Agenda and minutes

There were no declarations of interest.

The minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2021 were approved as a true record of the meeting.

The report of the Director – Neighbourhoods is attached.

The Director – Neighbourhoods presented his report, which focused on the impact of Covid-19 on the Council internally and explained that this topic had been split into two parts to enable meaningful scrutiny, with the second report discussing the external impact to follow in May 2022. The report outlined how Rushcliffe Borough Council had responded and reacted to Covid-19, and how the Council had activated its emergency plan to respond to the pandemic. The report also outlined events which had occurred just prior to the pandemic, including serious flooding in parts of the Borough, which had been dealt with. The second part of this report detailed the effect of Covid-19 on the Council’s staff, services, and projects and it concluded with a reflection on some of the lessons learnt with a view to improving similar responses in the future.

The Group questioned whether there would be any alterations to the Council’s emergency plan and the Director – Neighbourhoods explained that it was a generic document, designed to be deployed when an emergency situation arose and no changes were anticipated for the current plan, as it was still fit for purpose.

The Group referred to paragraph 4.18 of the report and indicated that the whole of the Borough was affected by broadband and mobile connectivity issues, not just officers. The Director – Neighbourhoods indicated that the Council was in a good position with many officers already working from home prior to the pandemic.  It was noted that there were 1.8% of houses within the Borough without broadband and that despite vouchers being made available from Nottinghamshire County Council, there were still issues and both the suppliers and the County Council should be encouraged to ensure that no one was without broadband or mobile phone connectivity.

The Director- Neighbourhoods reminded the Group of a recent Communities Scrutiny Group meeting, when the County Council had given an excellent presentation on the broadband roll out programme and future phases and suggested that if the topic was to be added as a scrutiny matrix, then the County Council should be involved.

The Director – Neighbourhoods explained how the Council had remained connected with its employees by encouraging staff to work from the Arena or the Contact Centre once or twice a week and it was hoped that this would help to attract and retain talent. Councillors recognised that officers were also able to remain connected with events such as the Red Umbrella sessions and virtual coffee mornings for home schooling parents. Based on the extreme hard work and adaptivity of the Council, Councillors asked questions about financial recognition and how it would be achieved. The Director – Neighbourhoods advised the Group that there had been some renumeration for those who have taken on extra roles, responsibilities, and duties during the pandemic but that it was not always possible to recognise staff financially. The Group was informed that there were different reward systems in place such as staff compliments in the Council’s weekly newsletter, and that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

The Service Manager – Finance presented the report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services, which detailed the quarter two position in terms of financial and performance monitoring for 2021/22. The report separately highlighted the Covid-19 variances.

The Service Manager – Finance referred to table 1 at paragraph 4.2 of the report, which summarised the position at Quarter 2. The table summarised the main variations from revenue efficiencies and Covid related pressures. It was noted that income lost related to Covid-19 totalled £0.129m, with in-year efficiency savings of £0.845m and non-ringfenced grant funding £0.036m. It was noted that, in regard to business rates, the Council was expecting a surplus of £3.113m but that a significant proportion would need to be appropriated into the Collection Fund Reserves (£1.765m) to cover the anticipated deficit that would arise next year and in 2023/24.

The Group suggested that sufficient attention had been given to continued marketing for the golf course and Rushcliffe Borough Council’s other facilities following Covid-19. It was agreed that this feedback would be passed to the relevant team.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager referred to Appendix G of the report, which detailed the Strategic Scorecard summary table.

It was noted that there were fourteen strategic performance indicators that were falling below target, details of which were highlighted in the report.

It was explained that eight of the exceptions were covered in Quarter 1, with some of the measures impacted by lockdown or changes in resident behaviours, but they were no longer subject to the special reporting introduced in 2020/21 due to the easing of restrictions.

It was explained that the percentage of residents who believed that the Council provided value for money had been impacted by Covid. The pandemic had affected feelings of resident satisfaction across many areas, and this was replicated nationally. The Group was informed that the Council would continue to educate residents about the role of the Council as the waste collection authority and would also explain how Council Tax was distributed among other key parts of the public sector. The Group was informed that the percentage of residents satisfied with the variety of ways they could contact the Council might have decreased due to Covid. For example, the closure of face-to-face services at the start of the pandemic. It was noted that this indicator had been addressed and there had been a wider discussion on how the Council could continue to engage with its residents through its forthcoming Customer Service and Communications strategies being finalised this spring.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager was pleased to note that the percentage of residents satisfied with the cleanliness of streets and appearanceof parks and open spaces was positive and well within the targets set for performance within the contract.

The Communications and Customer Services Manager informed the Group about the percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting and the number of pavilions, community hall and playing field users. It was noted that there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.

