panel at its meeting on 18 September 2015. The audit had been straightforward and appreciation was expressed of the co-operation of the Principal Accountant (Pensions) and her colleagues. An unmodified audit opinion had been issued. The complexities around the calculation of contributions had been identified as a risk in Deloitte’s Planning Report of May 2015. LGPS employee and employer contribution rates changed in 2014/15 due to:

changes to the tiered contribution rate bandings for employees;

a changed definition of pensionable pay since April 2014; and

a new schedule of employer contribution rates since April 2014. Deloitte noted that a meeting of the Council’s Payroll and Pensions Administration staff had already taken place, on 10 September 2015, to initiate the provision of pensionable pay information with the remittance of LGPS contributions to the Fund on a monthly basis from now on. It was reported that the under valuation of £646,000 in the Fund Account was due to a late provision of asset valuation information as at 31 March 2015 from the investment manager (Morgan Stanley). This was recorded as an uncorrected misstatement in the ISA 260 Report, but was not considered material to the Fund Account. In connection with the Internal Controls and Risk Management section of the report, Deloitte recommended that Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) be reminded annually to prepare and submit an internal controls report. RESOLVED that (a) the uncorrected mis-statement identified within the ISA 260 Report be noted;

and (b) the Pension Fund Report and Accounts would not be amended for this

adjustment on the grounds of materiality. 17. REPORTS OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE

(1) The Statement of Accounts 2014-15

The report provided members of the Audit Committee with an overview of the minor changes made to the Draft Statement of Accounts, which had been considered at the 22 July 2015 meeting (a copy of the report is enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix C). A copy of the Final Report and Accounts for 2014/2015 was tabled at the meeting (a copy of which is also filed with the signed minutes). The Head of Corporate Services issued a revised Final Report and Statement of Accounts 2014/15 and confirmed that all the final changes had very recently been


made. With reference to the recommendations of Deloitte, confirmation was also provided in relation to the following internal controls:

measures were now in place in Employee Services to provide the Pension Fund with the required monthly LGPS pensionable pay information;

discussions were to be held with the finance officer of Arch to consider the reasons for the changes to the accounts;

the £2m mis-statement in pensions redundancies related to a timing issue of Section 188 notices;

the valuers of property had been spoken to about ensuring there are no deficiencies in the valuation reports in future;

changes had been made to the notes to correctly identify Related Parties transactions;

the final exercise to complete the WGA procedures would be completed before the end of this week, ahead of final sign-off of the accounts.

These changes had no impact on the bottom line of the accounts. On behalf of the Committee, the Chair extended her appreciation of the work and co-operation of the Head of Corporate Services and her team in assisting the External Auditors during the audit process. Furthermore, members considered the Annual Governance Statement to be well written and expressed appreciation of the comments and work of Deloitte’s.

RESOLVED that (a) the changes made to the draft Statement of Accounts 2014/15, be noted; (b) the Northumberland County Council Statement of Accounts 2014/15 be

approved. (2) The Northumberland County Council Pension Fund Report and Accounts for 2014/2015 The report provided members of the Audit Committee with the final Report and Accounts for Northumberland County Council Pension Fund, since being presented to the Committee at the 22 July 2015 meeting (a copy of the final Report and Accounts is filed with the signed minutes as Appendix D). RESOLVED that the Northumberland County Council Pension Fund 2014-15 Report and Accounts be approved. (3) Corporate Fraud Team – Counter Fraud Update The report updated the Audit Committee on work undertaken by the Corporate Fraud Team together with counter fraud activity within the Council (a copy of the report is enclosed with the signed minutes as Appendix E). The Corporate Fraud Manager outlined the interim report of investigations into suspected fraud undertaken between 1 April to 31 August 2015. It was noted that responsibility for investigation of housing benefit fraud had transferred to the


Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) along with three members of staff, with effect from 1 July 2015. Having a good working relationship with DWP, it was hoped that any issues could be resolved in the future. The remaining team of fraud investigators were concentrating their efforts corporately, and had offered their services to Children’s Services to investigate the overpayments of free school meals, and in instances of school admissions where school places had been obtained fraudulently. Working in conjunction with Newcastle Council and their systems, investigations were continuing into the misuse of the Blue Badge scheme. It was noted that there had been a very positive response to the checking-up system from users of the Blue Badge scheme in South East Northumberland. Opportunities to investigate the recovery of overpayments in relation to Direct Payments and Social Care payments were being pro-actively followed up. Members expressed appreciation of the efforts of the Corporate Fraud Investigation Team, who seemed to be effective at recovering the overpayment of monies, and it was noted that successful cases were often publicised in the media to act as a deterrent. RESOLVED that the progress in work undertaken by the Corporate Fraud Team since the last report, and the steps being taken to recover any monies owed to the Council, be noted.

CHAIRMAN DATE


Standards Minutes – 20 January 2015


STANDARDS COMMITTEE

At a meeting of the Standards Committee held at County Hall, Morpeth on Tuesday, 20 January 2015 at 3.00 p.m.

PRESENT

Mr. J. Jackson (Independent Chairman, in the Chair)

COUNTY COUNCILLORS

Burt, E. Tebbutt, A. Homer, C. Webb, G.

