PERFORMANCE AND OVERVIEW COMMITTEE COMMUNITY

RECORD OF MEETING HELD ON 7^TH FEBRUARY 2007

Present:

Councillor G Griffiths; Chair

Councillors T E Ankers, D N Bebbington, J D Bratherton, D H D Charlesworth, S Conquest,

M Grant, J Lewis and M A Martin

Non-Committee Member in Attendance:

Councillor R Westwood      Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods

In Attendance:

Lisa Carr                             Policy and Performance Officer

Barry Cooper                       Assistant Director (Revenues)

Paul Goodwin                      Assistant Director (Treasury and Corporate Support)

Bernadette Hurst                  Assistant Chief Executive

Carol Jones                          Democratic Services Committee Officer

Jocelyn McMillan                 Cultural Development Manager

Sally Roper                           Senior Accountancy Assistant

Su Turner                              Local Strategic Partnership Manager

Mark Ward                            Trainee Accountant

Apologies:    Councillors S J S Mottram, J I Stockton and M J Weatherill

55        DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor G Griffiths declared a personal interest in the Board agenda report 15 (Strategic Grants to Voluntary Organisations) on the basis that he was a Trustee of Nantwich Museum Trust (appointed by the Borough Council) and his wife was also a Trustee of Nantwich Museum Trust, (appointed by the County Council).

No other Member made any declaration of interest in any item of business on the agenda.

56        RECORD OF MEETING

AGREED:  That the Record of the Meeting held on 10^th January 2007 be approved as correct.

57        WHIPPING DECLARATIONS

In accordance with Paragraph 18 of the Performance and Overview Procedure Rules, Members were invited to declare in respect of items where the whip had been applied.  No such declarations were made.

58        BOARD BUSINESS – BOARD MEETING – 8^TH FEBRUARY 2007

The Committee was invited to comment on the following reports which were due to be considered by the Board at its meeting on 8^th February.  At this point in the meeting, Councillor R Westwood declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Board agenda item No. 16, on the basis that he was a member of Wistaston Sports and Leisure.

AGREED:  That, on this occasion, no comments be submitted to the Board.

(Note:  Having declared a personal and prejudicial interest in Board Report No. 16, Councillor R Westwood withdrew from the meeting during discussion of the item.)

59        BUDGET CONSULTATION – 2007-20008

The Assistant Director (Accountancy and Audit) was in attendance for discussion of this item and identified the key issues for Members.

During discussion, a suggestion was made about the format of the information presented, and the Assistant Director undertook to raise this with the Executive Director.

AGREED: That no comments be made on the Budget Proposals for 2007/2008.

(Note:  In accordance with Procedure Rule 26(2) Councillor Westwood spoke on this item with the permission of the Committee.)

60        PROVISIONAL LIST OF BOARD ITEMS (BOARD’S FORWARD PLAN)

The Committee noted the Board’s Forward Plan for April 2007.

61        RESPONSES/REFERRALS FROM THE BOARD OR COUNCIL

At its meeting held on 10^th January 2007, the Committee had commented on two Board reports –

Ø       Integrated Youth Support Service for Cheshire

            “The Committee supports the recommendation.”

Ø       Appointment to Outside Organisation

“Health issues in general, fall within the remit of the Community P & O.  The Board is asked to consider, in the longer-term, the appointment of a Member of the P & O (Community) Committee, onto the County Health Scrutiny Select Committee.”

Ø       Youth Nuisance Policy and Procedures

Formal comments to the Board were not submitted, but the Committee made observations on the report, principally in respect of grammatical errors;  the Chair of the Committee raised these issues at the Board meeting.

The Board had noted the comments in respect of each of the two items.

It was noted that there were no referrals from Council on this occasion.

62        PERFORMANCE MONITORING – BVPIs AND LPIs

The Committee received service performance monitoring information on the agreed basket of key national performance indicators for the period 1^st April 2006 to 31^st December 2006.  

Members discussed in detail the performance indicators and the way in which the information was presented. Some of the data represented a specific period only, whilst other was cumulative.  The Policy and Performance Manager was asked to take note of the comments made by Members and to provide clarification (by e-mail to each Member) in respect of performance under the heading “Environmental Health”.

Concern was expressed about performance under the heading “Community Safety”.  Councillor M Grant, who was Chair of the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership, agreed to raise this issue with the Steering Group.  

