To receive any questions submitted from Members of the Council in accordance with the provisions of Procedure Rules 30 and 30A.
Minutes:
Question from Councillor Waller to Councillor Stephenson, Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Communities, Environment and Climate Change
Live and Local, when it is fully operational, provides much needed social contact in our villages and mitigates against social isolation and low level mental health problems. It also provides an income generation opportunity for our village halls, through raffles and the sale of refreshments for example, which in turn keeps our village halls open for further social interaction opportunities. RCC currently subsidises Live and Local to the tune of £2,500 annually. The remainder of the income they need to operate coming from ticket sales and fundraising activities. At our scrutiny committee meeting to discuss the budget savings I asked if this saving could be delayed till next financial year in order for the parishes to have the opportunity to replace RCC’s subsidy with a subsidy through the parish precept. Cllr Stephenson declined my request instead indicating she would negotiate replacing RCC’s grant with one from The Arts Council and talk to parishes about this proposed withdrawal. I would therefore like to ask:
1. What was the outcome of Cllr Stephenson’s discussion with The Arts Council?
2. What was the outcome of Cllr Stephenson’s discussion with parishes?
3. If Live and Local cannot continue in Rutland because of this reduction in their income what additional low level mental health support will RCC be putting in place to fill the void?
In response to Councillor Waller, Councillor Stephenson replied:
I would like to thank Cllr. Waller for her question: it touches upon pertinent topics: culture and arts provision within the county, mental health, rural isolation and fundraising opportunities for individual parish councils, all these against the backdrop of a decreasing authority budget and one with an agreed need to balance the books which does not rely upon reserves to do so. It is also pertinent that our cabinet report tonight includes a budget paper: how we spend the public’s money including key underlying principles. The portfolio holder has made clear in scrutiny meetings that simply putting off these changes for another year is not the best course of action; this needs to be consistent across the budget areas, regardless of the sums involved – the authority and community need to evolve now for the greater good of all going forward.
To add to Cllr Waller’s most helpful background to the Live and Local events within the county: between 2015 and 2021 there have been 59 shows over 9 villages and 1 town; this equates to roughly 9 shows a year; 1 show per village per year. There is sufficient budget to deliver the planned programme up until September 2021 with additional ability to deliver a further 2 shows between September 2021 and May 2022.
1) When the draft proposals for the budget came to scrutiny in April, I committed to arrange a meeting with Arts Council England to explore the possibility of the match funding to come from the Parishes rather than RCC. Members should note that Arts Council England works on the principle of only match funding; a model that has many benefits in terms of promoting the value of the arts by authorities but one that places rural communities such as Rutland at a disadvantage – I will not repeat the points regarding our funding formula and the impact this has on our non – statutory services as compared to our urban counterparts. In June, the Head of Service and I met with Arts Council England to discuss the proposal that the origin of the match funding should not be an issue: if our parishes can provide the funds; Arts Council England will match fund. In real terms this equates to each of the 9 parishes providing £250/show. The Arts Council England representatives were amenable to this proposal but needed to confer with colleagues regarding the direction of travel and to liaise with Live and Local. We are awaiting a response from them on the outcome of this; their next port of call was discussing with their wider team and liaising with the lead at Live and Local.
2) Clearly, liaison with parishes needs to be done with the full facts including a formal response from Arts Council England however, I believe the 9 parish councils and 1 town council affected are fully aware of the situation, subject to agreement at Full Council regarding the cabinet recommendations for the in – year savings proposed tonight, and so presumably will have been proactive in considering alternative methods of raising the £250 required. I will welcome an item on the Parish Forum agenda to discuss next steps and await to hear from those who set the agenda with regard to this.
3) In terms of mental health, we all clearly have mental health which will work on a continuum throughout our lives, just in the same way that we all have physical health. Living in a community that enables good mental health for all, has to be of key importance. The key here though is not to look at one item in isolation: we have to be holistic in our approach, principles clear with an understanding that all of us both individually and collectively contribute to delivering the ambition of good mental health for all; this does not lie solely at the feet of the authority – rather like safeguarding – mental health is everyone’s business. So, in terms of filling the 9 shows a year void: as members are aware the Future Rutland Conversation outputs are soon to be played back to the community. From this our Council will have a clear idea of what is important to our community, a community vision resulting upon which RCC can build its corporate plan ensuring that the authority plays its part in delivering this vision. This vision will also play an integral role in shaping our baseline principles for our refreshed Cultural strategy, work on which will be starting in the autumn. Therefore, I would wish to reassure Cllr Waller and colleagues that what feels uncomfortable today and requires individual parishes to determine the extent to which they value their annual show, we are at the start of developing an exciting future – one in which the community of Rutland works together to create a county that offers much to all.
There were no supplementary questions.
Question from Councillor A Brown to Councillor Razzell, Armed Forces Champion and Portfolio Holder for Planning.
It appears that the funding for the Armed Forces Covenant of £30,000 has been withdrawn. RCC will now be footing the bill from the Covid-19 grant, is this proper use of that grant, and if so what exactly will we be getting for the £30,000 and does it represent value for money when we are cutting back on so many services which affect the whole community. Should we be spending this amount on a section of the community by virtue of their job?
Councillor Razzell replied:
The budget report does identify 30K from COVID grants fund to pay for the AF Officer who has been redirected to Covid response duties. This is an appropriate use of funding as they have been utilised to assist with the shielding programme, volunteer mobilisation, vaccination centre duties and coordinating and being present at the testing centre.
The Armed Forces grant was withdrawn and Council were asked in the 21/22 budget whether they wished to fund the pressure caused by the withdrawal of grant. At that time there was unanimous agreement to fund the pressure in recognition that the work of this Officer is valued and extends beyond the armed forces community. Members may wish to revisit this, as with any area of service, in future
Cllr Andrew Brown sought clarity in the initial part of his question, which I believe has now been answered. Thereafter, he asks if the sum represents value for money and should we be spending on a section of the community “by virtue of their job”. Mr Chairman if I may, Councillors often share wisdom with us, so on this occasion, I thought it might be helpful if impart a modicum of my lived experience and understanding on military service, the service community, the Armed Forces Covenant (which is currently progressing through Government to be enshrined in law) and the opportunities for us as a Council to continue to apply for Armed Forces Covenant funding (which we have already been successful in) to help support our community.
It is of course true to say that those who serve do so with a very clear understanding of selfless commitment (perhaps referred to as “their job”). Forgoing societal norms and being ready often at just a few hours’ notice to deploy globally or nationally, this part of society do so out of a sense of duty made through personal choice. Often with family left in isolated locations, they train, deploy, redeploy, train again and in between, respond to calls from central and local government to provide Military Aid to the Civil Authorities (Covid19 refers). The majority will forfeit annual leave plans due to rapid deployment, they have no set hours of working and they spend weeks / months / years away from society and loved ones in support of the nation, local authorities and our community.
Over time and as part of “their job”, they will be asked to deliver solutions and capability far beyond their professional skills and competencies which might include disaster relief, culling livestock during national outbreaks of foot and mouth, performing life-saving interventions in response to national ambulance strikes, become overnight firefighters, driving petrol tankers and then responding in extraordinary numbers to a national and international pandemic. All of this in addition to what some might call “their job”. Some might suggest that they have become the nation’s 4th emergency service but on demand and on every occasion, they step up and do “their job”.
Critically though, they do not expect favour, charity or advantage.
Routinely, they ask nothing of society but in doing “their job” and anything else that is thrown at them, they become isolated from societal awareness, knowledge and wisdom and at a point during later life or crisis on the home front when serving, they stumble and become the very thing their pride and fortitude struggles most with. Over the past years, Rutland has watched with pride as our Armed Forces Officer has restored faith in service provision, prevented countless numbers of service families and veterans from becoming “looked after” and delivered low-cost sustainable support for members of AF our community who are now retired. Simply, this investment in our Armed Forces family represents pro-active solutions to families and individuals who have not grown up in usual society; because in our ask of them “doing their job”, we have created gaps in awareness, knowledge and wisdom that then requires help in the future.
