·
To select appropriate items from the Cabinet agenda for pre-decision
scrutiny (cabinet reports enclosed for Scrutiny Members)
Minutes:
The Committee
scrutinised the following Cabinet Board items:
Corporate Plan 2022-2027
- Recover, Reset, Renew
Members received a
report which was seeking approval to consult on an updated Corporate Plan for
the period 2022-2027.
The Chief Executive
stated that the report captured the Councils response to the pandemic, and set
out the impacts on communities and the local economy; the impacts had changed
the context of the way in which the Council needed to plan going forward. It
was noted that the Council had a statutory duty to produce these plans and had
to consider, as part of this work, whether the previous wellbeing objectives
remained appropriate or if they needed to be changed; it had been concluded
that the wellbeing objectives needed to be amended in light of the change of
context. Another part of this work which was highlighted included looking
forward to identify various factors that would have an effect in the future
such as climate change, financial settlements and the Welsh Governments own
programme for Government.
It was noted that the
circulated report also summarised the initial recovery actions that the Council
had taken; actions against recovery had proceeded as and when they could,
dependant on the situation of the pandemic. One of the pieces of work Officers
mentioned that they had completed was setting out the priorities for the next
phase, which had been split into four new wellbeing objectives:
1. Best start in life for
all children and young people;
2. Building thriving and
sustainable communities by drawing on the strengths seen in communities during
the pandemic;
3. Give a greater priority
to the work carried out around local environment, culture and heritage;
4. Renew and intensify work
in order to create good quality, green jobs in the area, and to help local
people equip themselves with the skills and confidence to take up that
employment.
Officers stated that all
of this work will need to be underpinned by a significant organisational change
programme within the Council; when developing the Corporate Plan, Officers had
liaised with Members regarding the sorts of changes to the culture and ways of
working that will need to be introduced. It was mentioned that at the heart of
this change was being one Council; over the course of the pandemic, many
departments across the Council had come together as a team, and silos between
departments had been broken down. The Chief Executive added that this was going
to be a really important part of the way the Council progresses forward.
One element that hadn’t
been completed yet was noted to be working out the measures in relation to the
new wellbeing objectives; there was some work to be completed over the coming
weeks to ensure that the Council could demonstrate the difference these will
make. It was highlighted that Officers will be interested in any views the
public may have about the ways in which the Council could measure success as
part of the consultation. The Committee was informed that after the Election,
there will be an opportunity for the new administration to undertake a further
review of the Councils prioritises and policies, which will be reflected in an
updated Corporate Plan and medium term financial plan for the period beyond
that.
Members made reference
to the outcomes of the Let’s Talk campaign, and stated that the level of
responses varied, especially in the valley areas; Officers were asked to
comment on this. The Chief Executive reassured Members that the effort that was
put into the consultation in all parts of the County Borough was consistent. It
was noted that this consultation relied quite a large extent on the electronic,
digital means of consultation due to the pandemic, which more than likely
affected the response rate; had it not been for the fact that there was a
second and third wave when undertaking this work, Officers would have planned
to go out into the community and meet face to face with communities in order to
obtain more responses. It was highlighted that a lot of work was carried out to
try and gather views of children and young people; this was completed largely
through the programmes that were being held over the school holidays.
The Committee was
informed that once it was apparent that there were low numbers of responses
from some of the valley communities, focus groups were organised to try and
obtain qualitative information in order to gain some insight into some of the
issues in those communities; 30 in depth interviews were completed to ensure
that representation was received across the give valley areas, some as focus
groups and others as one to one interviews. It was added that the Chief
Executive also went out into valley communities to talk with Local Members; the
messages brought back from those visits were consistent with what had been
gathered from the consultation feedback.
Reference was made to
consultation fatigue which was becoming more talked about. The Strategic
Communications Officer explained that the Let’s Talk campaign tried to
demonstrate that the Council was acting on and had listened to what individuals
had expressed; this work also will give these individuals the chance to comment
on whether the plans capture the relevant points in order to achieve the
wellbeing objectives.
