Transcript
Good afternoon everyone. I'm Councillor Susie Houghton. I'm the Deputy Leader of the Council,
and I will be chairing this meeting. Before we start with the housekeeping, if the continuous
fire alarm sounds, please evacuate the room by the stairwells. Do not attempt to use the
lifts and assemble by Queen Victoria's statue in Guildhall. In order to comply with the
Guildhall Trust's fire martial regulations, if you did sign in, please sign out when you
leave today. Everyone who's speaking, please can you do so via a microphone and it will
be recorded and broadcast on the website, including those making deputations. Members
of the press and public also permitted to record the meeting on the understanding that
neither disrupts the meeting nor record those stating explicitly that they do not wish to
be recorded. As I said, please use the microphones. Remember to switch them off when you've finished.
Just the usual statement that cabinet have read the reports, so when officers are presenting
their particular report, they highlight that any developments that have occurred since
publication will give a brief summary. Introductions. I will start to my left.
I'll be the old city solicitor. Nastya Barbara Pearl, Chief Executive. Anna
Martin, Democratic Services. Chris Ward, Director of Finance and Resources.
Councillor Hugh Mason, St Jude Ward. Councillor Kimberley Barrett, Cabinet Member
for Climate Change and Greeting the City. Thank you. James Harris, Senior Local Democracy
Officer. Good afternoon, Chair. Chris Atwell, Cabinet
Member for Central Services. Peter Candlish, Councillor for Eastening
Cranes Water and Cabinet Member for Transport. Natasha Edmonds, Director of Corporate Services.
Paddy May, Corporate Strategy Manager. Andy Biddle, Director of Adult Social Care.
Claire Watkins, Business Manager. Councillor Graham Heenius and Jude Ward giving
a deputation. Councillor Russell Simpson, Hillsie Ward.
Councillor Raymond Denn, Cockney Ward. Welcome to everyone for this meeting. I probably
should mention, as well as being Deputy Leader, I'm the Cabinet Member for Children, Families
and Education. So as Councillor Heaney mentioned, he will
be giving a deputation on Item 4. Apologies from Councillor Steve Pitt, Councillor
Lee Hunt, Councillor Darren Saunders, Councillor Dave Ashmore and Councillor Matthew Winnington
will be late if he gets here by the end of the meeting but he has asked me to explicitly
say that he is giving blood and therefore he thinks that's a very good excuse for being
late, which I agree. So are there any declarations of interest?
Chair, I was -- I participated as part of the scrutiny panel that is referred to in
items 8 and 9 last year. Thank you.
Any other declarations of interest? Okay. So Item 3 is a record of previous meeting
held on the 15th of May, 2024. Members, for those who were here, is that
an accurate record of the meeting? Proposed as accurate record.
Thank you, Councillor Mason. Happy 2nd, Chair.
Thank you, Councillor Barrett. Okay. So we'll go on to Item 4, which is appointment
of two outside organisations and member champion, and this is where Councillor Heaney wishes
to do a deputation. Chairman, before you come to Councillor Heaney's
deputation, it might be sensible to put Item 5 at the end of the agenda since Councillor
Matthew Willington may wish to speak to that. Very, very sensible idea, Councillor Mason.
Thank you for reminding me. So we'll put that to the end.
Item 4, and, Graham, do you want to do your deputation now, then?
First of all, an apology. I've got a problem with my left ear because it's hay fever and
it's playing up and I can't hear properly. This is why I'm sitting this side so I can
hear you better. Also, my voice sounds a bit strange. I'm not sure that I'm projecting
out. If I'm not speaking loud enough, you'll have to shout at me.
I wanted to check about recommendations that you're going to make because there's no formal
recommendation in relation to the King's Theatre Trust, which I obviously am going to speak
about. Is there any recommendation on that? What we normally do in this meeting is we
come to these and take each one of the ones where there's a contested position and then
make a decision. The cabinet's been through them already. So do you want me to tell you
now? Well, it would be good to know.
Okay. So I think that's -- is that the first -- no, that's not the first contested one.
It is the King's Theatre Trust, let me just find it, which is -- oh, Councillor Hugh Mason.
Okay. The reason I've come to talk to you about this is because, as you will see from
the report, it says current representatives, Councillor Mason and Councillor Graham Heaney,
I need to take you back to last year when the cabinet made its recommendations on the
same report and I was actually recommended to be put onto the board. However, the King's
Theatre Trust would not accept my nomination from you. I subsequently follow that I've
been in correspondence with officers as well as with the theatre. The theatre didn't respond
to any of my correspondence. I wrote twice. And I understand from correspondence that
I received from officers that, in fact, at the time that that report was put forward,
which recommended two nominees and which was accepted by the cabinet, apparently the leader
of the council had actually made an agreement with the King's Theatre that they should reduce
the nominations to one. This was confirmed in an email I had from a senior officer who
I wrote to in October, because I was obviously following this up after coming back from leave.
The email which I have says, I understand from the chief executive that this was agreed
with Councillor Vernon-Jackson on 22. I'm afraid that the other officer and I are not
involved in the appointment of trustees or the agreement of the trust allocation. Now,
what concerns me here is that the leader of the council made a decision about nominations
which wasn't communicated to officers and wasn't communicated to democratic services
at the time it was made, and therefore the democratic services officers presented a report
which didn't actually reflect what the situation was. None of us were aware of this, despite
the fact that Councillor Vernon-Jackson was sitting in the room at the time, last June.