63        WORK PROGRAMME

63.1     Educational Attainment

The Committee had agreed that the topic of "Education within the Borough" be included in its annual work programme.  Education was a County Council function and the Committee agreed that to raise Members' level of understanding of this issue, information on attainment levels be provided. 

The Local Strategic Partnership Manager (LSP) (Su Turner) and the Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods (Councillor R Westwood) addressed the Committee.

The Committee considered the report of the LSP Manager together with additional data on GCSE results.  It was reported that subsequent to the previous presentation to the Committee (in February 2006), the Local Strategic Partnership had carried out some work on attainment levels.  The presentation to the Committee covered the attainment levels for Crewe Education Improvement Partnership and Nantwich Education Improvement Partnership and also focused on attainment levels in the vicinity of the regeneration areas.  This highlighted collective performance for 10 primary schools and four secondary schools in Crewe.

Following discussion, the Committee expressed concern at what appeared to be low attainment levels and declining attainment trends for certain local schools.  It was agreed that the appropriate Executive Member (Cheshire County Council) be invited to a future meeting to provide an overview of the relative reduction in educational standards in the borough.

AGREED:  That the appropriate Executive Member from Cheshire County Council be invited to attend the next meeting of the Committee to provide an overview of educational standards in the Borough.

63.2Up-dated Work Programme

The Committee received the up-dated work programme.

63.3Proposed Reviews

63.3.1             Police Service Review: 

Chief Superintendent Ian Hopkins had responded to the Committee’s invitation to attend a meeting to provide an overview of the Police Service in the Eastern Division following restructuring.  He had extended an invitation to Members to visit the Police Headquarters at Winsford.

AGREED: (a) That the invitation to visit Police Headquarters, Winsford be accepted; 

(b) That Chief Superintendent Ian Hopkins be asked to offer dates for the visit; and

(c) That Members of the Committee be informed of the dates, and arrangements made for the visit.

63.3.2             Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Review:

The Committee considered a scrutiny form completed by Councillor Griffiths.  The reason given for the review was that the Council had made significant budgetary commitment to CCTV, but there was little Member awareness of performance or effectiveness.

AGREED:  (a) That the Committee include a review of CCTV in its work programme; and

(b) That Councillor Griffiths discuss the proposed review with Councillor John Dwyer (Portfolio Holder for Safer Communities) and David Marren (Executive Director – Direct Services) and report back to the Committee on the outcome of those discussions.

63.3.3             Social Care:

The Committee considered a scrutiny form completed by Councillor Conquest.  The reason given for the review was that it was an important issue of public concern to establish the number of people affected and how they coped with the services.

AGREED: (a) That the Committee review the impact of care charge increases upon users of the service locally (non-residential care);

(b) That the review be conducted by way of examination of Cheshire County Council’s charges and witness evidence from representatives of local Carers Groups; and

(c) That Cheshire County Council be asked to provide a list of current costs for non-residential care, including home and day care, transport and meals.

64        FUTURE OF POST OFFICE NETWORK

The Government was consulting on the future of the Post Office network with a closing date of 8^th March 2007 for receipt of comments.

Postwatch had invited comments and a copy of its consultation paper was submitted.  The paper set out the key proposals together with Postwatch’s own view of those proposals.  

AGREED: (a) That the Committee support the following statements set out in the document submitted –

·         “We welcome the extension of funding.  This investment needs to be tied to reform.  All structural changes must be driven by customers’ needs and undertaken following local consultations with affected communities.

·         We want the government to explicitly set out what it views the social role of post offices to be.  This should help determine the size and structure of the network, and what closures may be undertaken to ensure savings whilst not unduly adversely affecting customers.

·         More effort needs to be made to ensure that post offices offer services that customers need and value; for example, the government should take steps to make more of its services available at post offices.

·         Distance and topography are good starting points for access criteria;  however, other factors (for example, walking distance to closest alternative, availability of public transport, socio-economic indicators) need to be taken into account.

·         We support the current 0.5 mile protection for post offices in urban deprived areas and do not think the government should weaken this.”

            (b) That these comments be forwarded to Postwatch as the Committee’s response to the consultation document.

65        DATE OF NEXT MEETING

            4^th April 2007      

……….……………….………….  Chair