PARISH COUNCILLORS

Parker, D. Rawlings, C.

ALSO IN ATTENANCE

Common, J. Independent Person

OFFICERS IN ATTENDANCE

Henry, L. Monitoring Officer Bennett, Mrs. L.M. Team Leader (Governance/People)

Democratic Services Masson, N. Principal Solicitor (Corporate &

Governance) 7. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs E. Armstrong, A. Murray,

L. Pidcock, and Parish Councillor D. Buckle. 8. MINUTES Minutes of the meeting of the 20 October 2014, as circulated, to be confirmed as a

true record, and signed by the Chairman.


9. REPORT OF THE MONITORING OFFICER 1. Development of Code of Conduct

Members of the Committee considered a report on a range of code of conduct issues which had been highlighted for attention following the meeting of the Regional Chairs and Independent persons meeting on the 19th September 2014 and their views were sought on what action to take in relation to these matters. (Report attached to the signed minutes as Appendix A).

In addition to these issues, in general discussion, members considered the

right of an elected member to freedom of expression in accordance with Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights which was thought to come into direct and, at times, unhelpful conflict with the Standards regime. Mention was made of a recent complaint which concerned a member’s public criticism of officers which had had potential complications concerning the issue under discussion but which had, ultimately, not progressed for other reasons.

Members discussed the issue and it was generally felt that there should have

been an opportunity to at least rebuke a member in such circumstances and/or to obtain an apology. However, the Monitoring Officer explained that the Standards regime did not allow for a requirement for an apology, also the Councillor could not be rebuked or warned as to their future conduct as no misconduct had been proven.

Express Reference to Sexism and racism in Code of Conduct Members were informed that the Regional Monitoring Officers’ Group

meeting on 15 December 2014, had felt that sexism and racism were already sufficiently covered in the Code of Conduct. Members commented that it would, nevertheless, be beneficial for all County Councillors and Parish/Town Councils to be reminded about the importance of these issues and that an informative note be drafted to this effect for issue to all local authorities in Northumberland.

Social Media Members welcomed the guidance note which had been prepared by North

Tyneside Council. It was agreed that the guidance note should be issued to all County Councillors and Parish/Town Councils.

Promotion of Code of Conduct and Training It was noted that North Tyneside Council used the ‘Learning Pool’ resource

for training and suggested that Northumberland County Council should investigate this as a method of training for its own members.

RESOLVED that


(1) an informative note be drafted emphasising that all Councillors must

respect men, women and children and all faiths equally and without discrimination. The note should be submitted for approval to the next meeting of the Standards Committee.

(2) the social media guidance note be circulated to all County Councillors

and Parish/Town Councils. (3) the use of ‘Learning Pool’ for training in the Code of Conduct be

investigated and a report submitted to the next meeting of the Standards Committee.

2. Code of Conduct Complaints – Progress Report

Members received a report on the progress with complaints received by the

authority under the new arrangements adopted by the authority for dealing with standards allegations under the Localism Act 2011 on caseloads. (Report attached to the signed minutes as Appendix B).

RESOLVED that the report be noted. 10. DATE OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, 21 April 2015, at 3.00 p.m. in

Committee Room 2, County Hall, Morpeth. CHAIRMAN DATE


Standards Minutes – 18 and 19 August 2015


STANDARDS COMMITTEE

At a meeting of the Standards Committee held in Committee Room 1, County Hall, Morpeth on Tuesday 18 August 2015 and Wednesday 19 August 2015 at 9.30 am.

PRESENT

J. Jackson (Independent Chair, in the Chair)

MEMBERS

Armstrong, Mrs. E. Kelly, P. Burt, Mrs E. Pidcock, Ms. L. Homer, Mrs. C. Tebbutt, A

PARISH COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES

Buckle, D. Rawlings, C. Parker, D.

INDEPENDENT MEMBER

Common, Mrs. J.

OFFICERS

Henry, L. Chief Legal Officer Bennett, Mrs L.M. Team Leader (Governance/People),

Democratic Services Officer Prendergast, Ms. C. Trainee Solicitor


Apologies were received from Councillors A.H. Murray and G. Webb.

2. DISCLOSURES OF INTEREST Councillor A. Tebbutt declared a personal, non-prejudicial, interest in the matter as

he was a member of the same political group as Councillor G. Jones (a


complainant) and had a working relationship with Mr. D. Bawn (representative of the subject member)

3. MEMBERSHIP AND TERMS OF REFERENCE The Committee noted the following membership and terms of reference as agreed

by Council on 20 May 2015. Members: 8 Councillors (3:3:1:1) (1 Lab place to Ind) and 3 Parish Council

representatives (Only one member of the Committee can be a member of the Policy Board).

Quorum - 4 Chair – Mr. J. Jackson. Vice Chair – G. Webb

Labour Conservative Liberal Democrat

Independent

E. Burt E. Armstrong A. Tebbutt P. Kelly

L. Pidcock C. Homer

G. Webb A.H. Murray

Three non-voting Parish/Town Council Members

D. Buckle D. Parker C. Rawlings

Independent Person – Judith Common Functions: (a) Promoting and maintaining high standards of conduct by councillors, town

and parish councillors, co-opted members and church and parent governor representatives.

(b) Assisting the councillors, town and parish councillors, co-opted members and

church and parent governor representatives to observe the Members’ Code of Conduct.

(c) Advising the Council on the adoption or revision of the Members’ Code of

Conduct. (d) Monitoring the operation of the Members’ Code of Conduct. (e) Advising, training or arranging to train councillors, town and parish

councillors, co-opted members and church and parent governor representatives on matters relating to the Members’ Code of Conduct.

(f) Granting dispensations to councillors, town and parish councillors, co-opted

members, church and parent governor representatives from requirements relating to Disclosable Pecuniary Interests set out in the Members’ Code of Conduct.


(g) Assessing and reviewing complaints about councillors and conducting determinations’ hearings.

(h) Granting exemptions for politically restricted posts. (i) Such other roles as may be given by the Council.

4 DATE OF NEXT MEETING The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, 20 October, 2015, at 3.00 p.m. in

Committee Room 2, County Hall, Morpeth. 5. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

Representations were received from Mr. Bawn on behalf of the subject member that the hearing should be heard in public. Members were advised that the resolution should be passed as per the normal procedure and the press and public asked to leave. Both parties would be asked to remain to put forward their representations before being asked to leave whilst the Committee discussed the representations and made its decision. RESOLVED that:- (a) under Section 100A (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and

public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item on the Agenda as it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the 1972 Act, and

(b) the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest

in disclosure for the following reasons:-

Agenda Item

Paragraph of Part I of Schedule 12A

6 1

Information relating to any individual. The public interest in seeking this exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosure because there is a continuing need to preserve the confidentiality of the member, the subject of the report, which is considered to outweigh the public interest in disclosing this information.


The Committee heard representations from Mr Bawn as to why the hearing should be heard in public. This was followed by the Investigating Officer who was in agreement with the proposal. After considerable discussion, the Committee agreed that the hearing should be held in public with the caveat that any public present conducted themselves in an appropriate fashion. It should also be noted that it may be necessary for some of the debate to be heard in private and that the decision making process would take place in private. The hearing was opened to the press and public. A request was received from a member of the public to film the hearing. The Committee agreed that filming of the public part of the hearing only should be allowed.

4. MEMBER COMPLAINTS NCC 05/14, NCC 06/14 and NCC 07/14 Members were asked to carry out a hearing in respect of Member complaints NCC

05/14, NCC 06/14 and NCC 07/14. (Report attached as Appendix A)

Following representations from the Investigating Officer, the member’s representative, and the hearing of evidence from a number of witnesses, the Committee found as follows:- Committee’s principal findings of fact including the reasons for them (i) In respect of the publications by Councillor Hill on Facebook contained in

screen dumps dated 29th May 2014 and 18th June 2014, the Committee found that Councillor Hill did allude to the Town Clerk’s grievance, the Town Clerk’s sick leave, provided extracts of the confidential report of Mr Dunn’s investigation into Councillor Hill’s complaint, gave details relating to disciplinary and grievance matters being considered by the Council relating to the Town Clerk and raised issues regarding the Town Clerk’s performance and that the information contained in those postings had been obtained by Councillor Hill in confidence in connection with her duties as a Town Councillor.

(ii) Again in respect of publications by Councillor Hill on Facebook, the

Committee found that Councillor Hill likened the Council to North Korea in her comments on 27th March 2014 and referred to fellow councillors as “rogue” and “manipulated” in her comments on 29th May 2014.

(iii) That Councillor Hill commented in the Independent on Sunday on 5th January

2014 alluding to corruption within the Council by stating “What is quite often happening in town councils is a town clerk and a civil servant making decisions without the necessary checks and balances that you used to have. There is some extreme low-level corruption going on and people getting away with making decisions behind closed doors that you would never get away with in Parliament.”


(iv) That Councillor Hill was not responsible for the comment on the Berwick Town Council Public Voice Facebook page on 28th May 2014 saying “What would the public think if the police and the fraud squad made a visit to our Town Council” accepting her evidence in this regard that she was not responsible for, or in control of, that particular Facebook page.

(v) That there was insufficient evidence to definitively determine that there was

collusion between other Town Councillors and/or Ms Finch or behaviour which might be considered to constitute bullying of Councillor Hill from those same Town Councillors and/or Ms Finch designed to suppress the actions of Councillor Hill in carrying out her duties as a Town Councillor. There may have been differences of opinion, forcibly expressed at times perhaps in what may have been a difficult environment for the Subject Member, but nothing that would suggest collusion and/or bullying.

(vi) That there was insufficient evidence to definitively determine that Ms Finch’s

conduct or behaviour and performance in carrying out her duties as Town Clerk was of a nature that could be considered to be unacceptable to a reasonable employer.

(vii) That the reports commissioned by the Town Council from Mr N Dunn and Mr

P Cameron were of an independent and objective nature and raised no issues of bias.

(viii) The Committee was invited by the Investigating Officer to make a finding of

fact as to whether Ms Finch gave an apology to Mr A Marshall with regard to a remark she made in a meeting with him but the Committee concluded that there was no conclusive evidence either way on this issue and determined that it would not make any finding regarding the issue which, in any event, it did not consider to be of any direct significant relevance to its consideration of the totality of the complaints.