He didn't appear to remember that he'd agreed with the King's Theatre Trust to reduce the
nominations from two to one. Also, there was no public record of this and no record of
it actually happening. As I said, I followed this up, and I did question whether in fact
the leader of the council had the right to do that and whether in fact this matter should
have been drawn directly to the cabinet to say there is a recommendation that we reduce
it from two to one, this is the reason why we're going to do that, and therefore the
cabinet could either accept or not accept that recommendation. So it's really a part
of a historical problem, but I think it's also about one proper decision-making, because
I think it was careless not to inform officers and the democratic services that a decision
had been made. Secondly, I don't think it was the right to make that decision on his
own. It was a cabinet decision. It was never brought to cabinet for a decision. It's obviously
reflected in the recommendation here, but we still have no reason as to why that's been
changed. I am aware of the reasons why it's been changed, because the King's Theatre requested
it, because they are in some sort of a dispute with us about the building and whether we
should have representation or not. They wanted to see it reduced. So I wanted to make that
point, because I think it's important to make sure we do make decisions properly, and also
that for some months we were misled about the situation and it caused a good deal of
confusion. And certainly from my perspective, I had no idea about this until three or four
months afterwards when it all emerged as to what had gone on. The King's Theatre, obviously,
if they wish to request lesser nominations, they're perfectly entitled to do that, and
it's perfectly entitled for the cabinet to agree that. But what I'm concerned about is
the lack of transparency and the carelessness with which the decision was made.
Thank you for your adaptation. I don't know whether officers presume. I have to say, that's
news to me. I didn't know either, so I feel like we need to go ahead with the proposal
today, but I think it's a fair question to ask about the procedure around that, whether
the King's Theatre want to stick to their one position, which is what we've got on the
papers in front of us.
Councillor Mason.
As a trustee last year, I was not aware that this decision had been made until well into
the year, and so I was not aware that it had been formally made, and I don't know how this
decision came to be.
For the purpose of today, though, on that, according to the paperwork that we've got,
it's one appointment, so I guess the takeaway from today is to check with the King's Theatre
whether they still want one appointment, and I'm assuming that they do, because that was
the decision that was made, but I can't answer for them or change that decision in this meeting.
Are there any other comments on that? So, what I'll do is assume that all of the uncontested
positions will go through, according to the paperwork, and look at the ones which are
contested, which have been discussed with cabinet. So, the first one is the Aspects
Visual Arts Trust, which is an observer position, and that's Councillor Chris Atwell.
The next one we've discussed was Councillor Hugh Mason for the King's Theatre Trust. The
Lord Mayor of Portsmouth Coronation Homes Board. It will be Councillor Jason Fazacoli, because
he is the Lord Mayor, and it's a Lord Mayor's position. The Newscaster Royal Trust is Councillor
Vernon Jackson. The Southern Coastal Group and Standing Conference on Problems Associated
with the Coastline. It's Councillor Hugh Mason, but Councillor Judith Smythe was also interested
in this, and Councillor Hugh Mason suggested that she would be welcome as a deputy. I don't
know whether, James, whether that's in our gift to do that, but I think it's a generous
offer and I think Councillor Hugh Mason seems to have been on it for a while and thinks
that that will be okay. Do you have any comment about that, Councillor Mason?
Yes, it's not a very formal grouping, and I think that Councillor Judith Smythe would
be welcome at any of their meetings. Thank you. The training stand at South East
Limited is Councillor Leigh Hunt, and the Violence Against Women and Girls Task Group
is Councillor Susie Horton, me. So that's all the contested ones. The other thing probably
worth mentioning is the champions, so the Heritage Champion is now, there was a paper
that was brought to cabinet a couple of years ago which looked at the role of a champion,
and over a period of time, whether that could arguably have become business as usual, which
is often a really good news story. And so over the last few years, the number of champion
roles have depleted, in a way, for that very good reason. So the Heritage Champion, which
the current appointment is Councillor Leigh Hunt, has now been deleted because it's considered
to be absorbed into a relevant portfolio. Similarly with the third sector and City of
Service Champion, that now role is absorbed within a portfolio. And that leaves the LGBTQ+
Young Persons Champion. This is the one where it's open to other people to put their names
forward, and in the process of sorting out these positions, no one actually put their
name forward. So I put my name forward again because, as you might understand, that I wouldn't
want the young people to think that they didn't have a member who was interested in becoming
the champion. But since that point, Councillor Mary Vallalie has requested to be a deputy.
Now whilst we've not really done deputies before, I've absolutely got no problem at
all with sharing what I do with Councillor Vallalie and inviting her along to see what
we do. And the Armed Forces Liaison Champion, which is a requirement, is that it has to
be a cabinet member. So that's Councillor Vernon Jackson with Councillor Tom Coles as
a deputy. That was last year. And then this year, it's Councillor Steve Pitt, Councillor
Vernon Jackson as a deputy, and also with Councillor Tom Coles remaining as a deputy.