The Chairman of the Communities Scrutiny Group informed the Group that there had been two substantive items at the last meeting.  The Housing Delivery Plan 2022-2027 had been discussed and it had been noted that the biggest challenge involved trying to get people off the streets, and the ongoing support that the Council would provide to support these people. The Chairman informed the Group that the Council would face challenges with people going onto the housing register, which was hard to forecast. The second report had related to the resident survey, with over 84% of residents who had responded stating that they were satisfied with the Borough as a place to live. The Communities Scrutiny Group believed that people did not understand what the Council’s roles and responsibilities were, for example discussions around removing the Council logo from Council Tax Bill might encourage people to change their minds about this being all the Council did. He explained that communications needed to be made clearer about what the Borough Council’s role was. He explained that there were recommendations around a focus group being introduced to discuss the outcomes of the survey, which was heavily debated in the meeting but ultimately not agreed to.

The Vice Chairman of the Governance Scrutiny Group stated that at the last meeting the Group had focused on the Internal Audit Update report, Annual Audit report, Capital Investments, Statement of Accounts, and the Streetwise Annual report. He informed the Group that it was a comprehensive agenda with a number of technical and external reports.

The Chairman of the Growth and Development Scrutiny Group stated that the Group had considered two reports at its last meeting. The first report had considered tree conservation, and it was noted that the recommendations had been supported but additional recommendations had been agreed, to include a review of how appraisal was given to planning applications in relation to tree protection. The second additional recommendation related to how the Enforcement Policy could be strengthened and protected, together with a discussion about how that could be achieved. The Group had also agreed to write to the Government regarding legislation around Tree Preservation Orders, mainly about the aesthetics as opposed to the environmental benefits and biodiversity. It was noted that the Group had also wanted to include the protection of hedgerows as opposed to just trees. The second report the Group had considered had related to cycling and it was noted that this item had been a summary of the previous meeting alongside further discussion. The Group had agreed that walking and cycling would be included in future polices and a one-page walking and cycling plan was agreed. He advised that a shorter and more focussed presentation in relation to tree conservation had helped to promote more discussion and debate and he suggested that going forward presentations should be broken up or shortened to facilitate more interaction and debate.

The Chairman of the Corporate Overview Group advised that she had attended the Growth and Development  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.

The Service Manager – Corporate Services updated the Group on the East Midland Councils Scrutiny Network, which had been held in December. It was noted that the discussions that had taken place had related to the impact of Covid-19 on scrutiny meetings rather than the impact of Covid-19 on councils and their communities in general, so the meeting had been less useful than anticipated. She informed the Group that there had been a verbal presentation by Ed Hammond from the Centre for Public Scrutiny and Governance and the main points covered were:

·        Relationship between councils and the public is changing.

·        Post pandemic there is greater engagement in democracy from both formally (meetings and decision making) and informally (with community- based action).

·        Post pandemic scrutiny – how things have changed, are we still delivering the right services in the best way.

·        Uncertain future- Levelling Up, Health and Care Bill, Environment Bill – lots of change coming.

It was noted that the next meeting would be held on 11 March 2022.

The Service Manager – Corporate Services referred to the forthcoming scrutiny training on 23 February and confirmed that the training would cover listening and questioning skills and techniques, and there were plans to set up a mock scrutiny meeting with topics to make the training more interactive.

The report of the Director – Finance and Corporate Services is attached.

The Group considered the requests for scrutiny items submitted by either Councillors or officers using the scrutiny matrix. In respect of the ownership of public and open spaces, the Group raised concerns about ownership of the commercial sites and how the Council dealt with those. Councillors were also concerned about what protection there was for residents, as some sites (Sharphill) were already on their third management company. The Group questioned how this item would be scrutinised and noted that there needed to be an understanding of how legal planning legislation could protect the community space.  It was noted that this item had already been scrutinised and it was agreed that the Group would be given a briefing note covering what the legislation was and what protection could be given to open spaces, to ensure that they were kept in public use.

The Group then discussed the scrutiny matrix related to the Tree Preservation Order Register being made public and online and noted that this had already been discussed and agreed at the Growth and Development Scrutiny Group.

It was noted that the recommendation for the establishment of a Youth Council, raised as a motion at Council in December, had already been agreed.

Discussions took place on alternative energy policies and emerging technologies and the Group was informed that external participation in the item would give Councillors a better understanding and allow them to make their views known. It was also noted that this work would be undertaken by the Local Development Framework Group. The Group discussed the possibility of splitting the cost between other councils and agreed that a session would be held at Scrutiny to allow Councillors to put forward their views. 

The Group discussed the topic of sewage infrastructure and discharge within Rushcliffe and agreed that this item could be considered by either Communities or Growth and Development Scrutiny Group, if external partners were able to attend.

In respect of the scrutiny matrix regarding the Canal and River Trust, the Group stated that it would like a better understanding of what the plans were going forward and agreed that this item would go to Scrutiny.

It was RESOLVED that the work programmes outlined below be agreed.