To receive a statement from the Leader of the Council in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9.
Minutes:
The Leader wished to provide a brief statement and confirmed:-
· The joy and news that Rotherham United Football Club had secured promotion.
· The Impendent Health Check commissioned by Commissioners to supplement information to Government. This information recognised all the progress made which was now in the public domain.
· Rotherham Together Partnership one year on from launching the Partnership Plan celebrated together the progress made and the challenges ahead. From there it was confirmed that McLaren had now taken ownership in the AMP and the owner of Gulliver’s Theme Park spoke passionately about the forthcoming project at Rother Valley Country Park.
· The Council had also formally appointed a new Director of Children’s Services, John Stonehouse, who would join the Council at the end of the summer from York.
The Mayor invited other Members to ask questions of the Leader’s Statement.
Councillor Reeder referred to the health check outcome for Commissioners and further the decision of the learning disability closures and the sale of some homes that were designated for people with learning difficulties that were now for sale in Eastwood. She asked was it not premature that they were for sale when they may well now be needed.
The Leader believed the two areas were entirely different. The Commissioners had to report on the governance of the Council of which there had been good progress and this was validated from people outside the authority.
This was distinct from the difficult decisions that had to be made The Council had heard today from people in relation to learning disabilities and understood why they felt strongly about the changes being made. The decision was to be implemented over two years and whilst this had been reflected upon and the decision hard, this had been discussed with the Commissioners but the decision sat with the Council.
It had to be recognised that all Councils made the difficult decisions about needs and about services. This would continue as policies were implemented and it was hoped that at the end of the process the services would be improved so that those affected now would come back in the future and speak about the changes and how this could be improved in the future.
Councillor Cowles also commented on the learning disability closures and the arguments presented at the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board. The advice of officers was taken on board, but a number of recommendations were made relating to the need to relationships between users must be maintained, transition into the community must not be rushed, provision for long term residents must be available and that most importantly visits to Councils where there had been successful implementation of this policy and this was available to carers and users. If the issue was so important the visits should have taken place. He expressed his concern about this. He also referred to an extract he had received from a service user which raised his concern further.
He asked why the Council had not ensured visits took place prior to the decision being made and why it was decided to take the route through Cabinet and not through Improving Lives.
The Leader confirmed there were visits made to other parts of the country well before the decision was made. There was a long lead in lead by Councillor Roche. No Member had taken this decision lightly and it was why there was a need to phase this in gradually. The view from the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board and been around providing further assurance and an opportunity for others to see first-hand about where the implementation had worked. A trip had been arranged during the summer.
In terms of decision making process there had been some discussions in scrutiny, but in governance terms the decision was an executive decision and the responsibility of Cabinet, which meant the report could then be considered through pre-scrutiny. There would be ongoing discussions through Scrutiny as part of the implementation.
In a point of information Councillor Steele confirmed the recommended visits to other Councils was to ensure that service users and their relatives could view first hand why the decision had been made.