And finally, the Women, Children and Domestic Violence Champion last year was Councillor
Charlotte Girarda, and also this year is going to be Councillor Charlotte Girarda. I think
I've covered everything. James, I should have come to you probably to present it all
before I charged in after the ‑‑ is there anything that you want to add about what I
‑‑ have I missed anything out? Thank you. So that's half of my script already
done perfectly, so thank you very much, Deputy Leader. Just to note, there are also some
vacancies, some of which have been longstanding vacancies, but just for completeness, there's
one vacancy on the following to Marsh's Management Committee, two on the Highford Portsmouth
Friendship Committee, one on the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Local Government Association,
one on the Mary Rose Trust, which is a nomination for approval by their board, one on South
East Employers and the West Paulsgrove Scout and Community Association. Also, the small
table at the end of Appendix 1 has been added this year for completeness. It lists company
director appointments that are purely for their information for Cabinet to note. And
when making appointments, can I just draw Cabinet's attention to Appendix 2, which is
Part 4E of the Council's constitution, appointments to outside bodies and organisations political
proportionality protocol. Finally, for those appointed to positions, can I just draw your
attention to the relevant guidance and protocols in Appendices 3 and 4, along with the requirement
to update your register of interest within 28 days, where applicable, in line with the
Council's Code of Conduct? Thank you. Apologies, James. Thank you. Okay, so the recommendation
is that Cabinet agrees the appointments that we've just been through to represent the Council
on those outside organisations set out in Appendix 1 for the 2024/25 municipal year,
and secondly, to agree the member champion positions and appointments for the 2024/25
municipal year. Thank you. Okay, we're not doing Item 5 till the end, so Item 6, continuing
to support residents with the cost of living. I'm assuming it's Mark Sage who's going to
present this report. Thank you. Thanks very much. So Mark Sage, TAC and Poverty Coordinator,
presenting, sorry, can you hear me okay or shall I move closer to the mic? Presenting
report on continuing to support residents with the cost of living. So the report outlines
help for residents with the cost of living, which includes help that's funded by the Household
Support Fund, and it also outlines the position to continue providing support from October
this year, when the current Household Support Fund grant ends. So the report says although
inflation has significantly reduced from the peaks we saw between Autumn '22 and Summer
'23, prices for essential goods and services remain high. There have been some other positive
signs, with the national minimum wage reaching two-thirds of median earnings nationally and
with median earnings in Portsmouth increasing at a faster rate since December, but we know
that residents continue to seek help and advice with the cost of living, with 1,800 calls
to the cost of living helpline and 94,000 views of the online cost of living hub between
April '23 and March '24. So the report outlines how Household Support Fund is being used to
support with the cost of living between April and September this year, which includes information
and advice, helping people to apply for support, money advice and signposting to other specialist
support. And the Household Support Fund is used to provide a range of support again,
including vouchers for children eligible for free school meals distributed via schools.
We've got three different application-based schemes we'll be running during this period.
There's funding to extend the Have Fund Pompey program to support other low-income families
who don't qualify for free school meals. And there's, again, funding for voluntary sector
services that are supporting people in financial hardship, including food banks, community
gardens and pantries and community meals. The current position is that Household Support
Fund ends on the 30th of September this year, so there's no grant funding at this stage
for councils to support residents in financial hardship going into the autumn and winter.
Cabinet decided in February that the council will continue to deliver support with the
cost of living until at least March 2025, but without additional grant, the council
will need to target limited resources to maintain the essential elements of support. So the
outline plan for that is included in the report, but we will continue to develop that over
the coming months, based on our evaluation of current delivery and the ongoing impact
of the cost of living to ensure that our offer meets residents' needs and makes best use
of the resources. Work to support residents in financial hardship or struggling with the
cost of living feeds into the overall council priority to reduce poverty enforcement. So
this report is to provide an update on this element of that work. Thank you.
Thank you so much for that report and all your work. Members, any comments? Councillor
Conlon. Thank you Mark and thank you for everything you do around tackling poverty. As Mark just
said, government grant finishes at the end of September and we're already at the end
of June, which is troubling. So Chair, as the report is an information only report,
can I suggest that we note an action alongside our accepting the report to ask the leader
to write to the new government, requesting that they extend the funding at least until
the end of the financial year to avoid a cliff edge in September, and that they consult with
local government on giving flexibility to use funding over a longer period of time to
enable councils to avoid future cliff edges. We know demand, as Mark just pointed out,
demand for support, the household support fund isn't easing, and though we are doing
what we can to provide ongoing support, the local authority does not have the finance
to plug the enormous gap left if there is no household support fund going forward.
Thank you. I think that's a really good suggestion. I know we've had a lot of discussions about
the frustrations in not having the long-term ability to plan for this sustainability. Any
other comments from Cabinet? No. And as you say, Councillor Atwell, it's a report for
noting, but always a report that's I always find it very interesting. It's always really,
really well thought out, and I think what I'm proud of that this Council has done is
really considered how we've used that money. We've constantly looked at where the need
is in a way greatest and tried to be as creative as possible, and great thanks from the whole
Cabinet to Mark Sage for all the work that he's done on that over the years, so thank
you. So it's a report for noting, and we will hope that the new government actually does
realize the importance of this to local authorities. Thank you. Item 7, are we on? Yes, 7, which
is the response to housing and social care scrutiny review. You presented this, James.
Thank you, Chair, and good afternoon, Cabinet. My name is James Hill, Director of Housing,
Development and Building Services, and I'm joined by Adam Hardwick, Assistant Director
of Building Services. So the report before you contains the officer's response to the
recommendations of the housing and social care scrutiny review of landlords' practice
when dealing with dampened mould. The scrutiny panel reviewed the practice of social housing
landlords, including the City Council, and also private sector landlords, and that panel
was chaired by Councillor Dent. The scrutiny report has already been published, and this
can be found on the City Council's website, and the report before you contains a link
at the end of the report in the background list of documents. Members will recall the
coroner's finding published in November 2022 that the death of Awab Ishak in 2020 was found
to be due to prolonged exposure to mould, and the response of the landlord was heavily
questioned in that case. The scrutiny review, therefore, took place in a timely point. It
was an opportunity for landlords in the city to reflect on their practice, and the actual
review itself took place between July 2023 and February 2024. Section 3 of the report
contains background information and a summary of the evidence that the panel considered.
The scrutiny panel made 10 recommendations to cabinet, and those can be found in appendix
A of the cabinet report. In section 4 of the report, we have noted for context that the
local authority housing service had initiated a review of its practice when dealing with
dampened mould and council-owned properties. That didn't arise because of a specific concern,
but we felt it to be the right thing to do, and a working group was established to coordinate
our response to the government review, and also to check our own practices. We also asked
our internal audit team to audit our practice, and that work culminated in bringing forward
an updated dampened mould policy, which was agreed by the housing cabinet on the 22nd
of February. That's relevant for the report before you, because the dampened mould working
group were then able to absorb the recommendations from the scrutiny panel into the work that
was underway, and also then the scrutiny panel's work influenced the council's housing policy.
In section 4.4, we show how the 10 recommendations can be taken forward. In many cases, the recommendations
can be taken forward by the council's housing service, and also the private sector housing
team. There are recommendations specifically for housing associations, and in section 4.5,
we outline that whilst the panel and cabinet cannot mandate change for housing associations,
we do have good working relationships with housing associations in the city, and we will
use a landlord forum form to share practice to promote the findings of the scrutiny panel.
The recommendations in section 2, therefore, ask you to thank the panel for its work in
this area, which has been influential in the direction of our policy, and in 2.2, that
you note the panel's report, its recommendations, appendix A, and the officer's response as
set out in section 4.4. I'm happy to take any questions.
Cabinet, any questions or comments on this report? Councillor Mason.
4.4.3 refers to the Dampen Mould Working Group. Could Mr. Hill please tell us, A, what is
the makeup of this working group? Does it contain specialists in Dampen Mould? And has
its recommendations been fully implemented? Thank you. I might ask Adam to step in with
some of the detail. The working group is an officer group consisting of members of the
building service, the housing management teams, and our private sector housing teams. It was
designed to aid the review of our own policy and also the recommendations that came from
internal audit. They do have the ability to pull on expertise should they need to. And
they've considered the government's recommendations arising from their own review, so they were
well placed to inform our own practice and policy, as well as discuss those changes with
housing associations in the city as well. All of their work fed into the revised policy
which came through to the housing cabinet decision meeting. And the working group continues,
I should say. It hasn't stood down. It's continuing to take forward both the recommendations
from the scrutiny panel report and other changes that we wish to make.
Thank you very much. Are there any other comments or questions? No. In which case, that leaves
me to thank the panel for its work in undertaking the review and the resulting report. Thanks
for coming along to the meeting today. And the cabinet notes the panel's report and recommendations
as set out in appendix A, together with the officer responses to the recommendations as
set out in 4.4 of this report. Thank you very much.
Chancellor Winnington. Welcome. Thank you. I have no declaration of interest. Have we
had anyone else join the room since we did introductions? I thought so. Sorry, Jane Lemaire,
Head of Economic Development and Skills. Welcome, Jane. Okay, so on to Item 8, which is the
response to the review into education, employment and training opportunities for care experienced
young adults aged 18 to 25. They're on their way. Shall I defer that and go on to Item
9 for when they -- okay. So I'll come on to Item 9, which is also another scrutiny report.
So the response to the Economic Development, Culture and Leisure, Scrutiny panel, brackets,
high streets. Is this you, Jane? Or is this -- joint effort? Excellent. Over to you. Thank
you, Deputy Leader. Yes, so Jane and I come from two separate departments, Economic Development
and Culture and Leisure, and we work together to engage in this scrutiny process. And as
you mentioned, the topic is review of the economic development and regeneration strategy
focusing on the high street direction. So we had a range of witnesses available for
the meetings, both internal and external witnesses, and you'll see from the appendix that the
recommendations cross a range of areas and teams, including economic growth and bid process,
street entertainment and licensing, communications and transport. And also to say that several
of the initiatives highlighted are already underway, such as the bid process and a demand
responsive transport bus service at Port Solent. Thank you. Jane? I'm happy to support and
take questions as we go through. Claire's covered that eloquently. Thank you. Kappner,
are there any questions or comments to make about the report? Councillor Winington. Thank
you and thank you for the report. There was some discussion on this when it came to cabinets
in terms of how scrutiny is done, and I think this is an apposite example of the issues
that we have. So I'm looking at the cabinet agenda for a meeting of the 11th of June 2015,
of which we had a report from the economic development cultural and social scrutiny panel,
which was called revitalising local high streets and secondary shopping areas with response
to the report. At the time I sat on that panel, I was the vice chair, and both myself and
I was vice chair, and the chair of the panel, then Councillor Judy Schwann, came and presented
the report. So what I don't see in this scrutiny at all is any kind of going back and saying,
have we done this before? Has this been looked at before? Is there anything we can learn
from it? Is there anything we can look at? And indeed, the scrutiny management panel,
when I was on scrutiny, when I was in both opposition and then when I first started as
backbencher, the scrutiny management panel would take a look at old scrutiny and actually
do update reports. If that was done, then they would have known that things have happened
in the past, and in fact, a lot of that stuff was done. I was looking through the report
prior to this meeting, and there would have been a lot that we wouldn't have to retread,
retrod and done it. Now, I'm not sure if the chair of the scrutiny panel who presented
this report is here today. Oh, you're here. You are. Excellent. Excellent. But I think
it would have been something that could have been done and indeed to actually come and
present your recommendations. So I think we have to look at this in a better way, and
I think we have to be a bit more cognizant of what's been done in the past. But it does
come down to the scrutiny management panel. The scrutiny management panel has to take
control of scrutiny and has to actually meet and do its job properly, rather than doing
things that are just maybe retreading things that have been done in the past, but also
actually reviewing things that have been done in a systematic way. And what I would like
to say, and I would like to thank the scrutiny panel for actually, well, you're here, but
also the fact that this is a scrutiny panel that's obviously met and done a report that
has taken a lot of evidence and done a lot of good work. Because that hasn't been the
case in the recent past with a lot of our scrutiny panels, and it just has not, we haven't
had that at all. So I'd like to thank Russell for being here today. I'd like to thank Russell
for actually chairing this panel and doing a report that it has some very good elements.
But if we're going to do reports, we do have to have a bit more from the scrutiny management
panel in terms of actually looking at what's been done in the past and building on it,
rather than, I don't know if Russell was aware that the scrutiny was done nine years ago
on this very subject. You can ask a question for clarity, but you
can't have speech. Okay. Which part of the report, only because
the report really came from the fact that local plan was based in 2019 and a lot of
that changed due to COVID. So that was one of the reasons why we really looked at this.
So even if it was done previously, it would have been out of date. So the question is
which part? Thank you for sticking to a question. Sorry.
I think one of the things that we did back 10 years, well, it was 10 years ago when we
started this, was I think particularly about some of the involvement we got with some of
the retailers at the time. And we were particularly looking, I know you were looking at high streets
in a more broad context. We were looking at secondary and tertiary. And I think one of
the things that we particularly did was go after, so for example, one of them was Tangier
Road in Baffins. We also had ones that stick in mind in particular were the Highland Road
bit, so the bit nearest Albert Road, for example. And we actually got some of our people involved
who were actually retailers there. I think the other thing as well was about some of
the work on having groups of, getting retail groups up in those areas where they didn't
exist before. And obviously there's a particular one in there, if you have a look at it, was
specifically around North End as well, because that had been somewhere that then as now had
really struggled in terms of losing retailers, et cetera. So I do agree in terms of that
there are things that would have changed since 2019, and especially since COVID. But I do
think there was things in there that, as I said, it's more a criticism of the scrutiny
management panel and the scrutiny management of what's been done since then, rather than
specifically the EDCL, because really it's the scrutiny management panel who should have
been going, hang on a minute, this was done in the past, have you looked at this, do you
want to do something that's related to it or something that's completely different?
Thank you for that reply. Councillor Candliss.
I would just build on what's said there. As someone who was new to the scrutiny panel
process last year, and sat on two, and in conversations I've had with both other councillors
and with officers around the scrutiny panel, I think there is actually some good work that
could be done to improve the preparation of members for those scrutiny panels, which will
hopefully lead to a better result, and for example, thoughts around direction to previous
reports that have addressed this area as a starting point or as another source of information,
would actually be excellent to do. So I think there is something we should take away from
here about scrutiny panel management and processes more broadly that is wider than for this specific
report, because otherwise I agree with much of what has been said. And I thank the officers
for taking away what was going to be my two brilliant pieces of contribution to the debate
by covering it off before I got there. I'm sure there's more brilliance to come
from you. Very little, I'm afraid, yeah.
Bringing it back to this, I think there's some really good points there to be taken
around about the process and the preparation and support for the scrutiny process, but
if we can just bring our attention back to this particular one. The recommendations are
that the panel is thanked for its work in undertaking the review, and again, thank you
for coming to this meeting. Sorry I couldn't give you lots of ‑‑ deputation next time,
Councillor Simpson, deputation. And the second thing is that cabinet notes
and considers the recommendations together with the officer responses to the recommendations
which are set out in appendix 1 to this report. Thank you, everyone.
We'll now go back to the last one, which is item 8, which is the ‑‑ also scrutiny,
so it's the response to the education, children and young people scrutiny panels, recommendations
regarding a review into education, employment and training opportunities for our care experienced
young adults aged 18 to 25 years. Sam, are you going to ‑‑
Yes, it is. Do you want to introduce yourself and also
Sarah? Yeah, hello there, I'm Sam Bushby, I'm the
deputy director for children and families. And I'm Sarah Daley, I'm the director of children,
families and education. Thank you. So I'm aware you've all had the opportunity
to see the report which is the response, but embedded within that is the full report of
the scrutiny panel. So I'm not going to read through all of that on the basis that everybody's
had the opportunity to read through it. But just to highlight that this panel, we
met on four occasions, the panel, and the focus was on the opportunities for our care
experienced young people in terms of their access to education, employment and training.
And the reason this was chosen in our focus is we know that actually we want to enable
far more of our care experienced young people to be able to access opportunities.
So through those sessions, the panel heard from a number of people, really, as we looked
at, we heard from PAs in terms of the personal advisors that support our care experienced
young people. We heard about the work that they do and through that some of the barriers
for our care experienced young people in terms of why it can be so difficult to access opportunities
or actually if you do access, why it can be even more of a challenge to be able to stay
within those opportunities and make full use of them.
So we heard about those, we heard about the work done by the PAs to support our young
people with that. And we also heard from our young people themselves in terms of what has
helped them, what their hopes are for the future. We had a number of education providers
join and talk about what is available through them, but also what else they could, how they
could be supported. And that was particularly in terms of being trauma informed and how
we could support them in being trauma informed. Because we know that actually understanding
behaviour and potentially some of the behaviours of our young people, looking at those through
a trauma lens gives a totally different eye sometimes in terms of interpreting and understanding
some of the behaviours in front of you.
We heard about the work of our careers and employability hub and what that provides for
our young people, but also what we've had in the course of the scrutiny was also our
employability academy launching and the work that we're doing through that to really create,
engage with people in the city, employers and really create as many opportunities as
we can. And I think that a key part that we make again today is that's not just externally
within the city, but also within Portsmouth City Council itself. What can we do in terms
of making as many opportunities within the city, within all directorates for our care
experience young people, but also with people that we contract with. So actually we are
their parents, we are their corporate parents and there are many, many opportunities for
us to be able to create opportunities across so many different, or that would need so many
different skills in so many different areas. So it really was, we were saying, as the scrutiny
panel was saying, as a council what can we do for our children and young people. So you'll
see the recommendations sit out here. What I would highlight is it was certainly is the
person responsible for the operational practice. It was really good to hear back from the scrutiny
panel that they had no concerns about our approach and our practice. And in fact, they
really could see why our PAs are so valued as well as the work of the hub and in supporting
our young people. It really was what else we can do in terms of really embracing the
academy, creating opportunities across our directorates. And I think those are captured
in the recommendations that obviously we've laid out in the response to say that we very
much embrace. Thank you, Sam, for that explanation around
and highlighting some of the content of the report. I think it is, I mean, you kind of
nicked my key line, which is I think what was really important about this, and I think
the scrutiny panel themselves fed this back, is a real depth of understanding around what
it is to be a corporate parent. So this is not just scrutinizing something that the council
does at arm's length. This is our, these are our children and these are our responsibility.
