Agenda and minutes

Members and officers must declare any pecuniary or personalinterest in any business on the agenda. They should also make declarations at any stage such an interest becomes apparent during the meeting. Consideration should be given to leaving the meeting if the nature of the interest warrants it.  If in doubt please contact Democratic Services before the meeting.

19.1     In accordance with the County Council’s code of conduct, the following declarations of interest were made:

·       Cllr Oxlade declared a personal interest as an employee of Manor Royal under the Climate Change Strategy Delivery Update.

·       Cllr Oakley declared a personal interest as a member of Chichester District Council, a waste collection authority, under the Performance and Resources Report. 

Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency by reason of special circumstances, including cases where the Committee needs to be informed of budgetary or performance issues affecting matters within its terms of reference, which have emerged since the publication of the agenda.

20.1     No urgent matters were raised.

The Committee is asked to agree the minutes of the meetings held on 10 June and 8 July 2022 (cream paper).

21.1     The members were asked to agree the minutes of the meetings held on 10 June and 8 July 2022.

21.2     With regard to the minutes of 10 June 2022, comment was made that there needed to be reflection that footway and verge parking in rural and urban areas needed to be considered differently

21.3     Resolved – that the minutes of the Committee meeting held on 10 June 2022 be approved as correct record with the addition of the point raised under 21.2 above and signed by the Chairman.

21.4     Resolved – that the minutes of the Committee meeting held on 8 July 2022 be approved as a correct record and that they be signed by the Chairman.

The Committee is asked to note the cabinet member responses to recommendations made at the meetings on 10 June and 8 July 2022.

22.1     The Committee noted the response to recommendations made at the meetings on 10 June and 8 July 2022.

22.2     A question was raised on the triggers for future work of the Bus Enhanced Partnership Plan Task and Finish Group (TFG).  Officers reported that information on funded schemes was expected in October 2022, and there could be some work for the TFG following those outcomes on the schemes proposed and how they could be delivered.

Report by Assistant Director Highways Transport and Planning.

The Committee are asked to preview the proposed response to the consultation.

23.1     Mr Hemmings, Transport Policy and Planning Manager, introduced the report by informing the Committee that the County Council was part of the Transport for South East (TfSE), a sub-national transport body.  The report is the County Council’s draft response to the latest consultation by TfSE on the Draft Strategic Investment Plan (SIP).  The SIP is a 30-year investment plan underpinned by a set of technical exercises and evaluations.  A presentation on the item was shared and a copy is appended to the minutes. 

23.2     Members of the Committee then asked questions and a summary of those comments, questions and answers follows.

23.3     It was felt that better public transport would be a key to help reaching zero carbon targets, however increased fares were making the option unaffordable for many people. Officers confirmed work was being done to find funding for fare subsidies.

23.4     Members asked how the SIP was taking in to account the dramatic increases in costs over the last few years?  Officers confirmed that the estimates contained in the SIP were recently updated.

23.5     A Member stated that maintenance costs for highways were high and were likely to be unaffordable going forward and this would be of concern to residents across the county.  Officers reported that they believed the costs may have been overestimated by TfSE and had indicated this to them.

23.6     Concerns were raised about the high aspirations and vagueness in the SIP and officers reported that the SIP is high-level long-term regional proposal to enable the Council, other planning authorities and stakeholders to plan for the investments that will give the outcomes desired.  The County Council’s 15-year transport plan and a series of 5-year plans for road and rail will also mesh with the SIP.  The TfSE would present a voice to Government advising how they should in future invest to gain greater influence on investment programmes by speaking with one voice for the region. 

23.7     TfSE had made assumptions about the scale of investment in active travel across the region.  The scale of ambition in the SIP exceeds current spending and future maintenance would be unaffordable so investments would need to be prioritised.  This had been highlighted to TfSE, who had been asked to apply consistency.  TfSE’s influence on the Government for funding of multi-modal routes could be invaluable.

23.8     Members raised concerns on whether local planning could undermine some of the ambition in the SIP e.g. the impact of a second runway at Gatwick Airport and new roads serving new developments.  Officers reported that the TfSE approach is different to local plan and strategic transport type studies.  It is not a specific set of proposals but a model to understand the connection between economy and the transport model e.g. how an investment in transport could lead to economic growth.   The County Council works closely with local planning authorities to give transport guidance, considering if there is a better way to introduce a development to give a more sustainable infrastructure.  If developments could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

24.1     The Cabinet Member for Environment and Climate Change, Cllr Urquhart, introduced the item, reminding members of the County Council’s commitment to be net zero on carbon emissions by 2030.  This commitment underpinned all operations and the Council Plan, and the report set out progress, focussing on the County Council estate, and the challenges faced.

24.2     The Assistant Director (Environment and Public Protection), Mr Read, outlined that the Committee’s views were being sought on whether the right linkages were being made, whether the approach was coherent, whether the right data was being collected and whether the authority remained on track to achieve carbon neutrality by 2030.

24.3     Members of the Committee then asked questions and a summary of those questions and answers follows.

24.4     Although most UK local authorities had adopted a climate change policy or equivalent, there was a wide variation in priorities, targets, and timelines.  Currently there was no national standard set of data to enable benchmarking.  Through discussion with other authorities in the South East 7 group (SE7) and other groups it was hoped to be able to benchmark where we could.  It was agreed data needed to consider carbon reduction as well as cost elements. 