The important question
moving forward from this consultation was why more responses were received from
some parts of the County Borough than others; this will be an ongoing piece of
work for the Council, and an element would could be improved on in future with
the help of the Local Area Coordinators, Local Members and the Neighbourhood
Management Teams. It was added that Officers also needed to consider new and
additional ways of engagement in order to obtain a more consistent and higher
level of participation.
Members stated that many
of the issues raised were not directly related to Covid 19 impacts or recovery,
but show deep-seated concerns about services and the condition of towns,
villages and communities; it was therefore asked if the recovery plan will
reflect the longer term need for regeneration and front line services across
the County Borough. It was explained that the Councils Corporate Plan had to be
constructed in accordance with the Wellbeing of Future Generations Act
legislation; in terms of long term intent, one part of the sustainable
development principle requires Councils to look 30 years ahead to try and
determine how the actions and decisions made today will affect future
generations. In constructing the Corporate Plan, Officers tried to be very
specific for the next 12 months of work; this will provide Officers with
democratic cover for what needed to be completed whilst moving from one
administration to the next. Moving on from the next 12 months, it was noted
that Officers sought to look at what would be deliverable within a five year
period, whilst leaving it broad and flexible enough for an incoming
administration to be able to provide their own views and inputs; and again
similarly, with looking forward to 20 years’ time and setting a vision around
the four wellbeing objectives over this period of time. It was added that the
Corporate Plan was intended for future use, beyond the pandemic, and looking at
the longer term ambitions.
It was highlighted that
a lot of the elements within the Corporate Plan linked in with the Local
Development Plan (LDP), which was nearing the start of the process of being
consulted on in terms of its review; Members asked if there could be a tie in
between what was trying to be achieved through the revised Corporate Plan and
the LDP process. The Chief Executive stated that the LDP should be a
representation of what the Councils overarching plans were for its community;
therefore would expect, as the LDP review was taken forward, that these new
objectives that the Council will be considering were reflected in that process.
It was noted that as the LDP develops, there may be some new evidence coming
through the process, which could be used to reflect into an updated Corporate Plan;
the two plans over a period of time will keep being updated and reflected on to
keep pace with new evidence and issues as they arise.
Following on from this,
the Director of Environment and Regeneration stated that the Council was at a
critical point in the process of developing its spatial aspirations for the
growth and protection of the County Borough; the LDP was a spatial plan, but
there were also topic based policies within that plan, and the Council was
about to embark on a consultation period with its communities. Members were
reminded to encourage their constituents and partner organisation to engage
with Planning Policy colleagues during this exercise; it was important that
they do so at this early stage, so that issues affecting their communities
could be identified, and then the topic and spatial based polices can be
developed to try and tackle those issues. The Committee was informed that the
LDP was used on a day to day basis to determine the Councils growth aspirations
and planning applications that were submitted. The importance of the LDP was
reiterated, and it was added that it dovetailed into all the other plans that
the Authority was required to deliver.
Concerns were raised in
regards to a statistic detailed in the circulated report, which highlighted
that 84% of children entered nursery without the appropriate literacy, language
and communication skills to access the curriculum; this would imply that a very
large majority of families who had young children require this specific input.
Members highlighted that this statistic linked to a number of aspirations of
the best start in life for all children and young people wellbeing objective;
and based on the statistic, it was asked if the Council had the capacity to be
able to achieve those aspirations.
The Committee was
informed that a Head of Early Years, Inclusion and Partnership post had
recently been created in order to bring together the resources and partners to
try and help further with this area of work. The statistic detailed in the
report wasn’t new to Officers, however a different way of presenting figures
had been adopted. Members were reassured that a plan was being developed in
order to tackle the areas of concern, and that it was an ambition of the
Council to work towards this in order to improve. It was noted that some
children enter the education system with various difficulties due to the
socioeconomic makeup of Neath Port Talbot; there was a significant amount of
pupils with Additional Learning Needs (ALN), and also some which were
unidentified.