And some of the stories, of course, that come out about the opportunities that when these
young people are afforded opportunities with the protection and the support and the wraparound
that lots of other young people get, they flourish just like other young people. So
it's, and I think it's fair to say, I can't speak for people, but I did go to the last
scrutiny panel session and I think there was a lot of positive feedback about how much
the panel had learnt as well as how much they scrutinized. So thank you. Are there any other
comments or questions? Councillor Barrett. Thank you for bringing the report. I mentioned
it before when we spoke about it previously, but 2.7 where it's been discussed about the
modes of transport for our young adults to be able to get to their first point, whether
their employment for the first time, but there's always that worry about how they're going
to get there. Of course, as it mentioned, salary, you know, you get, you work and then
you get it. So how are they going to get there? The fact that they've got this offer so that
they can get to their workplace throughout wherever it is in the city and be able to
do that, I think that's a really excellent, excellent thing that we can offer them because
they should have that opportunity to be able to go to work. They want to work and, you
know, we should be able to support them. So to have that offer, I think is really, really
good. So thank you for putting that in. And also where it mentions about, I just want
to say the point in the report talking about the fostering. As someone who's got members
of the family who do foster, they are very, I actually sent them a link to the report
to have a look last week and they looked through it and they've said they loved it because
they feel like that, you know, they're obviously parents and they feel like they're the corporate
parents on top as well. And they said the support is next to none from the city. So
I think hopefully that's good feedback anyway. And the fact that people are looking at these
kind of things, reading them and agreeing and thinking and that we have that level of
support as well, not just for our care leavers and our young adults, but also for the families
and the adults that do across the city who do support these people. So I just hopefully
that's some good feedback. We know what it's like in this council. You never get good feedback.
It's always a bad feedback. So we always take the good feedback when we can. But yes, no,
that's coming from people who have the support from us and you know, we couldn't do it without
them. So thank you. Thank you. Oh, Sam, firstly to say thank you. We do love some positive
feedback, but also just to update in terms of the bus passes. I mean, that is what we've
included that in our care leaver offer. But I know at the time this was written, we were
saying that we were seeking funding, but just to confirm that we have obtained that funding.
So it is very much something that we'll be offering. Thank you. That's great. Thank you
so much. Um, so the recommendation is that panel is thanked for its work in undertaking
the review and that cabinet notes recommendations that the review, which have been set out, I'm
not going to read them all, but we've read the report. So that's, um, that, so thank
you, um, Sam and Sarah for coming along and presenting the report. So item nine now, uh,
no, we've done nine, nine item 10, which is the modern slavery and human trafficking statement.
And Caroline's going to present. If I forget something though, I think Natasha will help
out. So, um, I'm aware that you've all read the report. Just a reminder that the annual
modern slavery statement is a legal requirement for us as a council, but actually it goes
further than that because this forms part of our city vision to be a healthy, happy
city in a city with a thriving economy. Um, we've continued to make progress against our
ambitions to address modern slavery within the last year, working across all relevant
areas of our work as detailed in the report of most note is the progress we've made in
respect of training, which brings the total number of current staff that have completed
modern slavery e-learning course training. Since we started, um, that action to 737,
the report does set out our forward plan for the year ahead. Um, and within this, again,
that is set out in the report for you, but just to note the connection between our work
to address modern slavery on our work to become a council of sanctuary, um, and the refresh
of our strategic community safety assessment, which will be published in the autumn. Also
to highlight other work, which includes our continued efforts to raise awareness of this
issue, to hold our own supply chains to account and the work with police and other partners
to respond and disrupt modern slavery activity wherever, wherever it occurs. There are three
recommendations that this report asks that the cabinet approves. One is that the modern
slavery statement and, um, modern slavery and human trafficking statement is, um, is
signed off by the leader and published on the council's website as is our duty to do.
So the second is that the program of work set out in item 11 of the report is approved.
And the third is that full council be asked to note the decision of the cabinet to approve
and publish the statement. Thank you. Thank you, Caroline. Any comments or questions
or we've got to counsel Mason. I think you narrowly narrowly be here. Okay. Yeah. I wouldn't
have wanted this to pass without comment. Um, happy that they won't do so. Um, because
this is not a minor issue. Um, parliament last year was informed that there are approximately
100,000 people living in this country in conditions of slavery. Uh, anti-slavery international
considers that to be an underestimate and they see it as 130,000 and they think that
is a conservative estimate and it is the highest estimate ever. And this is important to Portsmouth
since we are a port, we are a port through which people can be trafficked, but also because
like many other port cities, they actual slavery, modern slavery does exist in this city. We
can be pretty sure of that. And so I think this is a very important report for this city.
And I am very pleased to note the work for the year ahead, the program of increasing
the awareness, not merely of the existence of modern slavery, which many people have
no real acknowledgement of, but also the awareness of what can be done about it. What, how they
can report it, how can they can report their concerns. The second thing I'm very pleased
to see is, is the working with the Hampshire and Isle of Wight, uh, modern slavery partnership
together with the police, because we're not going to be able to deal with this problem.
Um, this offense to our society unless we have a very good network and they work together
and do this. And thirdly, um, the link with the city of sanctuary is certainly to be welcomed.
Thank you. Councillor Atwell. I feel he might have stolen one of your lines.
Several of them, but it's okay. It's all good. It's all good. Um, uh, Chad, uh, through you,
thanks to Caroline, Natasha, and everybody who has been working on this, um, over the,
uh, the past months. And, um, I was pleased to be in the event you supported with Vista
who do, um, lots of important work in the city. Um, uh, chair item 11 of the report
speaks to the importance of working with partners, partners like Portsmouth city of sanctuary
do such outstanding work with vulnerable migrants and hidden communities in Portsmouth. And
I'd like to place on record are, uh, that we're looking forward to working with Portsmouth
city of sanctuary and others as PCC works towards formal recognition of, uh, as a council
of sanctuary. Um, can I pick your indulgence for one second? I said, you could say no.