Committee’s findings as to whether the Subject Member failed to follow the Code including reasons for that finding A. The Committee found that the Subject Member had failed to comply with the

following paragraphs of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct:-

(i) Paragraph 1 (ii) Paragraph 2 (iii) Paragraph 3 (iv) Paragraph 6

B. The Committee found that the Subject Member had not failed to comply with

the following paragraphs of Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct:-

(i) Paragraph 5


(ii) Paragraph 9 (iii) Paragraph 15 (iv) Paragraph 16

The detail and reasons for those findings are as follows:- (a) That at all relevant times during the course of events referred to in the

summary of allegations above, the Subject Member had been acting in her official capacity including when she gave the interview to the Independent on Sunday newspaper when she ought reasonably have known that it was likely that a member of public reading the newspaper article would have considered that she was acting in her capacity as a Councillor. As a consequence her authority’s Code of Conduct had applied to her at those times.

(b) That the Subject Member failed to treat the former Town Clerk, Ms Finch,

with respect contrary to paragraph 1 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in relation to her publications on Facebook evidenced in the screen dumps dated 29th May 2014 and 18th June 2014 and her comments in the Independent on Sunday on 5th January 2014 as detailed in the Committee’s findings of fact.

The Committee agreed with the reasoning in this regard provided by the

Investigating Officer in paragraph 6.4 of her report and, while concluding that there had perhaps been something of a delay on the part of the Town Council in dealing with the Subject Member’s concerns, the Committee felt that the authority had nonetheless commissioned the reports from Mr Dunn and Mr Cameron and they considered it unnecessary and unreasonable on the part of the Subject Member to take the actions that she took before those reports could be fully considered by the Town Council.

With regard to the interview given by the Subject Member to the Independent

on Sunday newspaper, the Committee considered that the Subject Member’s comments as reported could reasonably have been interpreted as implying that the former Town Clerk was corrupt, an allegation which had, the Subject Member conceded in evidence to the Committee, no foundation. The Committee agreed with the Investigating Officer that this was an attack on the former Town Clerk’s integrity. While the Committee did accept that the Subject Member might have meant to refer to another local council in the context of these comments they considered that she should have appreciated that it was likely that, given her position, they would be interpreted as referring also to the situation at Berwick.

(c) That the Subject Member bullied the former Town Clerk, Ms Finch, contrary

to paragraph 2 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in relation to her behaviour towards Ms Finch which included publications on Facebook evidenced in the screen dumps dated 29th May 2014 and 18th June 2014 forming a pattern of public criticism which constitutes bullying and harassment.

The Committee again agreed with the reasoning as outlined by the

Investigating Officer in her report at paragraph 6.5 in this regard and also felt


that the postings were designed to undermine the former Town Clerk’s position and would have put her in fear of what further postings regarding her might follow, all of which were sufficient to enable the Committee to conclude that the former Town Clerk had been bullied by the Subject Member.

Having made a finding of fact that that there was insufficient evidence to

definitively determine behaviour on the part of other Town Councillors and/or Ms Finch which might be considered to constitute bullying of the Subject Member by those persons the Committee could, it felt, not find otherwise.

(d) That the Subject Member conducted herself in a manner which could

reasonably be regarded as bringing her Office and her authority into disrepute contrary to paragraph 3 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct by virtue of the Facebook posts made on 27th March 2014 likening the Town Council to North Korea and on the 29th May 2014 with regards to “rogue” Councillors, and her comments as reported in the Independent on Sunday on 5th January 2014.

The reasoning of the Investigating Officer in her report at paragraph 6.6 was

again accepted by the Committee in this regard with the exception of the Facebook comment made on the 28th May 2014 which the Committee accepts was not proven as being made by the Subject Member.

While the Committee accepted that Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998

did give a high level of protection to comments that were genuinely made in the course of political debate, they felt that the comments made by the Subject Member, and particularly those in the Independent on Sunday, were entirely inappropriate and a slur on the reputation of the Town Council and an unjustified attack on the integrity of those persons directly associated with the authority including members and officers.

(e) That the Subject Member disclosed confidential information which was

exempt information as defined by Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 contrary to paragraph 6 of the Berwick Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Committee found that Councillor Hill’s disclosures on Facebook

evidenced in the screen dumps dated 29th May 2014 and 18th June 2014, details of which were given in the Committee’s findings of fact, were not of sufficient public interest that disclosure of the information outweighed the public interest in maintaining the exemption.

The Subject Member had conceded in evidence to the Committee that she

had disclosed this information in the manner described and that it was of a confidential nature but that she was justified in doing so as she was afforded the protection of the Whistleblowing Policy adopted by the Town Council. The Committee took her arguments, and those advanced on her behalf by her representative into account in reaching their decision but concluded, nonetheless, that she could not legitimately claim protection under the Policy as they did not believe that the disclosures were reasonable in all the


circumstances. The information disclosed was extensive and little or no thought appeared to have been given as to what the consequences of such disclosures would be, particularly in relation to the personal information relating to the former Town Clerk which the Committee considered to be of most importance given that person’s status as an employee of the Town Council.

