Agenda and minutes

Resolved:-

That the minutes of the meetings held on 21 June and 5 July 2017 be approved as true and correct records of the proceedings.

There were no declarations of interest by Members or officers in respect of any item on the agenda.

There were no questions from the public or press.

Consideration was given to a report detailing performance against the targets and priorities within the Corporate Plan 2016-17 for the final quarter of the year from January to March 2017.

The Performance Report and Performance Scorecard, set out in Appendices A and B to the report, provided an analysis of the Council’s current performance against 14 key delivery outcomes and 103 measures. The report was based on the current position of available data, along with an overview of progress on key projects and activities which also contributed towards the delivery of the Corporate Plan.

It was noted that, at the end of the final quarter (January – March 2017), 33 measures had either met or had exceeded the target set in the Corporate Plan. Although this represented only 31.4% of the total number of measures in the Plan, it equated to 49.3% of the total number of indicators where data was available or where targets had been set. A total of 27 (40.3% of those measured in the quarter) performance measures had not hit their target for the year (25.7% overall).

Consideration was also given to the Asset Management Plan Improvement Report (AMIP) and associated scorecard which set out the progress on delivering the AMIP.

Members took the opportunity to review the performance report, narrative and data and identified a number of areas for questioning, which included:-

·         Was it justifiable to disband the Step-Down Panel? In response, it was explained that the Panel was being used as part of process and decision making responsibility lay with Team Managers working with Early Help. It was confirmed that the re-referral rate at the end of June 2017 was 15%

·         Many measures marked as red (not on target) had a downward direction of travel and did that reflect more effort being put into keeping measures on target rather than getting others on target. In response, it was confirmed that the large workloads in Children and Young People’s Services and Adult Social Care had determined where efforts were to be focused, rather than attempting to maintain performance.

·         Was the rapid increase in the number of victims/survivors accessing post-abuse support services a sign of improvement? In response, it was confirmed that this was a good thing and with the number of prosecutions expected to increase, it was important to ensure that the right services were in the right place.

·         What had been put in place to reduce rates of persistent absenteeism? In response, it was confirmed that this had been a significant focus through Early Help and Family Support Workers.

·         What explanation was there for the decline in performance in respect of successful completion of drug treatment? It was explained that trends in respect of smoking were heading in the right direction, but there were concerns regarding suicide rates and weight management, with the latter continuing to be an acute issue for Rotherham.

·         Concerns were expressed that performance data in respect of adults with learning disabilities in employment was on a downward  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

Councillor Lelliott, Cabinet Member for Jobs and the Local Economy, and Steve Mullett, Principal Project Manager from South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive, attended the meeting to provide an update on the Sheffield to Rotherham Tram Train Project.

The Board had requested an update in light of the report from the National Audit Office which had identified concerns in respect of the rising costs and delays of the project.

It was confirmed that the project was led by the Department for Transport (DfT) and Network Rail and was not the responsibility of SYPTE or Rotherham MBC.It was noted that Network Rail had admitted that the project had not been managed properly initially and it did not have the expertise to oversee the project. The prompt audit had ensured that the right people with expertise were in place, alongside a robust programme to deliver the project.

The view was expressed that Network Rail and the DfT should never have got into that position and that the approach for any engineering project should involve the commissioning of a report to identify the works required and associated costs, rather than stumbling across them whilst in the midst of the works. Whilst it was accepted that this was the responsibility of Network Rail and DfT, it was noted by the Cabinet Member that by 2018 Rotherham would have a tram train which connected the town to Sheffield City Centre.

It was further noted that DfT had recognised the value of learning from the project and it was that learning which had ensured that the project progressed. Other cities were now looking at the technology and approaches adopted.

The Board thanked the Cabinet Member for Jobs and the Local Economy and Steve Mullett for their attendance and requested that a further report be brought back at a later date detailing the outcomes of learning from the project.