From the families of those who have lost loved ones on Operations; to the service mum who (following divorce) needs help with housing and education for her children; to the retired Royal Army Veterinary Corps soldier who needs support in accessing adult education; to the retired Special Forces operative who needs a Blue Badge and to the BAME service personnel who need help with access to healthcare, we have a moral duty under the Armed Forces Covenant (which we have signed) to ensure that none of the service community experience disadvantage.
Since signing the Armed Forces Covenant, Rutland has benefitted from Covenant funding that has spanned our community (saving central resource) but the “Value” has also flowed back right across the community as veterans, serving personnel, cadets, reservists and service families have become an enduring element of our society. In sports clubs, social enterprise, volunteer organisations, health, education and housing, our service community continue to thrive, give freely of their time and add “value” to the community. It was ever thus and as we look to the future, might we perhaps take this opportunity to re-affirm our bonds with those who serve, their families and our military community and underpin our signature of the Armed Forces Covenant with a continued commitment to those “doing their job” and equally, those who did the job … occasionally, they will need our support.
As a supplementary question Cllr A Brown asked whether, presuming that the number of armed forces personnel would be reducing, the covenant and the amount of funding would be reviewed.
Cllr Razzell confirmed that although it was likely that the number of serving personnel would reduce in real terms it would take many years before a point would be reached where the money spent on veterans and service families could be reached.
Question from Councillor Powell for the Leader of the Council
The budget outturn report at item 10 (66/2021 para 3.2.3) states that there have been savings of £978k on staff vacancies- some of which have been offset by costs of temporary staff. What approximate levels of staff vacancies is the council running at the moment and how can councillors be reassured that this policy, while delivering some welcome financial savings is not undermining the smooth and efficient running of services, and the morale of staff who deliver them?
In response to Councillor Powell the Leader replied:
There are various parts to this question so let me take each in turn.
The outturn report did highlight staff savings as noted. The savings arose for a variety of reasons 1) we had some vacancies which we tried to recruit to but were unsuccessful, 2) we have some vacancies which we wanted to recruit to but demands of Covid meant recruitment was delayed or deferred, 3) we had some vacancies which we successfully recruited to but the time difference between one person leaving and another starting gives a saving and 4) we did have some posts that we did not recruit to as posts were earmarked for savings which are on the agenda for approval tonight. So the £978k results from a combination of factors.
In terms of Council policy, then that is absolutely clear. We aim to recruit to the budget that Council approves. We understand that when teams are not fully staffed it can have an impact on delivery and wellbeing so I can assure Members that where there are gaps, Officers are doing what they can to close those gaps or look at alternative ways of working. Naturally, in our financial position, we have asked SMT to consider before any recruitment whether there are options to save and I can confirm this process is happening with services taking the opportunity to review how we best move forward.
Finally, we are currently actively recruiting to 19 posts
- 4 of these are new posts due to increased service pressure or re-alignment of existing roles/budgets
- 2 are maternity cover
- 4 roles within our Children’s Social Care team have been held and identified for 4 Trainee Social Workers who have been supporting us for a year
- 2 senior roles are pending recruitment and currently covered by interim managers
- 7 posts are active recruitment to replace post holders who have left or about to leave.
The Council is currently working on its latest position and is committed to improving the transparency in Finance reports and will be providing an update on key staffing information as part of the financial reporting arrangements for Q1 and all future reports.
Councillor Powell was pleased to hear that the Council was actively recruiting to 19 posts.
Question from Councillor A Brown to Councillor Stephenson
Can the portfolio holder please explain why there is to be a proposed cut of £60,000 to the funding of Public Rights of Way? This will be detrimental to access to the countryside and the health and well-being benefits that brings to residents. This represents a 66% cut in support, will any other department be suffering such a large decrease in its funding and if not why are Public Rights of Way being targeted and cut so severely?