In any event the Committee did not consider that any of the three pre-

conditions in order to seek protection under the Policy had been met for the Policy to be applicable.

In this latter regard, the Committee did not consider that the Subject

Member’s perception that she would be victimised if she raised the matter internally was a realistic one given their finding of fact in relation to the allegation from the Subject Member of collusion and bullying on the part of the other Town Councillors and/or the former Town Clerk. With regard to the other two pre-conditions there was a process with an independent input underway which, while delayed, had not been concluded which appeared to counter any suggestion that there was a reasonable belief on the part of the Subject Member that a cover up was likely or that she had already conclusively raised the matter internally.

(f) That the Subject Member did not use Council resources beyond its

requirements contrary to paragraph 5 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct as a result of responding to the matters raised by her.

The Committee fully accepted the reasoning of the Investigating Officer at

paragraph 6.7 of her report in this regard. (g) That the Subject Member did not fail to register with the Monitoring Officer

any change of interests or new interests in Appendices A and B within 28 days of becoming aware of this contrary to paragraph 9 of the Berwick upon Tweed Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in respect of her alleged failure to register her role as a committee member of Tweedmouth Feast and Crowning Carnival Committee as a discloseable personal interest.


paragraph 6.9 of her report in this regard. (h) That the Subject Member did not fail to comply with the provisions of

paragraph 15 of the Berwick Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct in relation to her participation in a matter relating to her half-brother, Mr A Marshall.


paragraph 6.10 of her report in this regard. (i) That the Subject Member did not deal with a matter in which she was aware

that she had an interest as outlined in Appendices A and B of the Code when liaising with the Council’s Finance Officer in relation to the grant for financial


assistance for the Tweedmouth Feast contrary to paragraph 16 of the Berwick Town Council Members’ Code of Conduct.


paragraph 6.11 of her report in this regard.

Action to be taken/ sanctions to be imposed The Committee, having heard from the Subject Member’s representative, the Investigating Officer and the Independent Person on the issue RESOLVED to impose the following sanctions:- (i) That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that the

Subject Member be issued with a formal censure by that authority. (ii) That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that the

Subject Member be removed, and remain removed, from any position she currently holds as Chair or Vice Chair of all Committees and Sub Committees of that authority for a period of twelve months from the date of that authority agreeing any such sanction.

(iii) That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that

training be arranged for the Subject Member which shall include training in relation to the Members’ Code of Conduct and Bullying and Harassment.

(iv) That the findings of the Committee be referred to Berwick upon Tweed

Town Council for their information. Recommendations to the Subject Member’s Authority The Committee, having heard from the Independent Person on the issue, RESOLVED to make the following recommendation:- (i) That it be recommended to Berwick upon Tweed Town Council that

training be arranged for all members of the authority in relation to the Members’ Code of Conduct and Bullying and Harassment.

CHAIR DATE


Delegation of Approval of the Council Tax Base

Delegation of Approval of the Council Tax Base

COUNTY COUNCIL DATE: 4 NOVEMBER 2015

DELEGATION OF APPROVAL OF THE COUNCIL TAX BASE

Report of the Chief Executive Cabinet Member: Councillor Dave Ledger, Deputy Leader

Purpose of report

The report asks Council to consider delegation of approval of the annual council tax base to Cabinet from 2016-2017 onwards.

Recommendations

That County Council be recommended to formally delegate the approval of the council tax base to Cabinet from 2016-2017 onwards.

Link to Corporate Plan

This report is of a technical nature and its implications do not have a direct bearing on the Corporate Plan.

Key issues

1. The tax base must be approved each year and traditionally for Northumberland this has been done by the County Council.

2. Section 84 of the Local Government Act 2003 allows the calculation or determination to be to be delegated to a committee or an officer of the Council.

3. The tax base for 2016-2017 must be approved by 31 January 2016.

4. The tax base must be notified to the Police and Crime Commissioner.

5. The tax base is based on actual figures taken from the Council Tax system at the time of calculation in line with the statutory CTB1 return required by the Department for Communities and Local Government.

6. Taking the statutory calculation dates into account there is insufficient time to calculate and reconcile the tax base in order to meet the deadlines for the County Council meetings and delegating approval to Cabinet would give more flexibility and


time to calculate the tax base and reduce the administrative burden and committee time required.

Background

7. The council tax base is one element of the calculations involved in setting the Council Tax.

8. The tax base is a measure of the Council’s domestic taxable capacity in its area.

9. The tax base sets out the number of Band D chargeable properties in the area adjusted to take account of any reductions due to discount, exemption and council tax support.

10. The tax base is calculated by prescription under the Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012.

11. Traditionally, the council tax base has been approved by County Council with the last approval being given on 3 December 2014.

12. Section 84 of the Local Government Act 2003 allows the calculation or determination of the tax base to be to be delegated to a committee or an officer of the Council.

Implications

Policy None

Finance and value for money

The council tax base directly affects the total value of council tax collected, which is incorporated into the Medium Term Financial Plan and budget setting processes.

Legal Section 84 of the Local Government Act 2003 allows the calculation or determination to be to be delegated to a committee or an officer of the Council.

