Agenda item

Delegated Powers

Children and Education Services – Pages 4F – 20F (Section F)

 

Environment – Pages 21G- 23G (Section G)

 

Adult Social Care and Health – Pages 9H- 30H (Section H)

 

Business Growth and Regeneration – Pages 10I-12I (Section I)

 

Safe and Attractive Neighbourhoods – Pages 30J-40J (Section J)

 

Adult Social Care and Health and Children and Education Services – Pages 1L-5L (Section L)

Minutes:

A number of questions were raised in relation to the minutes of the meetings of Cabinet Members as follows:-

 

Minute No. F21 (Youth Offending Services – Performance Management) – Councillor Cowles referred to the information which indicated an increase in the second paragraph on Page 15F, yet in the fourth paragraph of the same page there was reference to a decline in numbers and asked if there was a rise or a fall in performance.

 

The Cabinet Member for Education and Children’s Services confirmed that the rise referred to in the second paragraph was a one off situation, yet in fourth paragraph this referred to the trend in decline numbers within the Youth Justice System.

 

Minute No. F24 (Children and Young People’s Service Revenue Budget Monitoring Report to 30th September, 2014) – Councillor Cowles referred to the fifth paragraph after the bullet points where it was suggested that some overspends were off set against underspends in other areas and asked where these came from and how much they were.

 

The Deputy Leader confirmed that all the figures relating to the outturn of the budget were set out in full as part of the revenue budget monitoring report which was to be presented to the Cabinet on 17th December, 2014, which was now published.

 

Minute No. G35 (Parking Services – Financial and Statistical Report for the Financial Year 2013/14) – Councillor Middleton made reference to the income and expenditure for Parking Services and asked how much this was, issuing of few penalty notices and asked what was the previous year’s figures and the year reported, what was the effect of the vehicle-mounted circuit television system and whether the opening of the new Tesco store had had an effect on parking with statistics as to if the car park was used for town centre shopping.

 

The Cabinet Member for Environment confirmed that all the questions asked could be answered via the detail in the report and assured Councillor Middleton he would provide a full copy for information.

 

In terms of the vehicle-mounted circuit television system, this was used outside schools and had had a large impact on the safety for pupils.  In addition, it had been used as part of providing photographic evidence for fixed penalty notices and in evenings to ensure the free flow of vehicles.

 

With regards to the opening of the new Tesco store on Walker Place as predicted this had had an impact in terms of free parking. 

 

The Cabinet Member for Business Growth and Regeneration confirmed he was working closely with the Cabinet Member for Environment and, to mitigate the effect on the town centre, had arranged for the former Tesco store on Forge Island to be used as parking with sixty bays being allocated for free parking on a short term basis.  There had been some problems with the pedestrianisation, but this was being addressed.

 

Minute No. I19 (Rotherham Town Centre Business Grants) – Councillor Parker referred to the awarding of a grant and whether any impact assessment on existing businesses had been undertaken following any expansion.

 

The Cabinet Member for Business Growth and Regeneration confirmed this was a scheme designed to encourage and support existing retail and catering businesses to improve in the town centre, launched by Mary Portas, as long as the eligibility criteria was satisfied.

 

One such successful recipient had moved from the precinct area that was beginning to suffer as a result of the Tesco relocation and moved into the Old Town Hall near the market.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Parker asked if any impact assessment was, therefore, undertaken on existing businesses following a relocation or if there was any measurement of any adverse impact.

 

The Cabinet Member for Business Growth and Regeneration confirmed no such assessment was undertaken.

 

Minute No. J56(12) (Area Assemby Chairs) – Councillor Parker asked why, following the publication of the Jay Report, Area Assembly meetings were cancelled.

 

The Cabinet Member for Safe and Attractive Neighbourhoods explained that the relevant meetings were not cancelled merely postponed to allow for the relevant officers to be present and give information that was relevant to that particular situation at that time.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Parker disagreed that they were postponed, but pointed out that these were meetings where members of the general public could obtain information relevant to their area and where they could hold Councillors and officials to account.  The people of Rotherham wanted questions answering and those in charge ran away rather than dealing with the issues.

 

The Cabinet Member for Safe and Attractive Neighbourhoods confirmed the timescales for holding Area Assembly meetings were revised to allow for relevant staff to attend in order to properly address members’ of the public concerns and the concerns that people wanted to raise.

 

Minute No. L4 (Independent Review into CSE in Rotherham) – Councillor Middleton referred to the paragraph after the bullet points which indicated those previous victims of child sexual abuse did not meet the various Adult agencies’ thresholds for service intervention and asked why they did not or was it simply because they were too young.

 

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health explained that in terms of Adult Services there were certain eligibility criteria that must be met and even if a person was over the age of eighteen, they still may not meet the criteria require for a particular service, which was why there was a need for Departments to work together to ensure services were put together throughout social care.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Middleton asked if the children were too young to be eligible were their cases considered or dealt with?

 

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health explained that it was not about being too young or too old, but about having a partnership arrangement with agencies to ensure the services were provided in an appropriate way.

 

Minute No. L5 (Best Practice) – Councillor Middleton referred to the use of obscure and silly jargon in the report, such as in the words of “Embedding of Peer Challenge Models” and asked for an explanation.

 

The Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health accepted that jargon often became a barrier to communication and would endeavour to ensure that language used was a little clearer in the future.

 

Resolved:- That the reports and minutes of the meetings of Cabinet Members as listed below be adopted, subject to an amendment to Minute No. F24 (Children and Young People’s Services Revenue Budget Monitoring to 30th September, 2014) which the bullet point should be revised to read Looked After Children 3.046 millions and not 3,046 millions as written:-

 

·                Children and Education Services (Pages 4F-20F) (Section F)

 

·                Adult Social Care and Health – Pages 9H to 31H (Section H)

 

·                Business Growth and Regeneration – Pages 10I to 12I (Section I)

 

·                Safe and Attractive Neighbourhoods – Pages 20J to 40J (Section J)

 

·                Joint Meeting of Cabinet Members for Adult Social Care and Health and Children and Education Services – Pages 1LK to 5L (Section K)

 

Mover:- Councillor Lakin                           Seconder:- Councillor Hoddinott

Supporting documents: