|
|
 |
|
This is my opportunity to advise you of the issues that effect Worcestershire County Council
at this moment in time.
COUNTY COUNCILLORS REPORT No 23
December2003/January 2004
Firstly
may I take this opportunity to wish all the readers of this report a very happy and prosperous 2004.
Worcestershire County Council Cabinet met
on the 19
December 2003. There were 7 major items for discussion; the biggest one being the County Councils budget precept for 2004/05. As previously stated Worcestershire County Council spend £452,750,000
on its annual budget, of which for 2004/05 the Government are giving us grants totaling £286,724,000. The balance of £166,026,000 is raised from local Council Tax. The
consequential Band D Council Tax is provisionally being calculated at £826. This
would be an increase in the region of 5.3% on the County Council tax rates for 2004/05.
The Cabinet at County Hall is currently carrying
out detailed budget calculations which are needed to be completed and reviewed in time for the precept to be set in February
of 2004. District Councils will declare their Council Tax bases and balances
in January 2004.
Cabinet had a paper presented to them on
the future of the Alexander Patterson
School in Wyre Forest. Cabinet was
informed that the Alexander Patterson
School was opened in 1957 as a hospital school to provide education
for children of new residents of the Lea Castle Hospital. In 1971 the
new Education Act stated all children were the responsibility of the Local Education Authority and the Alexander Patterson School site was leased to the Worcester and Hereford LEA for a period of 50 years.
The LEA therefore have leasehold tenure until 2021.
The school has retained close links with the
Health Authority (now Kidderminster Primary Care Trust) and at the peak of occupancy in the mid-1970s had 160 children on
the role, some of whom where placed within the school for assessment purposes. The
school originally provided education for pupils with severe learning difficulties and profound and multiple learning difficulties.
The school was last inspected by OFSTED in
September 1999. The inspection report found that the weaknesses identified were
outweighed by the strengths of the school. At the time of inspection there were
94 pupils on the role. The LEA has continued to be satisfied that the school
provides a satisfactory education for the pupils placed there.
Today there are only 49 pupils in the school
and projections forecast the numbers will fall still further. The projected figure
for pupil numbers at the school in 2004 is 27.
The Cabinet was presented with a situation
that the number of pupils on role for the next academic year will not attract significant funding to sustain the staffing
levels necessary to deliver the national curriculum.
The reasons for the decline in the school
role can be partially attributed to the success of early intervention for pupils with special educational needs. For example, Wyre Forest pioneered the development of the multi-agency pre-school language centres. The original was part of the Alexander
Patterson School, but was moved to Sutton Park
First School in 1998. The success of the early intervention has meant better opportunities
for children with language difficulties to succeed in main stream schools.
Financially, the annual cost of educating
a child at the Alexander Patterson
School is high at £10,762 per pupil.
The average annual cost per pupil for special schools serving roughly the same cohort of children is £8,365 per pupil.
Weighing up all the above factors the Director
of Educational Services, Mr Julian Kramer, advised Cabinet to grant permission to publicly consult on the proposal to
close the Alexander Patterson
School from 31st August 2004. The short term scales for
the suggested closure date reflects the rapid decline in the projected numbers.
To accommodate the children in need the
LEA sought agreement from Cabinet to increase the number of places in Blakebrook and Stourminster Special Schools to accommodate the surplus children coming from the Alexander Patterson School.
Bromsgrove Schools Private Finance Initiative
Project.
Cabinet received a paper relating to the Private
Finance Initiative (PFI) proposal for replacing 10 schools in the Bromsgrove area.
Cabinet, in welcoming this exciting proposal,
agreed that approval be given to proceed to the Outline Business Case stage. The
next step in the process was to produce an Outline Business Case (OBC) for submission to the Treasury Project Review Group
(PRG) by the end of December 2003. The PRG will assess the financial basis for
the request for PFI credit and the business merits of the project.
One of the benefits of the PFI Bid is the
fact that currently a public library is attached to Old
Church Middle School. As part of the PFI Project it is proposed to relocate Old Church Middle
and Crown Meadow
First School to a new site. It is envisaged that the library would also move and
become the hub of a new joint school which would be of beneficial educational interest to a wider community. It would be a pathfinder development for Worcestershire as an exciting example of an extended school. Financially, the capital cost of including a new enhanced library facility as part
of this PFI schools project would be covered by the capital receipt contained from the sale of the existing site. The revenue running costs for the library would be apportioned between the County Library Service and the
Schools on an agreed basis.
County Councillors Report
PLANNING MATTERS
We have two very contentious
applications coming before the development control committee shortly, namely the change of use in Blakedown of the General
Store & Post Office, to a restaurant and the change of use in Chaddesley of a building into a local pharmacy. Councillor
Williams has organized a village petition and strength of feeling is running very high to oppose the application.
In Blakedown, I am advised over a hundred letters of objections have been received
from villagers wishing to see the General Stores and PO continue and the planners not grant change of use. I have received
representations from many objectors.
PETES TRAVEL
The County Council received notice this week that bus users throughout the county are facing further
turmoil due to local bus companies cancelling services.
Petes Travel, whose parent organisation Lionspeed Ltd is now in administration, is cancelling
most of its services from Thursday, September 4. Arrangements have already been made for a number of services to be transferred
to First (Midland Red), including hospital link services through Kidderminster, Redditch and Worcester.
First (Midland Red), however, have also deregistered a number of its own services. County Councillors
and officers are now concentrating on picking up the pieces and working toward a sustainable, effective network in partnership
with the bus operating companies. Worcestershire County Council is trying to help the situation where it can but is not able
to pick up all the service problems resulting from the bus companies actions.
Various changes to bus services are to take effect from next month affecting the Wyre Forest area,
including certain services to Worcester.
From Thursday, September 4, Pete's Travel is cancelling most of its services in the County, formerly
operated under contract between its previous parent organisation Lionspeed Ltd (now in administration) and the County Council.
These include the 11 and 12 Kidderminster - Bewdley - Stourport circular services, peak-hour journeys
on the 291 Tenbury Wells - Kidderminster route, Sunday journeys on 292 Birmingham - Kidderminster - Ludlow, and the X33 daily
Hospital Link between Alexandra Hospital, Redditch, Bromsgrove and Kidderminster Hospital.
These will all be transferred to First (Midland Red) under new contract arrangements from the same date.
Also involved in the transfer to First are the Hospital Link services 303/304 and 300 Kidderminster
- Worcester and X33 Kidderminster - Redditch, although there will still be some journeys run commercially by Pete's Travel
on the 303 and X33.
Evening buses in Wyre Forest operated by Pete's Travel on the 1, 2-2D, 3-3C, 15 and 18/18A routes
from 1800/1830 onward on services to Stourport, Bewdley and local estates, will cease.
The last buses on most of these routes will be those operated by First at about 1800 hrs.
From Monday, September 15, there will be certain changes to the First (Midland Red) local network
of bus services in the Kidderminster area, as the company are cancelling certain journeys.
These include some buses on the 1, 2/2C, 3/3A, 5, 6, 8/8A, 10 and 18/18A in the early mornings, and on 5 and 6A in
the early evenings.
From Monday, September 1, the 0712 hrs Alveley to Kidderminster (297 service) will
be withdrawn, and the 0915 Ludlow to Kidderminster (292) will run earlier at 0905 hrs.
Also, Saturday buses on the 731 Tenbury - Ludlow route will be withdrawn.
EDUCATION REVIEW IN WYRE FOREST
Education review continues to rumble on with save our school campaigns at the schools
earmarked for closure or merger. Nobody has come forward yet and stated how we can rectify the 1600 empty school places in
Wyre Forest. County Councillors will be reviewing the proposals in early 2004 I hope the decisions are taken before the district
elections.
However we need to know two reasons why Wyre Forest is being reviewed now. Firstly
HC leader John Gordon called for it to be moved up the agenda so it was not in County Election year 2005 and secondly Labour
strongly support the review and ALL their County Councillors voted for it to happen now.
HC Councillor Mrs Davies who sits on the Education Panel at County has an abysmal
record of attendance. All HC Councillors have large school governor vacancies unfilled in their divisions.
HIGHWAYS
I have
emailed the Highways Manager to seek a meeting in the villages of Blakedown & Churchill where local issues have not been
addressed even after repeated reporting to his department. If you have a highways problem let me know.
EDUCATION SMALL SCHOOLS POLICY
The Liberal Democrat Leader at County Hall (Liz Tucker), has been ferreting around
suggesting that the small schools policy needed to be amended and that if a small school
has less than 30 pupils it should be reviewed. The Cabinet in May 2003 refused to accept the argument that if pupil
numbers dropped below 30 that should trigger a review and so the Scrutiny Panel called the decision in In effect it halted
the implementation of the Cabinets decisions until they had the opportunity to quiz the Cabinet Member with responsibility.
After a lengthy discussion a compromise was reached whereby only if the small school teaching staff drops below 3 Full Time
staff will a review be triggered. We would not support the crazy policy of 30 pupils because that would have started about
50 reviews in mainly village schools - like Arley.
The Cabinet met on 2nd June 2003 with 16 items on the agenda ranging from Local Public Service Agreements
to School Organisational reviews.
The Local Public Service Agreement was a progress report for members following our previous signing up with central
government on our service delivery. The Cabinet had presented the latest performance and progress information.
Cabinet endorsed a working groups recommendations for the boundary redrawing for the next County elections in 2005.
This is a periodic review that usually takes place every 20 years. A small cross group was set up to review the countys current
population and decide on the way the 6 districts will be broken down into 57 electoral divisions for the purpose of electing
57 County Councillors.
In Wyre Forest District the number of County Councillors will reduce from 11 to 10. We have retained the Rural seats
with 3 divisions, Chaddesley & Spennells (new name but as it is now including the villages of Blakedown, Churchill and
Broome, Stone, Harvington and Rushock) Bewdley (as it is now which includes, Rock) and Wribbenhall, Cookley & Wolverley
(no change at all).
In Stourport-on-Severn there are minor changes to the two seats. Kidderminster reduces from 6 seats to 5. The biggest
change is the removal of Hoobrook Division and the creation of new divisions for all the Kidderminster seats generally following two district wards. So for instance Franche Ward & Habberley forms a new County
Division called St Barnabas. The County Council will be asked to endorse the proposals at its meeting in late July and this
will then form the submission to the Boundary Committee in London. When viewing the suggestions they may throw them out completely
or accept our recommendations on mass. Whatever happens the next County Elections will be fought on new boundaries.
The Cabinet accepted a paper, the Leach Report, written following the inspection of our new political structures by
Professor Steven Leach. Professor Leach was commissioned to evaluate the workings of the County Council and make recommendations
to Council on his findings. We seem to be living in a forever revolving changing society and every two years it is fashionable
to change the name but the product stays the same!
Cabinet endorsed a paper relating to Work Related Stress for staff which had been reviewed by the resources panel and
a policy statement recommended. No mention of Stress for Councillors!!
A Money Matters paper was noted. This is a regular occurrence at Cabinet the paper stated that 72% or 190 schools that
have submitted budgets shows that 33 are in deficit. Of the 71 schools to submit it is likely that many will have difficulty
in setting a balanced budget. The Education Director stated that the total number of schools setting a deficit budget for
2003/04 was likely to be around 50 compared to 12 in 2002-03.
In Worcestershire the County Council spent £4.834 million more on education than we are supposed to. The Government
give grants direct to schools for the provision of Education (it is called a Formula Spending Share) unfortunately the increases
given by central government only offset the pay awards and increases in National Insurance and pension contributions.
The County are pressing Government for Worcestershire to be included in the Area Cost Adjustment funding formula. If
we are included the County would benefit by an additional £14 million. Finally the treasurer predicted that the general county
balances will increase by just over £0.5 million to around £4.3 million, which
represents 1% of the 2003/04 budget.
Cabinet endorsed a new Foster Care payment scheme which falls inline with the latest legislation on how much we should
pay people to foster individuals in the county.
Cabinet endorsed the Director of Environmental Services recommendations to extend the contract for Highway Maintenance
with Messrs Raynesways(RCS) up to March 2006.
Finally Cabinet endorsed a PFI Bid for 10 schools in Bromsgrove and the setting up of a project group to work to an
Outline Business Plan. This follows our successful bid to the department for £69 million to replace 10 local schools. The
PFI bid means that all 10 schools will be tendered out to a private company set up to run the schools over a 25 year period.
At the end the schools will revert to the LEA or its successor.
The
February meeting of the Cabinet had 9 items for determination, the first and foremost was this years council tax rate. The Cabinet considered making proposals to the
Council in relation to the Council Tax, budget requirement and other statutory determinations for the financial year starting
1 April 2003. The Cabinet report indicated that in December 2002, they had discussed the key elements of the Governments proposed
financial settlement and funding allocations in relation to their effects on this years Councils budget. It had however been felt that further clarification of this settlement and its impact on Council finances
was necessary prior to the formulation of the Councils budget policy on which it would consult.
Following further consideration in January 2003 the Cabinet decided to consult on a budget policy
which would require a consequential Council Tax rise in 2003/04 of 14.8% or so. After
a review of services directorate by directorate, Cabinet were able to propose a Council Tax from April 1st 2003
of £437,823.000 with an increase of £12.9%. Members felt that:-
(a)
there was general disappointment that the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister had not accepted the Councils view on
the Labour Cost Allowance which, if applied, could have benefited the Council by between £10m and £12m. The Council will continue to press the Government for this allowance as well as a fairer share of resources
generally;
(b)
officers were instructed to continue to seek and make efficiency savings where possible.
(c) it was felt that local authorities
faced continual pressure to provide more and better services. In many cases however,
the general public were unaware that the inflationary pressures for local government were much greater than the Retail Price
Index;
The Cabinet concluded that the Council should, despite a far less generous resource base than
many Councils, continue to make budgetary provision in order to deliver services expected by the community and to meet continually
improving national targets and standards. However, it was mindful of the impact
the Council Tax rise would have on tax payers and concluded that whilst still maintaining its corporate priorities, it should
propose an adjustment to the budget upon which it had consulted which would now result in a Council Tax rise of 12.97%, pending
approval by Full Council.
The Cabinet considered a number of additions to the Capital Programme for submission to Council
for approval.
The report indicated that resources forecast to be available in the future to develop or further
renew the Councils stock of assets were as follows:-
·
2003/04 - £38.4m
·
2004/05 - £26.8m
·
2005/06 - £27.0m
The Cabinet considered the content of the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill and its response
to the related soundings exercise.
The report indicated that the Regional
Assemblies (Preparations) Bill was currently passing through Parliament. The
Bill, once enacted, would give the Secretary of State powers to order referendums on the establishment of a Regional Assembly
in any of the eight English regions. It would also require him to direct the
Boundary Committee (BC) to conduct a review of local government in the region and recommend the best wholly unitary structure
before any referendum was held. The Government had outlined the key factors that
the BC should consider when carrying out their assessment and comments on this draft guidance had been invited.
Cabinet resolved: that
(a)
the content of the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill be noted;
(b)
in response to the Regional Assemblies (Preparations) Bill Sounding Exercise, this Council does not support holding
a referendum at this stage.
The Cabinet considered the outcome of the consultation on the preferred option for the future
of Blackmore House, a residential nursing home inBromsgrove.
Members were reminded that at its meeting in October 2002, the Cabinet had agreed that a consultation
process be undertaken on the future of Blackmore House with a preferred option of a Very Sheltered Housing development on
site. This had been on the basis that the long term viability of the Home was
a concern given its bed-sit type accommodation, the current financial deficit and the likelihood that demand for the Home
would decline. Additionally, the Bromsgrove District had a comparatively high
level of residential provision and a low level of Very Sheltered Housing and Breme House, another residential home in Bromsgrove,
was shortly to re-open. If the preferred option was approved by the Cabinet Blackmore
House would close.
Based on the careful assessment of the above information and consultation responses the proposal
now was that the Home should remain open for a minimum period of 4 years. This
would ensure that existing residents could remain living there for this period, and possibly, but with no guarantee, beyond
this, subject to the outcome of the further review of the social care and supported housing. The estimated additional revenue
cost of the Home changing its use to provide more respite care was £760,000 over the next 4 years and would be funded from
existing budget allocations. Capital costs for refurbishment of the Home were
estimated at approximately £100,000 which would represent a commitment against the Minor Capital Works Budget in Social Services
for 2003/04.
The Cabinet considered
the future of Pensax Church of England Primary School. The Cabinet was pleased that the proposed closure of the school had proved uncontentious
and had the support of the Governing Body and wider community.
Cabinet resolved: that
(a)
the Council ceases to maintain Pensax Primary School on 11 April 2003;
(b) all the Menith Wood area currently in the Pensax and Lindridge
catchments become part of the Abberley catchment area from September 2003 and therefore part of the Martley school pyramid.
The Cabinet considered the appropriateness of the Council size in the light of the periodic electoral
review that is now underway in England and Wales.
Cabinet resolved: that
(a)
57 members is the appropriate size of the Council required to achieve effective and convenient local government;
(b)
subject to consensus in the cross-party group established for the purpose, the Director of Corporate Services be authorised
to publish the Councils preferred draft proposals for electoral arrangements for the County for public consultation purposes.
Waste Management
A special Cabinet meeting was held on Monday 17 February
2003 to discuss the Waste Management Contract for Worcestershire. Cabinet supported
the work being undertaken to reduce the amount of domestic waste being undertaken in the six districts, together with supporting
a request for our Waste Contractor to be able to export up to 200,000 tons per annum of domestic waste to a site in North
London. This will help alleviate the huge mountain of waste at Hill and Moor
Site just outside Pershore in South Worcestershire.
County Councillors Report - N0 13
I would like to start this report by wishing all readers a very happy and prosperous New Year. I
hope you have all had a peaceful Christmas and 2003 finds you all in good heart and fine feckle.
Following my last Councillors report Number 12 in December
2002, I promised readers of this column an update of the County Councils anticipated budget for 2003/04 and the following
report goes some way to address that commitment, albeit very depressing reading;
On 18th December 2002 the County Cabinet
met and was apprised of the current Government Financial Settlement for 2003/04. As many people know Local Councils set a
Council Tax levy but the tax charged only goes someway towards the overall cost of running local authorities. So at this time
every year we have this ritual of waiting to see how much we will be given by Central Government to run the Countys services.
Setting the 2003/04 Budget will be the most important
financial decision councillors will have in Worcestershire for many years and will set the course for well into the future.
The Councils finances are made up from;
1. Council Tax - (38%) or £166.5 million
2. Formula Spending Shares Formerly known as SSA - £273.1 million.
Last year 2002/03 Worcestershire County Council needed
£388 million to provide services. This year we see increased Government restrictions and responsibilities added to our budget
together with less money compared to neighbouring Counties. The overall proportion of local spending to be supported in future
by the Government is not enough to meet the pressure created by additional costs and responsibilities.
The following are some significant additional costs
needed to be added to our budget for 2003/04, for instance:
1.
increases in teachers pay will add - £7.5 million (3.75%)
2.
additional contributions to teachers pensions
- £6.5 million
3.
higher national insurance contributions
- £1.2 million
4.
pay increases in social services will add
£3.2 million
5.
funding liabilities passed onto social
services from Central Government will add £3.7 million
6.
£3.5 million has been taken off us and
handed to the Health Authorities for nursing care
7.
budgets for goods and services bought by
the Council will be increased at the Retail Price Index of 2.25% adding £2.8 million to our budget needs
8.
the Fire Authority have increased their
precept by £1.0 million
9.
landfill tax increased by £1.00 per tonne
by the Chancellor recently will add £0.3 million to budgets from April 2003. This
takes it to £14.00 per tonne, a similar rise will occur in 2004. The Chancellor
announced from 2005 they intend to increase the tax by £3.00 per tonne and by a similar amount each year for 7 years
Bringing all these factors together requires a funding
plan for next year that comprises in round terms:
£m
Worcestershire County Council services budget
439.4
Less
Revenue Support Grant & National Non - Domestic Rates 273.1
Budget Requirement
166.3
District Councils Collection Fund deficit
0.2
Total council tax to be raised
166.5
The consequential Band D Council tax in Worcestershire
will rise by around £108 to £836
In Worcestershire there is a population of 542, 238.
With the Governments formula we are allocated £786.95 per person to spend on services. Compared with Staffordshire - £824.06,
Warwickshire - £822.75 and Shropshire who have been given £839.88, that is £52.93 more per person they have to spend over
us. If we had the same amount per head of population we would have an additional £29 million and no need for any Council Tax
Increases! There are 34 County Councils in England and Worcestershire is 33rd place! See Appendix 1.
Appendix 2 attached shows similar figures on how much
we are allocated for education per pupil £2,981 compared to our neighbours. You will note we are in 33rd position
again. Interestingly in Birmingham they get £3,538 per pupil. If we had the same amount and it is questionable that costs
in rural counties are higher due to rural locations of schools and transport costs we would get an additional £45 million!
Cabinet was presented with this news on 18th
December 2002 and recommended to:
As a starting point, consider the draft revenue budget and council
tax proposals it is minded to submit to council in February 2003; and
Inform the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister that Council is disappointed
with the Governments proposals to reform the distribution of Revenue Support Grant as it relates to the outcome for Worcestershire
County Council.
All political parties in the Cabinet supported this
motion. It would be easy for me to blame the Labour Government for this settlement but all political Governments including
my own have given lousy settlements over the years. What I need to convey to as many people as possible is the fact that only
38% of what is spent locally is raised by Council Tax. In 2002/03 Worcestershire
is 29th out of 34.
The more
Government reduces the grant the higher council tax has to be to retain services. Its one vicious circle but the politicians
in Whitehall can blame the wicked Councillors and Councils in the country for doing a bad job when really they are starving
us all of cash!
COUNTY COUNCILLORS REPORT No 12
Worcestershire
County Cabinet met on Thursday, 5 December 2002 at County Hall, Worcester. The Cabinet
considered accepting the external audit letter 2001/02.
The report indicated that the Councils external auditors, Price Waterhouse Coopers produced an audit letter
each year following their audit of the Authoritys accounts. In introducing the
report, the external auditor commented that the overall financial position of the Council at the end of the year was sound
although the continuing pressures, which were being experienced by all local authorities, would persist into the future. He
confirmed that an unqualified opinion of the accounts for 2001/02 had already been issued and that he expected to be able
to do the same for the Best Value Audit Plan at the end of the year. He then
went on to highlight some of the key issues contained in the letter. Cabinet
welcomed the auditors findings and thanked Financial Services and staff in other directorates for their hard work in implementing
the new financial management system.
The Cabinet considered the Tourism Strategy and Action Plan for Worcestershire.
The report indicated that tourism was currently the third largest industry in the County generating just under
£400m per annum and helped to support over 15,000 jobs. The Councils role was
a strategic one working with national and regional bodies and the District Councils to promote the County overseas and domestically. Following the foot and mouth crisis, the Regional Development Agency (Advantage West
Midlands) had set about producing a regional strategy for tourism and had asked the Council to contribute to this by taking
the lead in producing an up-to-date Tourism Strategy and Action Plan for Worcestershire.
The Cabinet considered proposals to mitigate, where possible, the effects of the actions of bus operators to
deregister bus services significantly in the County. The report indicated that as a result of falling passengers, rising costs
and driver shortages the Bus Industry nationally was currently in sharp recession. Within
the County this trend had been felt with a number of operators deregistering local bus services. The impact however, had been most severe following an aggressive review by First Midland Red of their local
bus services, necessitated by such trends. This had resulted in a widespread
reduction in the public transport network with further reductions proposed early in the new year. Attempts had been made to provide some level of service in affected areas at minimal cost. Although the current situation was not of the Councils making there was a public expectation of the Council
at this time which meant it was coming under increasing pressure to address this problem.
Many of the affected routes were used by school children. However, it
was emphasised that these were non-entitled pupils and therefore the Council did not have a duty to provide transport in these
circumstances.
The Council had four basic options:-
(i) to fund all the deregistered services;
(ii) to subsidise just those deregistered services
affecting school pupils;
(iii) to not subsidise any of the deregistered services;
(iv) to subsidise core bus services
in the affected areas pending the introduction of demand responsive services next year.
A review of all current subsidised contracts had recently taken place which identified how a more efficient
use of the subsidies might be achieved and advocated the introduction of demand responsive services in rural, low patronaged
areas for a more sustainable and efficient service. The Environment/Sustainability
Panel was also undertaking a scrutiny exercise of bus services in Worcestershire.
It was therefore proposed that in the interim a middle-way core network of services should be put in place at
a cost of approximately £400,000 per annum initially financed from existing budgets.
The Cabinet considered progress on Local Public Service Agreement (LPSA) targets.
The report indicated progress against LPSA targets and the current activities and work programme for the Target
Leaders Group. Since the LPSA was signed in February 2002 work had been progressed
on establishing baselines
of performance and resource requirements, planning and progressing service delivery, designing and populating
the monitoring and review system and achieving improvement in service areas. In
addition, work was in progress to ensure project plans were in place to support delivery and to agree Target 13 with the Office
of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) who were yet to determine efficiency savings with pilot authorities. It was proposed to try to reach agreement with partners on the distribution and/or use of reward grant
early in 2003.
The Councils auditors, Price Waterhouse Cooper had been invited to work alongside the Council on the LPSA in
order to flag up early any corrective action necessary to meet audit standards.
It would also enable them to witness the difficulties inherent in the agreements, particularly the inflexibility of
the ODPM in respect of making changes to targets. The Cabinet welcomed the promising
progress being made in meeting the challenging LPSA targets and hoped that the difficulties experienced in agreeing Target
13 would soon be resolved by the OPDM.
Cabinet considered the Community Strategy for Malvern Hills district area. The Cabinet offered its support for
the Malvern Hills Community Strategy which accorded with its stated intention, as set out in the Comprehensive Performance
Assessment self-assessment, to support partnership working.
Cabinet considered the new charging policy for non-residential services.
The report indicated that in September 2002, the Cabinet had considered an initial draft of the charging policy
for non-residential users. This set out the Councils current charging policies,
the new guidance which the Council had to adhere to by 1 April 2003, the initial consultation results, the estimated loss
of income of over £1m to the Council as a result of implementing the proposals and the contentious issues arising from the
new guidance. The Cabinet in response had agreed that further consultation should
be undertaken with service user groups, which would include a member seminar to report back on the results of the consultation,
prior to further consideration by the Cabinet.
Since September the policy had been further developed. A service
user group considered this new draft and public meetings were held at venues around the County and consultation papers seeking
comments were sent out. Further amendments to the policy had been made in the
light of this feedback. This process of consultation had proved extremely valuable. Service users and carers themselves felt better informed about the policy and consultee
feedback indicated that the new policy met the Government criteria of being fair, reasonable, acceptable and affordable.
Since September
the policy had been further developed. A service user group considered this new
draft and public meetings were held at venues around the County and consultation papers seeking comments were sent out. Further amendments to the policy had been made in the light of this feedback. A seminar for members was held on 3 December.
This process of consultation had proved extremely valuable. Service users
and carers themselves felt better informed about the policy and consultee feedback indicated that the new policy met the Government
criteria of being fair, reasonable, acceptable and affordable which was supported by Cabinet.
The Cabinet considered
progress against the Councils e-Government strategy. The report indicated that
the Cabinet had approved the Councils e-Government strategy in July 2002. Since
then the e-Government Programme Board had, following a procurement process, approved the appointment of a consortium led by
Hewlett Packard in partnership with Deloitte Touche to help create links between key systems in the different partner organisations
to underpin joined up service delivery to customers. Negotiations were now underway
with the preferred bidder towards the agreement of a contract covering the creation of the facilities under Worcestershire
Hub. In terms of finance, the preferred bid was in line with assumptions
made in the earlier business case and the total costs of the project over 10 years were estimated at £61.7m. A number of funding sources for the e-Government work had been identified.
Negotiations with the preferred bidder over the next few months would also explore options for containing expenditure
within the identified affordability levels of the Council and its partners. Ultimately,
the Council would need to identify new funding of around £3m a year over the life of the contract.
At the time of
dictating this report the government have announced its provisional financial settlement for local government. The proposed
settlement for Worcestershire sees a reduction in funds made available in the region of £38 million to £10 million.
This is devastating
news for the County Council and the Consequential Band D council tax would need to be increased by 15% in April 2003. I will report more on the council budget in my January report.
I would like to wish all the recipients of this report
a
very Happy Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2003.
Dont forget if you want help or advice to call me
on 01299-402338.
Previous Councillor Reports - November 2002.
Worcestershire County Councils Cabinet met on Wednesday 30 October 2002 at County
Hall. There were 11 items on the Agenda, several of which were strategic strategy documents for which the Cabinet at County
Hall annually have to endorse and send to the department. A lot of these documents, for instance the annual Library Plan for
which I am part author, is a document that runs to some 96 pages and covers a range of key issues within the library service
from:
- Access to the services;
- Life long learning;
- Staff skills, development, training and structure and communications;
- The role of ICT;
- The role of libraries in the community;
- Stock and its management and exploitation;
- Marketing Strategy
The library service in Worcestershire will be socially inclusive, customer focused
and responsive to the needs of the users and potential users. The service will have easy access to all of our buildings and
services within opening hours and relevant to local communities. We will be responsive to the needs of communities and to
partnership opportunities.
The Library Plan alludes to the Best Value Review that was recently carried out
within the library service and also alludes to the peoples network computers in our public libraries where we now have ICT
equipment for public use which are hugely popular with members of the public. Cabinet endorsed a paper headed Community Strategy
for Worcestershire 2002 2012 and also a Worcester City Community Strategy which had been produced by Worcester City Council
in consultation with the County Council. This related to their service delivery to the public and how the local area in which
people live and work can be improved.
Community strategies are about producing and creating a better system for planning
and public services, where they are provided by local councils, private companies, community groups or the voluntary sector.
Worcester Citys community strategy document provides the overall vision and focus
for taking Worcester into the future under four priority areas. The priority areas identified by the City Council are:-
- A prosperous City;
- A green and healthy City;
- A safe City;
- An inclusive City.
Cabinet also endorsed a paper that had been presented by the Head of Policy and
Review relating to our national performance indicators for the year 2001/02. It needs to be noted that Worcestershire County
Councils overall improvement in performance compared to other County Councils puts us now at 19th position out
of 34 County Councils. (Worcestershire County Council was 31st in year 1999/2000 and 28th in 2000/01.)
This is an excellent benchmark for twelve months of Conservative control in the
county of Worcestershire and how we are improving service delivery at the sharp end which is being measured county by county
across the country.
Cabinet endorsed a paper prepared by the Director of Financial Services relating
to money matters within the County.
Council also endorsed a paper produced by the Director of Educational Services
whereby Pensax CE Primary School would be closed from April 2003 due to falling numbers. In January 1998 there were 49 pupils
that attended Pensax CE Primary School, whereas in January of this year there were only 23. Under the County Councils Small
Schools Policy if a school drops below pupil numbers of 25, then it needs to be referred to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee
for investigation. However, since this report was prepared by the Officers, the number of pupils at the school has dropped
from the 23 and the school has closed itself now rather than in April of next year due to the lack of pupils.
The Cabinet adopted a County Council Travel Plan that had been produced following
a comprehensive consultation with staff questionnaires, focus groups, car park surveys. This related to the number of staff
that are using County Hall on a regular daily basis, but travelling singularly rather than car sharing or using other modes
of transport to get to County Hall. Cabinet endorsed a range of measures which should be introduced to encourage staff not
to travel singularly, but to use other modes of transport or car sharing.
Following the major flooding that took place in the County of Worcestershire 18
months ago Cabinet requested that they receive every six months, an update on matters relating to major flooding. The paper
was endorsed by Cabinet.
A paper was presented on Blackmore House which followed a consultation exercise
on the viability of Blackmore House for the long term provision of services for older people in the Bromsgrove District.
There was a member of the public present who has been leading a pressure group
objecting to the threatened closure of Blackmore House and Cabinet noted that the overwhelming feeling of residents, relatives
and staff, was that they wished the home to continue in its present form. Cabinet decided to carry out a "full" consultation
exercise over the next three months before any decision is taken on the future of Blackmore House.
Relating to the Highways Partnership Unit in Kidderminster I have been active
in getting 14 roads out of the 25 recommended to be placed on the haunching repairs to rural roads budget. You will recall
that in my County Report No 3 earlier this year I announced additional funding for Highways in the County. Following this
investment and under the Governments Public Service Agreement (PSA) programme that we have signed up to, we are investing
money to improve our rural lanes, the roads that are on this are as follows;
Deansford Lane,
Sandy Lane,
New Wood Lane,
Podmore Lane,
Hurcott Lane,
Axborough Lane,
Park Lane,
New Farm Lane,
Chaddesley Lane,
Dobes Lane,
Egg lane,
Watery Lane,
Broome Lane,
Thicknell Farm Lane,
Barrs Lane,
Bewdley Road North,
Mostyn Road,
Wylde Lane,
Northwood Lane,
Hop Pole Lane,
Bine Lane,
Rectory Lane,
Dunley Road,
Short Yard & Fairfield Lane.
The Local HPU will endeavour to deal with all the above roads but it must be appreciated
that the available budget, and should one particular location require more work than anticipated then inevitably other locations
will suffer. Where it has not been possible to deal with a particular location this year it will be given priority status
for the allocation in 2003/04.
Should anybody like to know the exact location of these works I would be happy
to share the specific details upon request.
Worcestershire County Councils Full Council meeting took place on Thursday 14
November 2002 at County Hall. There were two major items on the Agenda. The first one was a visit by the Chief Constable of
West Mercia Constabulary, Mr Peter Hampson, who addressed Full Council for little under an hour and a half and gave a presentation
on the Police Service that they have to cover in West Mercia. Here follows a few bullet points:
West Mercia Constabulary currently provides policing services to 1.1 million
residents. The force area covers 2,868 square miles and is the 4th largest police area in England and Wales. As
of April 1st 2002, there were 2,100 budgeted police posts, 1,200 support staff (civilians) 370 members of the special
constabulary, together with 500 vehicles, 55 buildings and a farm. The Chief Constable stated that his three-year mission
was:-
- To deliver Top Quartile Performance.
- To secure high level of public confidence.
- To receive fair funding.
The West Mercia Police Authority set a budget earlier this year for 2002/03 of
£144.4 million. Included within that budget was 50 pence per week, which would pay for 300 additional police officers. The
Chief Constable stated that those officers were now being recruited and indeed 184 new recruits/transferees are currently
being trained.
The Chief Constable agreed at the offset that following his presentation he would
take questions, and readers of this column will be pleased to know that questions from many Members of the County Council
were forthright, direct and sometimes pertinent. However, Mr Hampson gave a full and frank reply to every question and he
closed the discussion by stating "my role is to deliver but we are in this together and together we can make a difference".
The second major item that Full Council addressed was a key issues debate on two
and three tier school systems. It was pretty clear from the offset, when 10 members of the public, representing various schools
in Worcestershire spoke in support of the three tier system, and tried to influence the thoughts of Members.
They saw this particular item on the agenda as being a vote for the introduction
of two tier education throughout the county and not on the motion that had been circulated by the Leader of the Council. The
motion stated, and I quote, "suggest that the key issue for this debate is whether the Cabinet should, when undertaking future
school area reviews, specifically consider in each case adopting a two tier system of education, circumstances and resources
permitting".
The debate was also hijacked by our Save our Hospital Group Leader, Councillor
John Gordon, together with the Liberal Democrats, who saw the discussion as being nothing more than a rubber stamping by Full
Council to go two tier across the County. After lengthy discussion the motion on the order paper was passed. The Leader of
the Council stated that he would listen to the views that had been expressed by members of all parties, in particular, members
of the public that had taken the time to come to the debate to express their views.
Where we stand in relation to education is exactly as set out within our timetable,
that the Wyre Forest Area Review is currently being undertaken. The findings of that Area Review will be reported back to
the Cabinet in the spring of next year, whereby a decision will be made on what implementation to take following the presentations
of the reports by the Director of Educational Services.
No other major items took place at Full Council, although there were several documents
that needed the endorsement of Council. It is interesting to note that the Health Concern County Councillors from the Wyre
Forest area, all bar 1, left the building at lunchtime. The rest of us endured a full days worth of decision making and Full
Council ended at 3.30 p.m. in the afternoon. The Conservative Group assembled at County Hall at 8.30 a.m. for a group meeting
so we had a very lengthy day compared to our fair-weathered friends from Wyre Forest.
|
|
|
September 2002
Cabinet met on the 16 September
2002 and endorsed the audited accounts that had taken place by Messrs Price Waterhouse Coopers, our external auditors, who
audit the Financial Statements of Worcestershire County Council under the Annual Statutory Statements which we have to produce at the end of each year.
We have
at the end of our first year of running the County Council been able to increase our general fund balances to £3.834 million. Our Financial Statement also took into account our response to the Governments proposals
to reform the distribution of revenue support grant. The government has exemplified
the effects of a number of proposals for changing the way that the grant formula is calculated. The worst combination of options for Worcestershire County Council if applied in the current year would result in a loss of SSA of £9.7 million. The best combination would result in a gain of £16.1 million. In addition, there are proposals to change the method of correcting anomalies in relative value of council
tax bands across the country. The implication of these proposals would be to
divert grant away from Worcestershire with a relatively high tax base to areas with a relatively low tax base like the north-east. The options show losses ranging from £2.8 million up to £7.5 million. In reality these are extremes and are unlikely to be introduced but they do identify the significant effects
that proposed changes could have.
Worcestershire
County Council sent a delegation to meet with Mr Chris Leslie M.P., the Minister in the office of the Deputy Prime Minister,
on 10 September to press for a better financial formular for the County. The
delegation was also supported by local Members of Parliament from Worcestershire, The Chief Executive of Worcestershire County
Council and the Director of Financial Services. We all await with abated breath
the revised Local Government settlement, although in reality we feel that very little will change from the current proposals.
Cabinet were
consulted by the West Mercia Magistrates Court Service for the closure of Evesham and Droitwich Magistrates Courts. A previous proposal in 1997 for the closure of Evesham Magistrates Court was not, following objection by
the then Hereford and Worcester County Council, allowed by the Lord Chancellor because it was premature at that time (in relation
to the then not completed new Courts PFI scheme). The closure of Bromsgrove and
Ledbury Courts at that time was allowed.
Cabinet this
time round endorsed the decision to close these Magistrates Courts and indeed alternative uses for both Evesham and Droitwich
Court buildings have been identified. A One Stop Shop is planned for Evesham
and the Police propose to use the Droitwich accommodation for the Camera Safety Partnership.
Cabinet
received a paper from the Director of Environmental Services relating to the Integrated Waste Management Contract and the
higher level of recycling within the county of Herefordshire and Worcestershire, which we need to achieve to reach the Governments
targets.
Since the original
contract was signed all of the local authorities have been given statutory recycling targets.
All six District Councils have shown a willingness to be responsible for their own recycling targets and the waste
tonnage has grown at a much greater level than was originally allowed in a contract.
Essentially,
there are three options that Worcestershire County Council could take relating to the Waste Management Contract.
1.
Seek termination on a no fault basis;
2.
Do nothing, effectively wait to respond to the contractors initiative;
3.
Renegotiate key components of the existing contract.
Cabinet
decided that a way forward would be to seek a further standstill with the contractor to allow time for the new disposal solution
to be developed within the confines of the existing contract. In the short term
such an approach would allow work to continue to refurbish household waste site and transfer stations which will be needed
regardless of the long term disposal solution. It would also allow work to continue
with district councils to develop recycling, thereby moving towards the Governments targets as quickly as possible.
Cabinet
also endorsed a recommendation for consideration to be given to alternative disposal solutions. We are looking at various options like, exporting our current County Council waste to Coventry Incineration
Plant, or Buckinghamshire County Council where they have a very thriving incinerator/recycling facility within the County
and import a lot of waste from all over the UK.
Environmental
Services has recently purchased six portable speed monitor units to sit on the roof of a car and display the actual speed
that the vehicle is doing when driving towards the unit. They cost approximately
£2,000 each and we have agreed to supply one unit to each of the Highway Partnership Units in Worcestershire; therefore one
per district. The units are designed to respond to complaints about speeding
traffic through villages and to improve the safety of the Directorate personnel while they go about their varied traffic management
and maintenance activities throughout the County.
On Thursday
19 September 2002, Full Council met, although the Agenda was very light due to the nature of the new modernisation system
that we are running. Most, indeed, all decisions are made in Cabinet now rather
than to Full Council. Council was informed that Mr Jeff Romanis would be retiring
on 1 November 2002, after servicing 35 years as a Local Government employee.
The only significant
discussion that took place at County Hall at Full Council was that of Regional Government where various Members expressed
their views on how a Regional Government would be set up in the West Midlands. The
Labour Government in their Manifesto in 2001 stated that they would set up Regional Governments in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom would have eight Regional Assemblies. These Regional Assemblies would be elected by everybody that lives within the region, so in the case of
Worcestershire County Council where we live in the West Midlands we would be one of 38 local authorities to elect a Regional
Assembly. The White Paper states that between 25 and 35 Members would be elected
from each region to the Assembly, but that where a Regional Assembly was to be introduced it would run co-terminus with unitary
authorities. In the case of the West Midlands there are only 10 out of 38 local
authorities that have got unitary councils. In effect, the County Councils could
be disbanded and unitary authorities put in their place. Whatever form of local
government is going to be implemented in the future it is pretty clear that the district councils as we know them to be now
i.e. in the size and shape of Wyre Forest and Bromsgrove District Councils will cease to exist.
There is talk
from Councillors, depending on whether you are a County Councillor or a District Councillor, that their authority will become
a unitary authority and the other authority will be disbanded. What is clear
from the governments White Paper is the fact that district councils are far too small to be unitary authorities and the Government
prefer unitaries to be in the region of 250,000. In the case of Worcestershire
we could end up seeing a north Worcestershire/south Worcestershire unitary authority, although at County level we are all
backing Countywide Unitary Authority based on the current County boundaries.
Currently in
the West Midlands there are four organisations, namely:
1.
Regional Development Agencies
2.
Regional Chamber
3.
Government Offices
4.
West Midlands Government Association
The purpose
of a Regional Assembly in the West Midlands would be to do away with these four organisations.
Between them they spend approximately £250 million per year and have no direct link with the electorate. They are what is known as quangos.
The principled
idea of a Regional Assembly in theory is good provided that power from National Government comes down to the Region and not
the other way round where power from Councils is taken away and given to the Region. This would be detrimental in the Shire
counties whereby we would see, for instance, an increase in housing development on our green belt fields. This would alleviate the problems that our urban cities are experiencing where they have got no land for
future development and growth, which would just mean a gradual spreading out into the countryside.
The Government
is proposing to announce very shortly their timetable for the setting up of Regional Assemblies. It seems most likely that
the north east of England will have its first elected Regional Assembly. Then
we will probably have the domino effect whereby it will just roll on down into England and before we know it we will have
Regional Assemblies whether we want them or not. However, there is one safety
valve in as much as the Government have announced in their White Paper, Regional Assemblies will only be set up in areas where
the electorate vote for it following a referenda. However, the drawback to the
referenda in the West Midlands is the fact that there are two and a half million people that live in the urban cities of Birmingham,
Sandwell and Wolverhampton, compared to two million people that live in the Shire counties like Staffordshire, Warwickshire,
Worcestershire and Herefordshire.
The County
Council Arts Team is working hard on the final details of this years Skills on Show, the Countys largest free celebration
of local arts and talent. With 200 stalls, marquees showcasing the arts, local
enterprise, discovering Worcestershire and the performance marquee with five stages, plus more free workshops than ever before. It promises to be even better this year.
As well a providing
a fun weekend for all the family, the event provides an ideal opportunity to show the public many of the County Councils own
services and the existing initiatives. Through the weekend people will have the
chance to see community, environmental and economic projects the Authority is working on.
Some with partners to enhance the quality of life in Worcestershire. Twenty
of the County Council services will be taking part, including countryside, road safety, public rights of way, archaeology
service, youth service, social services, economic development, the libraries, the museums, the records office, the arts service,
and educational outdoor activities.
Over thirteen
and a half thousand people flocked to County Hall for the event last year and organisers are hoping that attendance at this
years event the last in an autumn slot will top that record. Next year the event
will move to a July slot and better weather!
The events
are held on the weekend of 19th and 20th October in the grounds and buildings of County Hall, Spetchley
Road Worcester. Free parking is available for all and it is an excellent opportunity
to see the talent and craftsmanship of Worcestershire at its best. If you have
a free hour during that weekend it is highly recommended to spend time at County Hall seeing some of our talented craftspeople.
Finally, on
the local Chaddesley Division scene, planning permission was granted for the tipping and spreading of uncontaminated soils
on land in the ownership of Mr P Butler on a field to the east of the A450 Stourbridge Road at Barnett Hill, Broome.
This particular
County Planning Application received widespread publicity and as the local Member did not receive my support. However, my County Council planning colleagues accepted the tightening up of several of the planning conditions
relating to this application, mainly;
1.
The operation on the site will be completed and top soiled and seeded within one calendar year from the date of this
application.
2.
Nothing other than uncontaminated soil shall be tipped on the site.
3.
The ditch, to the south west boundary of the site, shall be cleared and necessary provision made to ensure that the
drainage system operates effectively and that riparian owners upstream and downstream of the site are not adversely affected.
4.
There will be no floodlighting or external lighting or generator power on the site.
5.
Improved public rights of way signage will be placed across fields and adjoining land to this site.
These improved
condition changes were made following representations made by myself as a member of the Planning and Regulatory Committee
and also local Member.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
August 2002
August is always seen as the quiet
month in Local Government when most staff and Council Members take their holidays. This
year was no exception with the Council duties and meetings almost being non-existent, except for a Highways Partnership Meeting
that was held in the middle of August. There were 11 items placed on the Agenda which I had asked the Highways Partnership
Manager to report on, relating to issues that affect my constituents across the District.
It needs to
be pointed out that at this moment in time, Health Concern are the ruling Group on the Highway Partnership Forum. There are 5 Health Concern Councillors and just myself, so in effect if you have a Highways problem, Health
Concern is responsible. Readers may care to note the complete mayhem that occurred
over the month of August, in particular with road closures and holes being dug up here there and everywhere on every major
road in the District.
On the afternoon
of Friday 30th August, 4 major roads in Kidderminster were closed, bringing the eastern side of Kidderminster to
a halt. If any of the readers of this report were caught up in this mayhem, I
can only profoundly apologise for the interruption that was caused, and I would like to assure readers, that I myself was
also stranded trying to get from Harvington back across Kidderminster - this took me over an hour. I rang the Highways Partnership Unit to bitterly complain to the Highways Manager at the number of roads
that had been authorised for closure on that particular day, but unfortunately he had taken a days annual leave!
If by
magic, September 2nd arrived and Council duties started up again at a hefty pace with many meetings at County Hall,
the biggest two being the Planning and Regulatory Committee which I sit on, and the Cabinet and Cabinet Briefing Meetings
which took place on Thursday 5th September.
The Cabinet
received a paper that had come from the Department of Health, which had been issued under the heading Fairer Charging Policies
for Home Care and other Non Residential Social Services. The new guidance must
be adhered to in full by the 1st April 2003. This guidance sets demanding standards. It specifies the circumstances when people should not pay. It
requires changes to the way that the Council administers charging and also requires changes to its existing systems. The guidance requires the Directorate to undertake one financial assessment to determine
the charge they will pay for all the services received. This is different to
the current arrangements where there are discreet policies for each service. The
Directorate acknowledges that this is a better way of working although it will introduce significant changes to how it currently
operates.
Worcestershire
County Council does not currently charge Mental Health Service users. The Social
Services Directorate is currently debating whether this exception should continue under the new charging guidance. The County Council currently charges a flat rate amount for Day Care Attendance, which represents 7% of
the total cost of the service. Day Care Services in the County are subsidised
at a far higher level than the Home Care Service where currently 25% of the cost is recovered through charges. Currently, Home Care full charge payers; pay £7.64 per hour, despite the true full cost of home care being
over £13.00 to the County Tax Payer. The Cabinet endorsed a recommendation that
a wider consultation programme with service users is undertaken on the drafting charging policy that emerges from this new
piece of legislation from the Department of Health.
Cabinet
endorsed a paper that had been prepared by the Head of the Planning Department, which will enable Worcestershire County Council
Education Department, to receive a sum of money from the development of every new house that is built in the County to go
towards Educational needs in the school pyramid for which the houses are being built.
This is a piece
of legislation, which I have been actively pursuing at County Hall. Worcestershire
is one of a few Counties where we have never requested from the Principal Planning Organisations i.e. the District Councils,
money to go towards the extension and development of the schools when large new
Housing Developments are being built. For instance Spennells Estate in Kidderminster
in my County Division, with all of the 4,000 houses that were built on the estate, never did any money whatsoever come from
the Developers to go towards providing Educational needs for schools on that Estate.
Under this Paper that has been endorsed by Cabinet, District Councils will have to impose what is called a Section
106 Planning Obligation Agreement with the Developers on sites with more than 5 houses, which will enable the Local LEA to
receive approximately £2,600 per dwelling to go towards Educational needs.
Cabinet endorsed
a draft Community Strategy for the City of Worcester; this is a further piece of legislation, which has come out from the
Local Government Act 2000, which requires each District Council, and indeed the County Council, to produce a Community Strategy.
Community
Strategies are all about how services are delivered to the public and how the local area in which they live and work can be
improved.
Community Strategy
documents provide the overall vision and focus for the way in which the Local Authorities, be it the District or the County
Council, will precede to deliver services over a 10 year period.
In the case
of Worcester City Councils strategy, they broke it down into 4 priority areas, the priority areas being: -
1.
A prosperous city.
2.
A green and healthy city.
3.
A safe city.
4.
An inclusive city.
All Community
Safety Strategies are produced in partnership with other organisations like the Police, Social Services, the County Council,
Parish Councils.
The Strategies
are all worthy of digestion, however I am a little sceptical at how they will be measured.
The service delivery improvement!
Cabinet
endorsed an Annual Paper, which is statutory, and must be produced and sent to Government Office covering the Corporate Asset
Management and Capital Investment Strategies for the County Council. The key
elements of the strategies and policy frameworks are designed to ensure that the Council manages its property assets as efficiently
and effectively as possible, and also makes the most effective and informed capital spending decisions.