24.5     The most effective way of spending money was not just to invest in reducing direct emissions but, for example, to look to reduce the dependency on fossil fuels in the longer term.  The development of a medium-term strategy over the next 6-12 months would help identify the projects over which the Council has control. A large amount of emissions arise from the County Council’s supply chain.  We have identified the top 25 contractors and are starting to examine how it could be feasible to reduce the emissions associated with them.  We are also working to ensure, through the Procurement Team, better contracts with future suppliers, many of whom are working towards similar goals.  Transport for pupils with special educational needs was identified as an area for potential improvement.

24.6     The Smarter Working Programme had looked at the future demand for office space and highlighted the need for smaller, more modern working accommodation.  The Council did not want to spend funds on decarbonising buildings which had no long-term future.  To eliminate the dependency on fossil fuels, schemes were being considered, such as removing and replacing gas boilers with more modern efficient options (reducing heat leakage) and alternative energy sources, e.g. solar power.  At the next update officers would provide some specific case studies for buildings.

24.7     Whilst good progress was being made in County Council buildings more work was needed on the wide range of commercial assets owned.  These can vary from a parcel of empty land to a fully functioning office block.  Work is in hand to survey all assets, to assess contractual conditions and durations of occupancy, in order see how carbon emission reductions can be handled.  Areas of good practice would be shared with other tenants to help and encourage them.

24.8     For areas where there is  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

Report by Director of Finance and Support Services, setting out the finance and performance position as at the end of June 2022.

The Committee are asked to examine the Council’s corporate performance, finance, savings delivery and business performance for services within the remit of this Committee and to make any recommendations for action to the relevant Cabinet Member. 

Members are reminded that only the performance data on Community Support in section 4 (Community Support, Fire and Rescue Portfolio) falls within the remit of this Committee.

Communities

25.1     The Cabinet Member for Community Support, Fire and Rescue, Cllr Crow, reported that business was getting back to pre-pandemic levels but there were still a lot of challenges to both staffing and workload.

25.2     The Assistant Director (Communities), Mrs King, reported that customer demand was rising, particularly for the Ceremonies team, but also in libraries.  This had put pressure on staffing levels and some services were struggling to meet the demand of customers due to challenges on recruiting staff.  The Coroner’s Service was under pressure due to the level of need.

25.3     Mrs King reported that the Homes for Ukraine scheme had not been in the business plan and there had been no workforce ready to respond.  The directorate had modelled their response on the pandemic response and gathered colleagues from across the directorate and remodelled.  She had been very proud of the outcome. 

25.4     Mrs King reported that the increase in demand for ceremonies had raised income, which had been used to offset losses such as video rentals in libraries.  Officers were looking at changes in customer behaviour in order to provide the best service to customers. 

25.5     Members of the Committee then asked questions and a summary of those questions and answers follows.

25.6     Homes for Ukraine Scheme – When the national online portal launched, a lot of interest had been expressed by West Sussex residents, leading to a very busy time in April and May.  Expressions of interest continue to feed through but many who initially expressed an interest in hosting have not taken the matter further.  Many hosts are keen to continue support beyond the initial 6 months of the scheme.  New guests continue to arrive through various schemes e.g. the unaccompanied minors pathway, and extended family scheme.  Records are held on the guests within the Homes for Ukraine Scheme and all guests have 4-monthly check-ins from their date of arrival and each guest has a tailored package. Information is fed back to the Government on the grant scheme.  Within this scheme there have been minimal safeguarding issues presented. 

25.7     Other refugee schemes are based on a tariff model with an allocation per individual where the Government identifies the cost over several years.  The directorate ensures costs do not impact on the County Council by ensuring the money achieves the most it can.

25.8     It was difficult to measure how judicial sentences, as the outcome of Trading Standards investigations, were proving a deterrent to others.  Successful outcomes were always publicised to raise public awareness.  Information would be sought through the National Trading Standards (NATS).

25.9     Communities Hub – The hub was transitioning well from its initial Covid-facing service to more general information e.g. cost of living, callers seeking government grants, etc.  The team were skilled and talented people who could be trained to answer questions on any subject. The team are trained to understand and reflect on tone, trigger words, and help to explain what is going on to callers. 

Environment and Climate  ...  view the full minutes text for item 25.

The Committee is asked to review its current draft work programme taking into account the Forward Plan of key decisions and any suggestions from its members for possible items for future scrutiny. 

26.1     The Committee received a tabled copy of the most recent Forward Plan of Key Decisions dated 15 September 2022, copy appended to these minutes, and Work Programme from the Business Planning Group.

26.2     A request was received for a progress report on the A27 Arundel bypass to highlight at what point the next steps might become visible.

There have been no requests for call-in to the Scrutiny Committee and within its constitutional remit since the date of the last meeting.  The Director of Law and Assurance will report any requests since the publication of the agenda papers.

27.1     There had been no requests for call in to the Scrutiny Committee within its constitutional remit since the date of the last meeting.

The next meeting of the Committee will be held on 18 November 2022 at 10.30 am at County Hall, Chichester.  Probable agenda items include:

·       Performance and Resources Report 2022-23 Quarter 2 – July-September 2022

·       Digital Crime

·       Energy Strategy Action Plan

·       Pre-decision scrutiny of any proposals through the budget process

Any member wishing to place an item on the agenda for the meeting must notify the Director of Law and Assurance by Friday 4 November 2022.

28.1     The next meeting would be held on 18 November 2022 at 10.30am.