Agenda and minutes

To record apologies for absence and the attendance of substitute members. 

Councillors Mike Badcock (substituted by Ben Mabbett) and Mohinder Kainth (substituted by Yvonne Constance), submitted apologies.

To adopt and sign as a correct record the Scrutiny Committee minutes of the meetings held on 30 November and 14 December 2017. 

The minutes of the meetings held on 30 November and 14 December 2017 were agreed as an accurate record and were signed by the Chairman.

To receive any declarations of disclosable pecuniary interests in respect of items on the agenda for this meeting.  

Councillor Sandy Lovatt declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 6: Partnership Grants, as his wife was the council’s representative and/or trustee on organisations in receipt of partnership grants.

Councillor Chris Palmer declared a non-pecuniary interest in Agenda Item 6: Partnership Grants, as he was the council’s representative on an organisation in receipt of a partnership grant.

To receive notification of any matters which the chairman determines should be considered as urgent business and the special circumstances which have made the matters urgent, and to receive any announcements from the chairman. 

None.

To receive any questions or statements from members of the public that have registered to speak. 

None.

To consider the report of the interim head of corporate services (attached).

The committee considered the report of the interim head of corporate services on the partnership grant scheme.

Jayne Bolton, interim communications and grants manager, introduced this item. Also present to answer questions was Councillor Matthew Barber, Leader of the Council.

The report stated that, historically, award decisions had been informal and the budget for the scheme had been based on these decisions and then agreed as part of the council’s budget setting process. In recent years, the Cabinet member for grants determined the awards based on officer advice about each organisation’s financial situation, performance targets and business cases, where relevant.

In response to members’ questions, the committee was informed that:

·         Over the last three years, there had been a move away from revenue grant funding.

·         The number of organisations receiving partnership grant funding had reduced significantly in recent years.  With the exception of the Albert Memorial (Abingdon) Trust, where there was a legal commitment to continue grant funding until 2021, the only organisations receiving these grants were providing services that, if they ceased to do so, would put pressure on the council to provide.

·         Due to financial pressures and the annual requirement to secure funding for this scheme, new applications were not being accepted.  Organisations seeking funding were directed to other council grant schemes including festival, capital and new homes bonus.

·         Last year, officers gave an update to Cabinet members on partnership grants and arranged presentations by representatives of South and Vale Citizens’ Advice Bureau and Wantage Independent Advice Centre. This year, similar presentations could be arranged for all councillors if members wished.

RESOLVED: to note the report.

An opportunity for Committee members, and other registered speakers, to ask the Council Leader any questions relating to the business of the district.

Councillor Matthew Barber, Leader of the Council, attended to answer questions relating to the business of the district.

Councillor Helen Pighills had submitted the following question:

“The Upper Reaches has been empty now for a number of years. Could the Leader please give an update regarding its future?  Also while it is empty, who is responsible for the maintenance of the buildings including the part of premises that is listed?”

Councillor Barber replied that the council was the freeholder but that the maintenance of the building was the tenant’s responsibility. Whilst he was of the view that the best option would be to retain the building as a hotel, there was no legal obligation on the tenant to keep the hotel open. He understood that the tenant was in pre-application discussions with the planning department.

Councillor Emily Smith had submitted the following question:

“The announcement that Old Abbey House in Abingdon will be used for council housing marks a change in approach for the Vale. What policies and strategy are the council using, or developing, to guide the Vale in providing housing for social rent directly?”

Councillor Barber replied that, in accordance with the Corporate Plan objective to support all types of affordable housing, the council was considering a range of options for Old Abbey House.

Councillor Judy Roberts had submitted the following question:

“On the Vale of White Horse corporate risk register only a quarter of the areas are in the green. One third of the areas are red, most of these highlight a need of effective management. What plans do we have to address these risks especially in the light of area 11? A breach of personal information as stated by the data regulations in place by May would leave the Council exposed to a maximum fine of 4% of gross turnover.”

Councillor Barber replied that the colour coding of risks in the risk register illustrated their significance rather than the likelihood of occurrence and he would be more concerned if the council was not identifying various risks as serious.

The council’s risk management strategy and framework had been approved and a progress report on the development of the corporate risk register would be considered by the Joint Audit and Governance Committee on 29 January. The committee would also receive progress reports at regular intervals.

Councillor Debby Hallett had submitted the following question:

“In the aftermath of the Carillion collapse, I’ve been looking into the wider issue of outsourcing public services as a decision and the associated risks. Whenever a decision is made to outsource public services to an external provider, we outsource the work but not the responsibility. It is still Vale that must meet payroll, manage HR issues, Keep the IT systems working, replace batteries in officers’ mobile telephones, and repair or replace wobbly tables in our offices. I see places where performance is falling short, yet the KPIs are still green. 

When Cabinet decided to outsource this work, who at Vale took on the responsibility  ...  view the full minutes text for item Sc58

To review the attached scrutiny work schedule. Please note, although the dates are confirmed, the items under consideration are subject to being withdrawn, added to or rearranged without further notice.

The committee considered its work programme and noted that the review of the joint communications strategy, which had been scheduled for submission to Joint Scrutiny Committee on 6 March, had been deferred to a later date.

The committee agreed:

1.     To cancel the scrutiny committee meeting which had been scheduled for 29 March.

2.     That a longlisting workshop, to identify potential topics for the committee’s future consideration, be held on 10 April.