Officers confirmed that
they had spoken about the detail of the plan to partners, who were on board
with the priority around early years; this will bring together the experts
within the third sector, the health board and other partners in order to
establish a coherent plan. It was highlighted that the work around this will
hopefully improve the situation so that when pupils to enter the education
system, they will be better prepared to learn and will make the same or
improved progress, and at the end of the education system they will leave with
better outcomes.
Members acknowledged
that the lack of bus services affecting residents’ ability to access employment
and leisure activities was referred to at various points throughout the
circulated report. Detailed within the Corporate Plan, it stated that there was
ambition to develop a plan to create new transport hubs that improve
connections between the places where people live and the places where people
work, learn and enjoy their leisure time; as well as develop community based
transport schemes to support access to work. Officers were asked to expand on
these two proposals.
It was highlighted that
there were a lot of public transport routes that were delivered by the private
sector; if those public transport routes were not profitable, then following
the reduction in subsidies that the Welsh Government would have given them, the
transport providers would withdraw those routes. Officers added that there was
very little the Authority could do about this unless Council money was used to
subsidize those routes, and it would be difficult to determine which routes
should be focused on, in terms of the prioritisation of the very limited
funding packages. The Director of Environment and Regeneration explained that
the Plan focused on and contained potential proposals that the Council had some
form of control over, and how the Council needed to respond to the way in which
transport was changing. The Committee was informed that community transport was
becoming more important, particular in the valley communities; the Council was
running a few pilot schemes operational within the County Borough to try and
expand the opportunity that community transport provides within the valley
communities. It was confirmed that Officers will be reviewing the effeteness of
those pilot schemes going forward.
In regards to the longer
term ambition of transport hubs, it was stated that the Council was potentially
looking to deliver a hub of activity in the future within the valley
communities; this could consist of various elements, such as hybrid workspaces
and community facilities within the hub to allow for people to come together
and share experiences, knowledge and social activities. Further to this, it was
noted that community transport car sharing schemes could be established from
the community hubs, to allow people to get to and from work, as well as to and
from retail and leisure activities. Officers concluded that the various elements
detailed within the Plan could potentially diversify the transport
opportunities within the County Borough, rather than relying solely on the
public transport networks which had been diminishing over time.
A discussion took place
in regards to the number of responses to the Let’s Talk Campaign. Members
expressed that although the feedback in the responses were useful, there was a
vast array of residents who did not provide their feedback. It was suggested
that a caveat be included with the data and information from the consultation
for clarification purposes. The Chief Executive agreed to look into the way in
which the circulated report had been worded and ensure that the report made
this clear. Members were reassured that it was a standard practice to include
this sort of detail in the breakdown of data; Officers did not rely on isolated
data sets, and instead would seek to triangulate the data which would include
checking with Elected Members, using data Officers had gathered themselves
which would feed into the overall picture, and using the feedback from the
public.
Reference was made to
the ‘resetting relationships with our residents’ element in the circulated
report, and how the Council had encapsulated the way in which it planned to
reset and renew relationships with residents. Members queried how the points
were going to be made a reality, and expressed the need for further resources
in order to achieve the aspirations. It was highlighted that the following
needed to be considered in more detail in the future; getting best price for
land sales, applying for a larger amount of funding e.g. Levelling Up Fund, and
the setting of council tax to be kept as low as possible.
In regards to land,
Members were reassured that the Council was selling owned land at the price
that the land was worth; whilst taking into account what constrains there were
on all of its land parcels. It was added that when selling land, Officers
utilised the independent advice of the district valuer to ensure that land was
not sold below market value.
The Director of
Environment and Regeneration explained that the prospectus and the call for
bids for the Levelling Up Fund were issued with very restricted timescales in
place, and it was a very strict process in terms of consultation and
endorsement; Officers had to secure a significant amount of information in
order to put in the bids. It was confirmed that the Council did submit bids,
however due to current issues with resources, there weren’t any ‘oven ready’
projects that could be submitted; this was made public at the time. The
Committee was informed that Officers had met with Government Officials in
relation to the Levelling Up Fund to try and obtain feedback, and had
specifically asked for details regarding the bids that were successful in order
to learn from them; unfortunately, UK Officials will not share information from
those successful bids. Officers were mindful that there was a second tranche of
this funding being released in the spring, and the Teams had started looking at
projects; additional money (£200,000) had been received in order to build on
the capacity within the Teams, however it would take some time to find people
suitable for the job and train them to a standard in which they were able to
deliver projects. It was noted that the extra monies will help to build a Team
that was fit for purpose in the future, and sustainable going forward; which
will also maximise opportunity to secure successful outcomes for any funding
opportunities.