Procurement None

Human Resources None

Property None

Equalities Not applicable

Risk Assessment None

Crime & Disorder None

Customer Consideration

The council tax base calculations form part of the wider budget process which is subject to public consultation

Carbon reduction None

Wards All

Background papers: The Local Government Finance Act 1992 Local Government Act 2003


Local Authorities (Calculation of Council Tax Base) (England) Regulations 2012 Report sign off.

initials

Finance Officer AE

Monitoring Officer/Legal LH

Human Resources n/a

Procurement n/a

I.T. n/a

Chief Executive SM

Portfolio Holder(s) DL

Author and Contact Details Graeme Barnes Revenues, Benefits and Customer Services Manager 01670 624351 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Council Tax Support Scheme Update and Approval of the Scheme for 2016-17

Council Tax Support Scheme Update and Approval of the

Scheme for 2016-17


COUNCIL TAX SUPPORT SCHEME UPDATE AND APPROVAL OF THE SCHEME FOR 2016-17


Purpose of report

The report asks Council to consider the Council Tax Support Scheme for 2016-17, and to approve its adoption. In addition the report also discusses and forecasts the potential impacts on the scheme as a result of the Budget 2015.

Recommendations

• That Council approve the Council Tax Support Scheme for adoption as the Council’s local scheme for 2016-17.

• That members note the potential impacts on the cost of the scheme as a result of the changes to welfare benefits announced in the Summer Budget 2015.

Link to Corporate Plan

The council tax support scheme is relevant to the Health and Well Being priority included in the NCC Corporate Plan 2013-2017 by supporting the financially vulnerable to be able to meet their council tax liability.

Key issues

1. A local scheme needs to be agreed by 31 January 2016.

2. Once a local scheme has been established any amendments or changes to the scheme for subsequent years require consultation.

3. The Council’s existing scheme protects both pensioners and working age claimants.

4. The cost of the existing scheme has reduced in 2015-16 and forecast at £23,460,265.

5. The proposal for a local scheme for 2016-17 is to continue with the local scheme for 2015-15 unchanged. In accordance with members’ previous decision on this issue, the


proposed local scheme has not been circulated with the agenda, but is published on the Council’s website alongside the papers for this meeting.

6. The council tax support scheme impacts on the council tax base calculation.

7. In 2016-17 it is expected that funding received from the Government will be further reduced.

8. The forecast cost of the scheme for 2015-16 has decreased by £385,000 from 2014-15.

9. The Summer Budget 2015 also introduced some welfare reforms, most importantly to Tax Credits and other welfare income for working age claimants which will also impact on the cost of continuing to provide support.

10. Modelling on the reforms is difficult due to the fluid caseload and unknown factors but calculations using a worst case scenario could increase the cost of providing support by £957,000.

11. The cost of this increase can be absorbed within the collection fund.

12. Pensioners will remain unaffected by the changes.

Background

13. The Government replaced the former means tested national council tax benefit scheme with effect from 1 April 2013.

14. Each local authority was required to have its own local scheme if it wanted to continue to provide support for the most financially vulnerable including pensioners. Pensioners would continue to be protected at the national scheme levels and a local scheme would need to be put in place for working age claimants. A national cut in funding also took place.

15. The requirements were that a local scheme was required to be in place having been consulted on by 31 January 2013. If a scheme was not in place by that date then the Governments ‘default’ scheme (which mirrored the previous council tax benefit scheme) would be imposed to ensure that a support scheme for claimants was in place.

16. At County Council on 5 September 2012, the Council set out its approach for council tax support for 2013-14. It was recommended:

Not to adopt a scheme and accept the Government’s default scheme. That scheme then became the Council’s local scheme for 2013-14.

To use the potential increased yield from the council tax technical reforms to certain empty property and second homes to offset the cost caused by the grant reduction.

That the 2013-14 year would be used to monitor the approach and the scheme be reviewed in light of the performance of the collection fund.

17. This approach allowed the Council to adopt a localised Council Tax Support Scheme that maintained the support offered by the previous national Council Tax Benefit Scheme and is more generous to claimants than those run by the vast majority of other councils who have reduced their support.


18. For the 2014-15 local scheme a consultation exercise was carried out and as a result the same scheme was adopted at County Council on 18 February 2014 which continued to protect pensioners and working age claimants at the previous levels.

19. At County Council on 3 December 2014 it was agreed that the local Council Tax Support Scheme to be adopted for 2015-16 would remain unchanged and continue to support claimants at the previous levels.

20. As a result of the Government’s announcements in the recent Budget, there are some reforms that take effect from 1 April 2016 which will have an impact on the scheme and will increase the cost of support.

Increased pressure on Northumberland’s Council Tax Support Scheme.

21. In July 2015, the Government’s Summer Budget announced a number of important changes to welfare benefits. These changes will result in claimants generally receiving less income through welfare benefits in the future.

22. Many of the people who live in Northumberland who receive welfare benefits also receive help through our local Council Tax Support scheme which is means tested. This means that if a claimant’s income goes down, which is likely to happen as a result of the recent changes to welfare benefits, their entitlement to council tax support will increase.