Um, can I take this opportunity to also to congratulate aspects Portsmouth, um, on being
awarded gallery in our status, in our status by city of sanctuary UK. Um, so aspects gallery
is now a gallery of sanctuary. Um, and the first visual arts organization in Hampshire
to be awarded this accolade. Um, and I'm also delighted to a few moments ago, been, uh,
appointed, uh, as PCC rep, um, on their, on their trust. So lots of really good work going
on. The council Mason is absolutely right. This is a really important report. Um, and
there are many thousands probably of people who might be considered to be, um, victims
of modern slavery in the city. Thank you. I'm absolutely endorse those, um, comments.
And also just to highlight, I know we talked about this before as a cabinet is about, um,
making this everyone's business. And actually the more these, more this is talked about,
the more, um, people are presented with what modern slavery looks like or could look like,
the more people will have the confidence to, to be able to act on that with, with, um,
with comp yeah, with confidence and, and, um, knowing that they will, they will be supported
by the council or other, other bodies. So absolutely, absolutely right. So thank you
very much for the report. And the recommendations are the cabinet approves modern slavery and
human trafficking statement for the signature of the leader and publication on the council's
website. Um, the program of work set out in item 11 of the report and full council shall
be asked to note the decision of the cabinet to approve and publish the statement. So thank
you very much, Caroline, for, um, the report and thank you colleagues. Okay. Item 11, um,
which is the, um, productivity plan. So Paddy, thank you for waiting so patiently over to
you. Um, so the productivity plan has to be submitted by the 19th of July. It's a government
requirement and as part of that, we do need to make sure we have member approval. Uh,
there was a thought that it might've been, um, showed on the basis of the election, but
DLOC have confirmed that it is still required. Um, it was announced as a requirement in February
and guidance for what had to be included came out in mid April. There was a requirement
that it is short, uh, it says three, four, five pages, uh, and DLOC sent out a range
of questions that they asked authorities to consider when they, um, completed the productivity
plan. And this means that the plan makes reference to lots of other documents that we have as
a approved as a council, such as our corporate plan, our medium term financial strategy and
so forth. Government have said that they will, um, review the plans and future funding may
depend on the analysis of these plans. There are four themes within the plan, uh, transformation
of services to make better use of resources, opportunity to take advantage of advances
in technology and make better use of data to inform decision making and service design,
ways to reduce wasteful spend within systems. And they specifically referenced expenditure
on consultants and discredited staff equality diversion and inclusion programs. If you look
at appendix one, we try to make sure that we're taking the right balance on both of
those elements. Um, and then finally barriers preventing activity that the government can
help to reduce or remove. As part of that, we've referenced the short term funding that
government gives to local authorities. And we specifically mentioned the house or support
fund, which you referenced earlier in that meeting as an example of where that could
be done in a way that could improve services and be more efficient. So we're asking in
terms of recommendations that you, the note, the requirement to produce and submit the
plan that you approve the proposed plan subject to any requested amendments and that you delegate
authority for finalizing and submitting the plan to the chief executive in consultation
with the leader of the council. Thank you. Thank you, Paddy. Any comments or questions?
Council winning 10. Thank you. Uh, thank you, Susie. And, uh, thank you, Patty, for this
uh, reports. Um, well, thank you for doing it, but I'm not thankful for the fact we've
had to do it. Uh, this is one of the most ridiculous things that government has come
out with. Um, well, this, this, this failing seem to be almost well, let's be honest, seem
to be gone. Government has come out with a load of rubbish over the last few years, but
this has to be, this has to take the biscuits. Um, local government is the most efficient
part of governments. It's more efficient than any central government departments. It's more
efficient than any government quango. Um, and for them to come out and say, we have
to justify our productivity is, is quite frankly outrageous. Um, and this is an excellent report
because it really does say what we know, which is we are incredibly pro uh, productive. Um,
and we are, you know, we make sure that we run things as efficiently as we can do alongside
our partners, uh, our other local authorities, uh, who are mostly of similarly done. Um,
because quite frankly, with the amount of cuts that we've had over the last, um, over
the last few years, we have had no choice because if we weren't, we're not productive,
then we would not be able to provide services to our residents. Um, and let's just take
an example of how unproductive, um, central governments is. Uh, so during the pandemic,
of course, some of us were on the cab, uh, cabinet during the pandemic and there was
a, uh, and there was some reporting requirements during the pandemic. Now you would have thought
that when you had to report on certain things that were in a particular area, you would
have to report back to one part of governments, but no, you had to report back to at least
two or exactly the same things. And what did those parts of government do? They didn't
even talk to each other. So they didn't know what you were doing. Um, and that continues
to this day. We have things, does it come from DLUC? Does it come from DHSC? Does it
come from department of education? Who knows? They don't talk to each other. So they just
keep asking for the same things time and time again. And this is absolutely an example of
unproductivity from central governments to demand every local authority. Can you imagine,
can you imagine the administration that this involves? You have to go out to every, uh,
every local authority say you have to come up with a productivity plan. Okay. That takes
administration time. You then, after we've taken on wasted this time doing a productivity
plan, which quite frankly will serve no purpose because this will almost certainly be, uh,
be bins once the new government comes in next week. Um, so that, that happens. And then
what happens? It goes back to, goes back to central government, goes back to Whitehall.
And what do they have to do with it? They have to comb through every single productivity
plan from every single local authority. And then what are they going to do with it? Are
they actually going to do anything with it? Or they just going to tick a box and said,
minister said, we need to do this. So that's what we've done. And if they don't, it's going
to take even more administration to do that. And then they're going to have targets. And
if they, if they did do it for funding, they're going to say, well, you have to keep to this
target and that target. So they'll probably have to employ more people to actually say,
did they meet this target or that target? It is the most load of nonsense I've seen
in my life. So thank you Paddy for the reports. Um, I think it gives a really good, a really
good breakdown of how productive we are as a local authority and quite frankly, how much
more productive that we are from central government. And I know, cause I used to be a civil servant
and I know how unproductive central government is.