In response to Councillor Brown, Councillor Stephenson replied:
Thank you for your question Cllr. Brown, the sentiment behind it I am in complete agreement with: if we are to encourage people to make the most of and enjoy our countryside then maintaining and enhancing the infrastructure has to be a central ambition. In terms of the revenue budget that you refer to in your question: hitherto this budget has been used for reactive maintenance and up - dating of existing infrastructure. Going forwards the reduction in the revenue budget will mean that the statutory obligations of this particular department will be met whilst the £60k formally sitting in revenue will be in the Integrated Transport Capital programme. A more proactive approach in terms of what we invest in will deliver more in terms of enhancing and promoting the use of our public rights of way: the LCWIP now has ring fenced funding to complete it which in turn will mean that a strong evidence base can be at the heart of well - placed capital investment. As mentioned, this capital investment will sit with Integrated Transport and schemes will come through the Highways Transport Working Group process. Likewise, the forthcoming vision resulting from the Future Rutland Conversation will assist with this evidence base: if the priority for Rutland is to enable greater and improved access to our countryside then this will be reflected in policy and the appropriate weighting given to schemes that deliver on this ambition.
In terms of the overall budget and have other departments suffered similar cuts – the detail of that is the paper you have before you tonight and will be covered by the portfolio holder for finance.
As a supplementary Councillor Brown referenced the recent meeting of the Countryside Access Forum of which he was Chair and said that members had been horrified at the level of the cuts and asked whether these would be reduced.
Councillor Stephenson referred Councillor Brown to her previous answer and restated that the budget had moved into the capital pot for integrated transport and the Council would be able to be pro-active and take an evidence based approach to identified needs.
Question from Councillor Powell to Councillor Stephenson, Portfolio Holder for Communities, Environment and Climate Change.
I note from the Scrutiny Annual Report under item 16 on the agenda today that the recommendations from the Biodiversity Task and Finish Group, together with their research and findings will now dovetail and feed into the work of the Climate Action Group and their wider remit. The Task and Finish Group reported to Growth, Infrastructure and Resources scrutiny in October 2020 and its recommendations included firstly a list of actions under each objective and secondly that progress against these actions would be reported annually to the committee. How exactly will these recommendations be monitored and recorded and when and how will progress on these actions be reported?
Councillor Stephenson replied:
Thank you for your question Cllr. Powell – it is so important that when work is undertaken that the momentum for delivery is maintained. In terms of this particular report, as you are aware there has been a commitment taken by this Council 11th January 2021 to declare a climate crisis and do develop a plan to deliver carbon neutrality by 2050 or is a soon as is viable. Work, therefore, has been focussed on this. I have formed a members’ climate action with meetings held regularly since 20th January 2021. The work undertaken has been phased. The first phase is to deliver on the ambition of a Community Climate Action Network: this has resulted in a highly successful, both in terms of numbers of attendees and breadth of speakers, Climate Summit at the beginning of May; our first meeting of the Rutland Climate Action network is due to take place this Thursday from which a community strategy will be developed and The Great Big Green week in September will be an excellent launch for events across the county. I am also delighted to note, that, due to the hard work of Cllr. Burrows, we have secured lottery funding for a Community Rutland Climate Action website. The second phase of work is the development of an RCC climate change strategy; this work will be underpinned by the baseline assessment procured with the Carbon Trust, due for completion this autumn. At this point Cllr. Powell you may be forgiven for thinking that I am not answering your question: what about biodiversity and the actions listed in the report? I have highlighted the work regarding Climate Change because this is what Full Council have committed to and so it is right that energy is being focussed on delivering on this. The good news, however, is that clearly climate change is inextricably linked to promoting biodiversity: many of the action points were focussed on community endeavour, these therefore will be reflected in the forthcoming community strategy. In terms of those actions that the report advised in terms of policy; some are already in hand: for example, the PlantLife guidance has been followed for our verge cutting this year and the emergent trees policy is being worked on as we speak. The report is a list of well – researched actions; the next step is to be clear of the underlying principles, to develop an overarching strategy that enables careful policy development to deliver. Any strategy must have a plan for implementation, monitoring and evaluation. I am looking forward to the outputs from the Future Rutland Conversation and the community driven vision for Rutland as this will enable our corporate plan to set deliverable ambitions upon which to develop this crucial piece of work.
As a supplementary Councillor Powell asked whether more specific times and dates could be supplied on when and how these actions would be reported on and implemented. In particular Councillor Powell wanted to know when all developments should be able to evidence no biodiversity loss, as recommended by the Task and Finish Group. Cllr Stephenson would liaise with Planning and the Planning Portfolio Holder to gain more information on this.