23. Many low paid workers who currently claim Council Tax Support also receive Working Tax Credit. Some of the biggest reductions in welfare benefits will be to Working Tax Credit and this may mean the Council will face a significant increase in the cost of its Council Tax Support scheme. It is difficult to forecast the extent of this extra cost as some of our claimants’ reductions in Working Tax Credit will be offset by the increase in the National Living Wage and the freezing of personal allowances used when calculating CTS awards. Furthermore, it is not known how many Council Tax payers will become eligible for Council Tax Support due reductions in Working Tax Credit.

24. As a worst case scenario however, should all of the current Council Tax Support claimants who also receive Working Tax Credit become eligible for full Council Tax Support due to reductions in their income, then the potential cost to the Council would be £957,000.

Options to consider.

24. Consideration needs to be given to the financial impact of these changes and whether the Council can either meet or share the financial burden with Council Tax Support claimants.

25. The Council currently has around 15,000 people of working age who receive help from the Council Tax Support scheme. Of these 3,415 also receive Working Tax Credit.

26. Three options have been identified:

(i) Absorb the additional cost within the council tax collection fund for 2016-17 in

order to monitor and fully understand the effect and impact of the changes and associated costs to the Council in order to better inform the design of the local scheme for 2017-18.


(ii) Base the award of Council Tax Support on current Working Tax Credit rates to offset the extra cost of Council Tax Support awards as described above.

(iii) Limited the value of Council Tax awards by applying a cap to the maximum

award payable to 90% of Council Tax liability.

Preferred option for 2016-17

27. The preferred option for 2016-17 is option (i). To fund the increased expenditure by absorbing the cost within the collection fund.

Rational for option (i)

28. It is believed that the impact of reducing Council Tax Support in 2016-17 will impose further hardship on those working age claimants most in need of support and at the forefront of the government’s cuts to welfare benefits. Council Tax Support recipients normally receive Housing Benefit and claimants also face further cuts in relation to this benefit meaning they will need to pay more towards their rent.

29. It is also very difficult to estimate the actual cost of increased amount required to maintain Council Tax Support at current levels due to some unknown factors regarding the rates of Working Tax Credit awards, and the number of Council Tax payers not currently in receipt of Council Tax Support who may qualify under the government’s changes.

30. Option (i) will also give the opportunity of continuing to support those in work who are facing a reduction in the household income and also in order to monitor and fully understand the effect and impact of the changes and associated costs to the Council in order to better inform the design of the local scheme for 2017-18.

31. In addition, any reduction in support will result in additional lower amounts council tax to collect. This is traditionally difficult to collect from those who have up to this point had their Council Tax liability fully covered by Council Tax Support.

Illustration of the effects

32. Whilst it is difficult to illustrate the exact impact that the changes to will have on typical claimants, the following case studies highlight some potential impacts:

33. Option (ii): Base awards of Council Tax Support on current Working Tax Credit rates to offset the extra cost of Council Tax Support awards.

34. Sue is a single parent with one 3 year old child. She works for 16 hrs per week at the supermarket and is paid £115.38. She also receives child benefit of £20.70 weekly and Working/Child Tax Credit of £140.42 weekly. Her Council Tax liability is £15.75 per week. She receives Council Tax Support of £4.50 per week as she is on a low income. She therefore has to pay Council Tax of £11.25 per week.

35. Due to the changes to welfare benefits in 2016-17 her tax credits will reduce by £19.85 per week. Her Council Tax liability has increased by 2.99% to £16.22 per week. This means that she would receive £8.94 per week Council Tax Support. She would therefore have to pay £7.28 Council Tax per week.


36. If Sue’s Council Tax Support for 2016-17 was calculated using the 2015-16 rates her Council Tax Support would be reduced to £4.97 per week. This means she would need to pay Council Tax of £11.25 per week (an extra £3.97 per week). Sue’s Tax Credits have been reduced by £19.85 per week because of the welfare changes which means Sue would be £23.82 per week worse off.

37. Option (iii): Limit the value of Council Tax awards by capping the maximum award payable to 90% of Council Tax liability.

38. Joe has recently been made redundant. He currently receives Job Seeker’s Allowance of £73.10 per week. His weekly Council Tax Charge is £15.75. He receives maximum Council Tax Support of £15.75 so has no Council Tax to pay.

39. In April 2016 his Job Seeker’s Allowance will be frozen at £73.10 due to the changes to welfare benefits. His Council Tax charge has now risen to £16.22 per week. Because the Council Tax Support scheme has been amended he can now only receive help on 90% of this.

40. His weekly Council Tax Support will therefore be £14.60 per week meaning Joe must now pay £1.62 per week from his Job Seeker’s Allowance.

Implications

Policy A Council Tax Support Scheme needs to be agreed each year. There is currently a scheme in place for 2015-16. The proposal is to continue with that scheme for 2016-17.


The Council Tax Support Scheme governs the level of financial support given to claimants on low incomes to assist them to meet their council tax obligations. The Council Tax support Scheme is also used in the calculation of the council tax base which is an element used to calculate the level of council tax to be levied.

Reform changes due to take effect on 1 April 2016 will increase the cost of support which will have to be absorbed by the collection fund. The cost of the scheme in 2015-16 has reduced by £385,000 with the current forecast for support in 2015-16 of £23,450,265.

Legal The requirement to have a Council Tax Support Scheme is governed by legislative requirements.