Some
basic facts and figures from the Asset Management Plan:-
·
In the case of Worcestershire County Council a fact that the Council has land and
building assets of just under £500 million.
·
There is a maintenance backlog of nearly £48 million, the majority of these relate
to the Education Portfolio.
·
The County Council spends some £8 million per annum on on-going maintenance.
·
The County Councils capital expenditure on property related assets for the financial
year 2001/02 to 2003/04 will be nearly £132 million.
Finally Cabinet
endorsed a Local Cultural Strategy which is again another piece of legislation from Central Government which we must have
in place by December 2002. The Countys Cultural Strategy has been produced in
consultation with the 6 District Councils in Worcestershire. The overall aim
of the strategy is to enrich the lives of Worcestershires communities and to attract visitors to the County by making the
wealth of arts, sports, countryside and heritage activities available to all.
Three goals
identified in the Strategy are: -
1.
To celebrate and promote Worcestershires existing cultural assets and make the most of what is on offer through active
partnership and joint workings.
2.
Extend and deepen participation across the County, bringing Cultural activities within the reach of more people, whether
improving local access or creating new opportunities.
3.
To boost prosperity in Worcestershire by supporting the growth of the cultural sector, enhancing the Countys profile
with inward investors and ensuring a greater share of funding.
July 2002
Worcestershire
County Council Cabinet met on Monday 8th July 2002 to decide on 9 major items for approval.
The first item being
Worcestershire Partnership and changes that we have decided to make as an administration in relation to the Partnership Assembly
(Board). Previously, (under the Liberal-Labour administration) there was only
one County Councillor who had ultimate responsibility for the whole of Worcestershire.
We have now changed that to 7 elected Councillors from each of the District Councils and County Council in Worcestershire. The Chairman of the new Assembly will be Professor Michael Clark, Birmingham University. The purpose of the new Board is to work jointly with our District Council colleagues
at County level to promote cohesion and a strategy that brings all levels of Local Government in Worcestershire together under
one umbrella. By pulling our resources, we feel as an administration we can achieve
greater things in co-operation with our partners in the rest of the County.
The Cabinet endorsed
a paper on Community Safety. The Community Safety Strategy has been produced
in consultation with the Police, County Council, District Council, Fire Service, Probation Service, and Substance Misuse Action
Team.
Cabinet also endorsed
a strategy for E-Government.
E-Government is about
providing improved, efficient, seamless services to the citizens of Worcestershire in a way that suits their needs. The Strategy sets out Worcestershire County Councils intentions and commitments of improving citizen access
to services. To help to achieve this, Worcestershire County Council intend to
set up a hub this will channel all of our services and providers through one portal on the internet.
This portal will electronically
have links through to our major contractors, i.e. Pirelli for street lighting, Severn Waste Services for Waste Management,
Raynesway for Highways and Fleet Maintenance. The Strategy is designed to bring
all of our services under one umbrella over a period of 10 years.
The delivery of E-Government
and its agenda will require a substantial investment of funding by the County Council and our Partners. The level of investment required is likely to be in the region of £60 million over a 10 year period. Central
Government are helping some Local Authorities (including Worcestershire) to setting up E-Government during the first 2 years.
In the case of Worcestershire County Council it is likely that we will receive £1.5 million compared to Wyre Forest District
Council who are expected to receive £400,000 for investing in E-Government technology over the next 2 years.
Cabinet also endorsed
the setting up of a Health Scrutiny Panel. The Health Scrutiny Panel will be
County based and will include 7 County Councillors, together with one District Councillor invited from each of the District
Councils within the County. The Health Scrutiny Panel will deal predominantly
with Scrutiny of Health Services across Worcestershire in and around the 3 Primary Care Trusts (PCT Boundaries). The Health Scrutiny Panel will be taking over from the role which Community Health Councils have up to
their abolition in April 2003.
Cabinet endorsed a
School Organisational Plan for 2002/07. This is the County Councils 4th
year of the plan and it was interesting to note that in the estimated pre-school children statistics, that there is a projected
decrease over the next 2 years in numbers of pupils entering Nursery and Primary School across the County, based on the statistics
from 3 years ago.
On education - Cabinet
also endorsed a change to the catchment area in Redditch for the Beoley First School, moving it from the Redditch Pyramid
into the Alvchurch Middle School with effect from September 2003,
On Educational Services
matters, the Cabinet also endorsed a paper where we have broken down the Senior Management level structures for the Education
Directorate and instead of having three Heads of Service with vast responsibilities, there will now be four. The new Division
will have responsibility for the Youth Service, Early Years and Child Care, Lifelong Learning and Outdoor Education, Student
Support Services, and the Music Service.
Finally the Cabinet
were presented with our Annual Progress Report for our Local Transport Plan. The
Local Transport Plan (LTP) sets out the Councils Transport Strategy for the next 5 years and forms the basis for the annual
financial settlement for transportation systems and structural maintenance with the County.
As a County Council we are by law required to produce an Annual Progress Report.
Our Annual Progress Report (APR) is used as a mechanism for submitting any bids for supplementary funding for transportation
projects to Central Government. Our APR submission is judged by Central Government against 7 criteria, these being: -
(i)
progress towards local
targets and objectives;
(ii)
delivery of systems
on the ground;
(iii)
an effective LTP spending
programme;
(iv)
actions to address areas
identified in the 2001 decision letter;
(v)
clear consultation arrangements;
(vi)
best practice sharing
and learning;
(vii)
a clear, readable and
accessible APR.
Central Government
have given an indication that Worcestershire County Councils LTP settlements for 2003/4 is £4 million for integrated transport
and an additional £5.25 million for structural maintenance.
Whats happening in Europe?
Physical Agents (Vibrations) Directive
Our Euro friends have introduced a new Directive on health
reasons to protect workers from over exposure to vibration as a result of working with heavy machinery. Employers will be
required to assess and measure vibration exposure, train and inform employees about the risks and safe use of equipment and
to provide appropriate health surveillance to employees.
The problem with this Directive is that the vibration limits
proposed are too tight. Further problems occurred in the Parliament when the
Socialist Group, supported by UK Labour MEPs, proposed to make these tighter still. Labour amendments proposed that tractor
drivers should dismount after only two hours. Fortunately, these were defeated but instead an eight-hour limit was imposed,
which is of little value to farmers especially at harvest time.
This highly controversial
directive was finally adopted after a lengthy "conciliation" procedure for which Conservative MEP Philip Bushill-Matthews
as Employment spokesman has been our representative.
Conservative MEPs managed to remove some of the more extreme
Socialist-sponsored amendments and have worked hard to get derogations for agriculture and forestry until 2014. However, we
believe that this amended version is still overly bureaucratic and have voted consistently against this regulation. The NFU
called the basic Directive "the European Nanny State gone mad" and we whole-heartedly agree with this assessment.
Local Implication: Farmers and those actively involved in
the use of any machinery which has Whole Body Vibration will be severely hit by this regulation. Some local small businesses
could well be forced to close.
For the record Conservatives never supported this Directive and have
worked hard to get the exemptions and derogations achieved. Dont forget our Labour MEPs wanted to make it even worse!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more information on any of the above reports please contact Councillor Stephen Clee
|
|
|
|