A discussion took place
regarding the new wellbeing objective ‘best start in life’, and the links to
the Flying Start programme. Members queried the value for money of this
programme, based on the worrying statistic that was highlighted earlier in the
meeting. Officers were not aware of any value for money studies into the Flying
Start programme across Wales; however, the schools which received children from
the Flying Start programme spoke highly of it, in terms of the support that the
young people and their families received. It was stated that not all children
who required support lived in the Flying Start catchment areas, and not all
children who lived in Flying Start catchments areas required support; in
discussions around ‘best start in life’, it was reported that some families were
actually receiving too much support and on the other side there were families
who needed that support. Officers mentioned that part of the strategic planning
referred to in earlier discussions, was to ensure that partners come together
to help those who needed support, regardless of if they lived in Flying Start
areas or not, and to ensure that those who needed support knew how to find it;
one of the issues identified was that there were a lot of support networks
between various sectors, however there wasn’t clear pathways in accessing it.
Following on from the
discussion above, the need to educate and help the family unit was stressed. It
was highlighted that the years of austerity had significantly impacted the
early years function; there used to be very good connections and links between
partners which helped children and their families. The Director of Education,
Leisure and Lifelong Learning reiterated the points that Members had made; in
nearly all cases, the needs of a child was best met when the family unit
understood the work and supported the child. It was added that one of the
reasons for establishing the new post of Head of Early Years, Inclusion and
Partnership, was to make sure that strategic plans were in place and the
resources available were utilised to their best effect.
It was asked if there
was a set way to deliver on some of the aspirations detailed within the
Corporate Plan, in order to move forward with achieving them; reference was
also made to the current difficulties with recruitment and how this could have
an effect on delivering the aspirations. The Chief Executive confirmed that
Officers had prioritised within the plan; the four wellbeing priorities being
the main focus going forward. It was noted that the circulated plan contained a
number of bullet points which set out the areas of work which Officers believed
could be progressed in the first 12 months.
In terms of performance,
it was noted that there were other mechanisms in place for demonstrating where
the Council was performing well, where it was doing ok and where it was
struggling; these will come through in the performance monitoring reports and
the annual report, and Officers will consider how the Council was performing
when updating the plans. It was added that if the Council was failing in a
particular area, there would be an opportunity to build this into the plan in
the next period; and then Officers will need to identify resources to deliver
on the work.
The Committee was
informed that some of the areas of work were long term objectives which will
not be completed within the first three years; these were the projects that
Officers will be working towards over the next 20 years. It was highlighted
that there will be an important piece of work to carry out in order to
determine the difference the Council makes and the position the Council was in,
in terms of progression.
The Chief Executive
highlighted that the Corporate Plan was yet to include the measures; by the
time the report was brought back to Committee, there will be a baseline measure
included. It was noted that scrutiny committees had an important role to play
in this; there will be an opportunity in the next administration to look at how
the Council and its partners, collectively, were making an impact on these
important areas.
Members raised that
communities weren’t only recovering from the pandemic, but from years of
austerity prior to it. It was stated that this should be reflected in the
Corporate Plan.
The following formal
amendment to the recommendation contained within the circulated report was
proposed and seconded:
Having had due regard to
the Integrated Impact Assessment it is recommended that Cabinet approve the
draft Corporate Plan 2022-2027 and the Strategic Change Programme (contained in
the annexe) be published for a 4 week consultation period (5th January 2022 –
1st February 2022.) subject to the plan including a reference to the impacts of
the years of austerity and the pandemic.
It was determined that
the Committee were in support of the amendment to be considered by Cabinet.