Procurement None

Human Resources

None

Property None


Equalities

(Impact

Assessment

attached)

Yes No N/A

An equality impact assessment was carried out on the council tax support scheme for 2014-15. No changes are proposed for the 2016-17 scheme and as a result no further equality impact assessment has been done.

Risk Assessment

The changes announced in the Budget 2015 will have an impact on the cost of providing support to the most vulnerable if the 2015-16 Scheme continues for 2016-17. The increased cost of support will be absorbed within the collection fund. Monitoring of the actual impacts will inform the debate for the design of the scheme for 2017-18.

Crime & Disorder

None

Customer Consideration

The Council has 29,353 claimants receiving council tax support who will see no change in their entitlement levels with the proposed scheme for 2016-17

Carbon reduction

None

Wards The scheme affects all wards in Northumberland

Background papers: Various legislative requirements County Council – 5/9/12 County Council – 27/2/13 Policy Board – 12/11/13 County Council – 18/2/14 County Council – 3/12/14 Report sign off.

Officers initials

Finance Officer AE


Human Resources n/a

Procurement n/a

I.T. n/a

Executive Director SM



Author and Contact Details Graeme Barnes Revenues, Benefits and Customer Services Manager 01670 624351 [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


Community Governance Review – Ellington and Linton Parish Council

Community Governance Review – Ellington and Linton

Parish Council


COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE REVIEW – ELLINGTON AND LINTON PARISH COUNCIL


Purpose of report To consider the outcome of a Community Governance Review in the County. Recommendations It is recommended that Council rejects the proposal to split the current Ellington and Linton Parish Council to form two separate Parish Councils. Link to Corporate Plan This report is relevant to the Stronger Communities and Families priority included in the NCC Corporate Plan 2013-2017. Key issues 1. A Community Governance Review has been conducted recently. 2. A petition was received from residents of Linton requesting that Linton should have

its own Parish Council. The petition had 191 valid signatures and this is just over the 50% threshold required to trigger a community governance review.

As a result a community governance review has been carried out with the following

terms of reference:- 'To consider the electoral arrangements of Ellington and Linton Parish Council with a

view to creating two separate Parish Councils.' 3. As part of the review a press release was issued in the local newspaper, notices

displayed around the Parish, and the Division Councillor consulted. In response to


the consultation, one letter of support has been received and three letters and a petition against the proposal.

4. The following comments were received from as part of the consultation process.

In support

Although Linton is represented on the Parish Council the representation is not fair as many more members of the Parish Council reside in Ellington

Linton is one of very few ex-mining villages remaining intact and has social and economic issues peculiar to itself.

Having its own Parish Council would make it easier to maintain the history and character which make the village a great place to live in.

In objection

Concern at suggestion that the proposed Parish Council would attract grant funding but this would be less likely to be awarded to a statutory authority

A public meeting should have been called and attended by a speaker from either the County Council or NALC. This would allow residents to have the full facts explained to them in a balanced and unbiased manner and to reach a decision based on the facts presented.

Members of the Parish Council have been constantly informed by Linton residents that the present Parish Council is both democratically and financially secure than if two separate Councils were created.

Many of the signatories in the first petition have had second thoughts when the full implications of creating two separate Parish Councils have been fully analysed and explained.

It would be difficult for Linton to precept enough funding to maintain the facilities that Ellington and Linton Parish Council currently service.

The present Parish Council runs and maintains Linton Welfare and Linton Village Hall receives funding of £5,000 per annum. The Parish Council also owns and runs the play area within Linton Welfare and supplies a number of litter bins, bus shelters and seats within the community.

5. Council is, therefore, requested to reject the proposal to split the current Ellington

and Linton Parish to form two separate Parish Councils. Background 1. Councils now have extensive powers delegated to them in relation to the creation of

parishes, modification of boundaries and names changes by virtue of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act. At the request of parish councils, the public or even on their own initiative they may conduct Community Governance Reviews. The aim of reviews is to improve the local governance in an area. The


process is managed by principal councils with outcomes incorporated into formal orders.

2. Delegated powers have been granted to the Democratic Services Manager to

conduct reviews subject to full council reserving the power to agree any formal orders arising out of reviews.

Implications Policy


None. There were no additional costs incurred in the community governance review other than officer time.

Legal

Procurement N/A

Human Resources All the work can be carried out by existing employees who possess the necessary skill and expertise.

Property N/A

Equalities (Impact Assessment attached) Yes No N/A

N/A

Risk Assessment The items raised pose a minimal risk to the organisation. Crime & Disorder There are no crime and disorder implications Customer Consideration

The proposals should improve the governance of the local community.

Carbon reduction N/A Wards Lynemouth

Consultation A press release was issued, notices displayed in the parishes, and the division councillor consulted. Background papers: Community Governance file Report sign off.

Chief Executive SM

Finance Officer N/A


Human Resources N/A

Procurement N/A


I.T. N/A


Author and Contact Details Jackie Roll, Democratic Services Manager 01670 622603 [email protected]

27 October 2015 Dear Sir or Madam, Your attendance is...

Documents

Transcript of 27 October 2015 Dear Sir or Madam, Your attendance is...