Resolved:-

1.    That the update be noted.

2.    That a further report be submitted to Overview and Scrutiny Management Board detailing the outcomes of learning from the tram train project.

Consideration was given to a briefing paper submitted on behalf of the Safer Rotherham Partnership in respect of a proposed Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) for Rotherham town centre.

It was noted that concerns had been raised by town centre businesses, the public, Ward Members, partners, public forums, the Town Centre Partnerships and others in respect of anti-social behaviour in Rotherham town centre. The identified issues related to persistent street drinking, littering, dogs running free (unleashed), people sleeping rough, rowdy and inconsiderate behaviour and drug related issues.

Section 59 of the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 enabled local authorities to address issues of anti-social behaviour in public spaces by the use of a PSPO. It was noted that the proposal for the town centre served to target individuals and groups that had consistently behaved badly. In order to introduce the PSPO, two conditions would need to be met:-

·         that activity within a public place within the Council’s area had had a detrimental effect on the quality of life of those in the locality, or it was likely that activities would be carried on in a public place within that area and that they would have such an effect; and

·         that the effect, or likely effect, of the activities is, or was likely to be, of a persistent or continuing nature, is, or was likely to be, such as to make the activities unreasonable, and justified the restrictions imposed by the notice.

Consultation would take place on the proposed Order containing the following proposed prohibitions:-

·         behaving in such a way or using language that causes, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress to another person

·         drinking alcohol other than in a licensed premises or event

·         spitting saliva or any other product from the mouth

·         face to face fundraising and marketing carried out by organisations without prior written permission of the Council

·         failing to keep a dog on a leash and under control

·         using or carrying controlled drugs otherwise than in accordance with a valid prescription

·         littering

·         using a vehicle to cause a nuisance by gathering in groups, playing loud music or otherwise impacting the quality of life in the locality

·         urinating or defecating in a public place

Members queried why a proposal for a PSPO had not been brought forward for consideration at an earlier point. In response, the Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety indicated that she had pushed for a proposal to be brought forward as quickly as possible. Following on, the Strategic Director of Regeneration and Environment also indicated that it had been brought forward as the earliest opportunity and apologised if Members felt that this was not sufficiently early.

The Chair indicated that Members expected such a proposal to be subject to a minimum period of six weeks’ consultation and for a wider body of interested individuals and groups to be targeted in the consultation exercise. The Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety indicated that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

The Chair indicated that there were no issues requiring report to Members at the meeting.

The Chair invited the Chairs of the Select Commissions to provide reports on their activities and future plans.

Councillor Cusworth, Vice-Chair of Improving Lives Select Commission, reported that there had been two meetings in July 2017 where Members had reviewed a report on domestic abuse and made a number of recommendations to secure progress in this area of work. She further reported that she was leading a review on Safeguarding and Corporate Parenting, which would include the annual reports of both Local Safeguarding Boards. In addition to this, the Improving Lives Select Commission would be looking at the Medium Term Financial Strategy in respect of Children and Young People’s Services, work being undertaken in respect of children missing from home and Home to School transport.

Councillor Mallinder, Chair of Improving Places Select Commission, reported on the meeting that had taken place in July 2017 where they had reviewed fire safety in the context of the Grenfell Tower tragedy. In addition to this, the Commission had reviewed the Town Centre Masterplan proposals and work supporting the future cultural offer for the borough.

Councillor Evans, Chair of Health Select Commission, reported on the meeting that had taken place on 28th June 2017 where Members had reviewed the Place Plan and the Adult Social Care Performance Plan.

Resolved:-

That the updates on the activities of the Select Commissions be noted.

The Chair reported that there were no items of business requiring urgent consideration at the meeting.

Wednesday 6 September 2017 at 11.00 a.m.

(A pre-meeting for Members will be held at 9.15a.m.)

The Chair confirmed that the next meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board would take place on Wednesday, 6th September, 2017 at 11.00am.