Draft Budget for
Consultation 2022-23
The Committee received a
report which was seeking approval to consult on the draft budget proposals for
2022/23.
The Chief Executive
informed Members of this year’s scrutiny process for the consultation on the
budget. It was noted that typically, this report would be brought to Cabinet
Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet, before then being taken to each individual
scrutiny committee, so that scrutiny members could scrutinise the budget proposals
in relation to their portfolio; this was particularly important when it was
proposed to either raise new income, make cuts in costs or make cuts to
services. However, it was highlighted that the budget was very different this
year as there were no proposed cuts to services; due to this reason, Officers
were not intending to present the budget report to each scrutiny committee,
unless scrutiny members request this be done.
An overview of the
proposals contained within the circulated report was provided to the Committee;
final decisions on the budget will be requested at the meeting on 28 February
2022, once feedback had been obtained from the consultation process.
Reference was made to
the current budget for 2021/22, which was at £316.246m; 75% of this was funded
from Welsh Government, and 25% from Council Tax collection. The report provided
detail as to how that money was being spent.
In regards to the Local
Government settlement for next year; on 21 December 2021, Welsh Government
announced a 9.4% increase in funding for Local Government in Wales, totalling
at £437m. It was noted that Neath Port Talbot (NPT) Councils share of this was
£20.78m, which equated to 8.8%. Officers mentioned that the Council usually
ranked towards the top of the Welsh Governments ranking system, however this
time NPT was ranked 18th out of 22 Authorities in Wales; the reason
for this was despite the fact that the number of pupils with free school meals
and benefit claimants within the County Borough increased, the levels increased
at less of a rate than the vast majority of other Councils in Wales, which
meant that NPT obtained a proportionately less share of the funding.
Officers highlighted the
amount of money that was available for next year; Council Tax at current
levels, and Welsh Government funding of £258m, will provide the Council with
£338m to spend. Members were provided with information regarding what needed to
be spent next year; this year’s budget position was £319m, adding to this would
be unavoidable service costs of inflation, social care levy, and the increase
in the national living wage, which would increase costs by £8.7m. Appendix one
of the circulated report also detailed the services pressures which had been
identified, which would provide costs of £8.7m. Officers were proposing that
the contingency budget be reduced by £965m, which provided an unallocated
amount of £2.2m; it was suggested that the £2.2m be retained to balance any
fluctuations of the medium term financial strategy period. It was added that as
a consequence of that settlement, it was not being proposed to increase the
Council Tax levels for next year; Officers were seeking to consult on a 0%
Council Tax raise.
In terms of the medium
term financial strategy, it was stated that the Welsh Government settlement
included indicative allocations of 3.5% for 2023/24, and 2.4% for the following
year; one of the reasons for proposing to retain £2.2m of this year’s funding
(as detailed above) was to mitigate the impact of those lower settlements in
the following year.
Included within the
circulated report was a policy around general reserves. It was noted that the
Council had an 8.8% settlement, despite having gone through years of austerity;
this allowed Officers to be able to set the strategy in relation to general
reserves due to a healthier financial position. Members were informed that
there was no prescribed minimum or maximum level of reserves, and it was for
the Chief Finance Officer to make recommendations to Members on these levels.
Officers were proposing to work towards a general reserve level of 4%, which
would be approximately £13.5m, as well as looking to reduce the current reserve
balance over the period of the medium term financial strategy, and support
investment which can drive down revenue costs or generate income.
A discussion took place
in regards to the one off investments to support Covid 19 recovery. Officers
were proposing to invest some of the specific reserves into delivering specific
short term measures, which will help start the delivery of the Corporate Plan;
£700,000 towards the best start in life objective, £1.2m into thriving and
sustainable communities objective, and £200,000 into the objective around
heritage and culture. Officers were proposing to use the £2.8m from the insurance
reserve to fund this, which would leave £700,000 unallocated; it was important
to note that individual projects to be delivered, would be subject to approval
of the individual Cabinet Boards.