I'm taking it and you're not a fan of the process of the process. Um, but I do appreciate
you thanking Paddy for all his work and, uh, and everyone else who's contributed to this
in producing a really good report that which at the very least demonstrates our productivity
and makes us feel better than central government and council at winnington. Any other comments
or questions? No. So the, um, if I go back to this, the recommendations is that we note
the requirement for Portsmouth city council to produce and submit a productivity plan,
approve the proposed plan subject to any requested amendments and delegate the authority for
finalizing and submitting the plan to the chief executive in consultation with the leader.
So thank you very much. Thank you Paddy for coming and presenting it. And we are now going
to go back to item five, which is the adult social care self-assessment for inspection
improvement plan. Here's a plan you like, Councillor Winningsen, over to Andy to present
the report, please. Thank you. Thank you chair. Uh, so the report in front of you, excuse
me, that follows a report we brought to cabinet on the 5th of March of this year, uh, where
we presented, uh, the adult social care self-assessment, which is included at appendix one. Uh, the
recommendation is to ask cabinet to endorse this improvement plan. We've set out the legislative
capacity for inspection under the background section, um, and the guidance that has subsequently
been published around inspections for the care quality commission to assess councils
with adult social services responsibilities for how they deliver on the care act. Moving
through into the second page of the report, uh, we've set out the timeframe for all 153
of those councils to be assessed to be completed by December of 2025 and included some information
about some of the pilots and those that have already been assessed and reported. What we
did with the, uh, once the self-assessment had been complete, we moved those things that
we needed to, um, address into an improvement plan and align that with our business plan
for this financial year rather than have two different plans. We felt one was more straightforward
and could be monitored more effectively. Further on in the report, we've, uh, set out how we've
broken down the activity within the plan and then given an example of how that breaks down
into the focus, a summary of what it means, the development area we're focusing on, what
we're actually going to do, and then the outcomes of that. To try and give that as an exemplar
that this isn't, uh, a lot of words, it is going to achieve an outcome at the end of
it. Uh, we've given, uh, further examples of some of the work streams that we picked
up on since we put the plan into action, uh, first of April this year. Um, and we've also
talked about some gaps in capacity that we're identifying as we work through the priorities
in the plan, uh, and given an example of that. Um, so the recommendations are being made
to be transparent and accountable for the delivery of the improvements as we did with
the self-assessment. We felt it was important that this was in the public domain, uh, to
ensure that cabinet appraised of the plan and aware of what it aims to deliver and to
highlight that if, uh, any additional resource may be needed in the short or long term, we'd
have a conversation, uh, with the section 151 officer and look to mitigation before
seeking further resources. That's a summary of the report for you, but I'd like to take
any questions. Thank you, Andy. Any comments, questions? Councillor Whittington. Thank you,
Susie, and thanks, Andy, for the report, and obviously, um, all the team that has done
this, I know this has been a, um, a really thorough process, um, especially in terms
of, um, the, um, uh, the self-assessments, um, which I think it's, it's worth pointing
out that we, there is no, there was no formal requirement for the self-assessments. We were,
we were told that by, um, by government when they, um, reintroduced, um, inspection, but,
uh, it is, it is obviously best practice and that was also made clear as well. So I think
the fact we've had this time to do that self reflection, I think it's been really, really
helpful. Um, and it gives us something really, I mean, whether inspection was there or not,
um, it gives us things that we can really work on. And obviously when inspection does
come, when we get the call, um, uh, later this year or, or, or next year, um, we will
be in a really good place to be able to move forward. Um, I'm not, I'm not particularly
keen on the fact that inspection has been reintroduced. I think it was, it was, uh, abolished
for good reason. Um, and, uh, again, for, if we're talking about government inefficiency,
um, the fact that they, um, that the amount of money that it was always, that was very
clear that inspection was going to cost the amount of money they gave local authorities
was significantly insufficient to cover those costs. Um, so, uh, so again, I mean, we have
an inefficient government asking efficiency of, of local government. Um, but yeah, uh,
it is, it is something we needed to do. Uh, we've taken a lot of time to do this as well
to, to, to make a really thorough thing. We're not, not, not being something that's been
done, um, uh, being done in a, uh, in a haphazard, short term way, um, engaging with, uh, with,
um, service users as well, which has been really important because that's the only really
way you can really, um, have that self-reflection. Um, and, uh, and as I say, I, I, I wish one
can hope that one day there will be some self-reflection and reflective practice in central governments
and among government ministers before they, uh, before they think up these wild schemes
to, um, make us do stuff that, um, they don't do themselves. So thank you, Andy and all
the team. And, uh, and I think we're in a really good place now for when inspection
does come to us. Thank you, Councillor Wellington. Any other
comments or questions? No, none from me. I think it's a good report and it's been interesting
to see the progress over the last year. So thank you very much to you and your team,
Andy, for all that they're doing and that, um, and the recommendation is to endorse the
improvement plan, which I believe we will. Um, and that I believe brings us to the end
of the meeting. Is that, have I forgotten something? Ah, I need to read out a paragraph.
Beg your pardon. Um, this is related to item four. Again, the appointments to outside organisations
and member champions, and it is regarding the European Cities Twinning Committee. Since
the agenda was published, Councillors Charlotte Giroir and Hannah Brent also wish to be members
of the European Cities Twinning Committee. We have not yet received a nomination from
the Portsmouth Independence Party. Julie done that. So that can be added to the minutes.
And that brings us to the end of this cabinet meeting. Thank you very much, members. And
there are no remain. Oh, there are a few remaining offices and the offices that are remaining.
So thanks for all the reports.
[BLANK_AUDIO]
