Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest made at this meeting.

There were no questions from members of the public or the press.

1.         To appoint two representatives on the Members’ Training and Development Panel – Currently Councillor Steele and a Vacancy.

2.         To appoint a representative on the Recycling Group – Vacancy (was Councillor J. Hamilton).

Resolved:-  (1) That Councillors J. Falvey and B. Steele be appointed as the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board’s representatives to the Members’ Training and Development Panel for the 2013/14 Municipal Year. 

(2) That Councillor D. Beck be appointed as the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board’s representative to the Recycling Group for the 2013/14 Municipal Year.

Further to Minute No. 13 of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board held on 14^th June, 2013, consideration was given to a report presented by the Scrutiny Manager concerning the discussions which had taken place at recent meetings of all of the Select Commissions with regard to the overall scrutiny work programme for the 2013/2014 Municipal Year.

Accordingly, consideration was given to the detail of the 2013/2014 scrutiny work programme. The following issues were raised during the debate:-

: procurement;

: Elected Member structures and the scrutiny function;

: the economy of the Sheffield City Region;

: tourism;

: the impending scrutiny review of access to GPs;

: Council Housing finance and the impact of the Government’s welfare reforms;

: care for the most elderly people in the Rotherham Borough area.

Resolved:- (1) That the report be received and its contents noted.

(2) That the overall scrutiny work programme for the 2013/2014 Municipal Year, as now discussed, be approved.

Further to Minute No. 203 of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 24th April, 2013, consideration was given to a report, presented by the Principal Educational Psychologist, outlining the response to the Scrutiny Review of Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in Rotherham.

The four stated objectives of the review were to consider:-

: the reasons for the higher diagnosis rates

: services required at diagnosis stage and after

: age 16+ support and transition

: budget implications.

The scrutiny review was therefore structured around these four objectives, with a dedicated meeting held for each one and evidence presented around these four subjects.  Key messages that came out of the review were:-

- Early intervention and prevention work is key for children with ASD;

- Mental health needs of children and adults with ASD can arise because of the lack of support;

- Lack of clarity about where the lead of support lies – Education, Health etc;

- Family and home support is a gap in provision;

- It is difficult for many parents to make sense of all of the different agencies that are involved in this area of work;

- There has been significant progress made with this area of work and this needs to continue with clear leadership and direction;

- To ensure the best outcomes for children and young people with ASD, parental voice and influence is absolutely crucial;

- All of the recommendations formed as part of this review are about more effective use of existing resources, achieving better value for money and becoming better organised in delivery of support.  

The recommendations of the scrutiny review were included as an appendix to the submitted report. Members noted that it is the view of the scrutiny review group that there should not be a need for additional resources to implement the recommendations of the review.

Members’ discussion of this review included the following salient issues:-

- early diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder;

- in recent years, Rotherham has become extremely effective in diagnosing this condition;

- the sharing of best practice with this Council’s regional and statistical neighbour authorities;

- the implementation of the review’s recommendations will be monitored by the Health Select Commission.

Resolved:- (1) That the report be received and its contents noted.

(2) That the progress with the implementation of the review’s recommendations be reported periodically to future meetings of the Health Select Commission.

Further to Minute No. 204 of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 24th April, 2013, consideration was given to a report, presented by the Streetpride Community Delivery Manager, outlining the response to the Scrutiny Review of Grounds Maintenance and Street Cleansing services.

Members noted that a report on the effects of budget savings on the Grounds Maintenance and Street Cleansing schedules had been presented to the Improving Places Select Commission on 25^th July 2012, where it was agreed that a review of the services be carried out.  The review was conducted over three separate meetings during November and December 2012 with the following objectives:-

: to analyse the impact of budget cuts to the service;

: to ensure that risk and impact assessments have been fully considered and are in place for the future;

: to develop practical suggestions for improvement of the service within budget; and

: to consider invest to save options.

The recommendations of the scrutiny review were included as an appendix to the submitted report. The review by the Improving Places Select Commission largely aligns with the work undertaken by Council officers to identify actions which mitigate the effects of the reductions in service budgets.

Members’ discussion of this issue included the following salient issues:-

: grounds maintenance, grass cutting and the use of the ‘grass retardant’ and weed killer; it was noted that the original trial of the use of the ‘grass retardant’ had occurred during the later 1990s;

: cutting back vegetation at the junctions of rural roads, so as to maintain sight lines;

: the Council’s procurement and use of specialist grass-cutting equipment;

: street cleansing and the review of the provision of litter bins;

: the recording of contacts with geographical information to gather intelligence on trends and patterns;

: large-scale works alongside the highway, which sometimes require temporary road (or lane) closures and traffic diversions;

: maintenance works which encourage the growth of wild flowers, especially in central reservations and alongside many of the principal routes into Rotherham;

: the various comments, criticisms and feedback received from members of the public;

: the proposal to establish a Town and Village Centre Standard for grounds maintenance and street cleansing throughout the Rotherham Borough area;

: future monitoring of the recommendations of this scrutiny review.

Resolved:- (1) That the report be received and its contents noted.

(2) That the Improving Places Select Commission be asked to establish arrangements for the monitoring of the implementation of the recommendations of the Scrutiny Review of Grounds Maintenance and Street Cleansing services.

The Overview and Scrutiny Board noted that the South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive has continued to liaise with the Youth Councils/Parliaments in South Yorkshire. Rotherham Youth Council members visited the Rotherham Interchange in May 2013, to meet interchange managers and discussed safety and security and other related issues of concern to young people.  A number of recommendations were made by the young people, which are now being assessed by the Interchange managers. There will be further meetings with young people to discuss progress. A delegation from the Youth Council participated in the Young People’s public transport summit organised by SYPTE and Sheffield City Council and will feature in a dvd film to use for driver training at SYPTE’s Transport Academy.  The production of this training film was one of the outcomes of the transport summit.

Resolved:- That the minutes of the previous meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board, held on 14th June, 2013, be approved as a correct record for signature by the Chairman.

Members referred to the establishment of the overall scrutiny work programme for the 2013/2014 Municipal Year, as approved at Minute No. 21 above.

There were no formal call-in requests.