One of the
recommendations within the circulated report was to repurpose the current ER/VR
reserve into an organisational development reserve. It was noted that this was
being proposed in order to help with investing in the Councils workforce; the
report detailed the types of initiatives that would be delivered over a three
year period, and would require £1.5m of this reserve to fund.
The circulated report
suggested that indicative funding in 2023/24 and 2024/25 will be lower levels
at 3.5% and 2.4% respectively; Members asked if they were to compare these
against the 8.8% for 2022/23. The Chief Finance Officer confirmed that this
statement was correct.
Members made reference
to the level of reserves at 31 March 2021, which was approximately £20m; it was
asked what the projected level of reserves was for 31 March 2022. It was
confirmed that the level of reserves was again expected to be approximately
£20m.
It was queried over what
period of time the reserves would be reduced incrementally to 4%. It was noted that
the incremental reduction would be delivered over the period of the new medium
term financial strategy, which would be the 2022/23 to 2026/27 period.
A further discussion
took place relating to the one off investments to support Covid 19 recovery.
Members highlighted that the funding from this will come from repurposing the
current insurance reserve (£2.8m), therefore it will not require any use of the
general reserves to stand up these initiatives. Members stated there could be
an opportunity to reduce Council Tax by 1%, using some of the reserves to fund
it; it was queried whether this could be done. The Committee was informed that
the Chief Finance Officer had a statutory duty to look after the best interests
of current and future Council Tax payers; the advice detailed in the circulated
report was framed around those statutory responsibilities. As previously
mentioned, the settlement for the next two years was not expected to be
significant and the ongoing effect of the pandemic was unknown; the Welsh
Government Hardship Fund was also concluding at the end of March 2022, and last
year the Council claimed back £24m from that fund. It was added that the Chief
Finance Officer had also built in a budget pressure of £2.5m; Officers were not
proposing a 1% reduction in Council Tax due to these reasons.
It was emphasised that
the circulated report did not provide information on the actual budget
structure or proposed departmental spend; there was a need to have further
discussions on what the Authority does to prioritise Council spend. Members
stated that Chairs of Scrutiny Committees should consider holding the usual
individual budget scrutiny meetings.
In regards to the
consultation, it was queried that if the feedback showed that a significant
amount of residents asked for a reduction in Council Tax, how would Officers
consider and manage this; following on from earlier discussions that had taken
place in regards to this matter. It was stated that when the budget goes out
for consultation, there will likely be people wanting a reduction in Council
Tax; it was recognised that NPT had the third highest band D council taxing in
Wales. However, it was noted that 80% of residents in NPT payed less than a
band D; a recent survey showed that the average amount of Council Tax paid in
NPT was the 16th lowest in Wales. The Chief Finance Officer
highlighted that when comparing meaningfully, comparisons were completed on an
average. Members were informed that Officers will consider the consultation
responses, and if there was significant weight, they will need to consider what
would be affordable and make recommendations as to how it would be funded; this
will mean reductions in services and cuts. It was added that reducing Council
Tax at this point in time will also put a burden on the new administration.
A discussion took place
in relation to the Councils current recruitment issues. It was highlighted that
Officers were in the process of putting in a recruitment task force to try and
deal with the fact that there was various vacancies that needed filling; staff
were working hard to ensure that those vacancies were filled and the Councils
services could continue.
Reference was made to
the percentage of the current budget which was allocated to the Social
Services, Health and Housing Directorate (28%) and the Environment Directorate
(13%). Members expressed that if the Council was in a position to make
investments in these areas and enhance certain aspects, it would be greatly
appreciated by the public; following Members comments, it was asked if the
percentages were ring fenced or could they be realigned. It was noted that the
figures were ring fenced, as in they were the current budget for those
services; in the spring time, Officers will be looking at a new medium term financial
strategy which will consider rebasing the current budgets, linking to the
Corporate Plan and trying to ensure that resources were aligned with the set
out priorities. It was concluded that there was a possibility of realigning,
however it needed to be aligned with the priorities set by the Cabinet.
Following scrutiny, the
Committee was supportive of the proposal to be considered by the Cabinet.