Agenda and minutes

The Minutes of the meeting held on 16 April 2007 were agreed as a true record.

(Report by Mr K G Lynes, Cabinet Member for Adult Social Services, and Dr T Robinson, Cabinet Member for Children and Family Services)

(Mr A Bowles and Mr T Maddison were present for this item)

(1)       The Adult Social Services Policy Overview Committee established a Select Committee to look at the issue of Transitional Arrangements to adult life and services for disabled children and young people and children and young people with a learning difficulty, including those who are Looked After.  The review explored the extent to which Kent County Council’s transitional policies and joint working particularly between Social Services, Education, health services and partners are able to meet the needs and expectations of these young people in Kent.

(2)       Mr Lynes said that it was essential to provide the right level of support and resources available to disabled and young people and those who had learning difficulties to ensure they had a smooth a transition as possible to accessing Adult Services. Putting forward proposals aimed at a more seamless transition to adult life and services was one of the specific targets set out in the County Council’s “Towards 2010” document and he proposed that an Informal Member Group should be established to undertake a piece of focussed work around some of the important issues raised by the Select Committee. He proposed the IMG should initially report to Dr Robinson and himself and its findings included as part of the overall report to the County Council in September.

(3)       Mr Bowles said that he supported the comments made by Mr Lynes.  Whilst the Select Committee had kept close to its terms of reference, it was obvious there were issues which could have taken it in a wider direction.  He therefore welcomed the fact that there would be some more detailed work undertaken.  Mr Bowles said one of the things which the Select Committee wanted to see addressed was the issue of ensuring that there was an equitable service across the county in terms of access and delivery.  The Select Committee had looked at best practice in other areas and Mr Bowles commended in particular the work being done in Hampshire which had had produced a transition handbook and multi-agency guide and he hoped something similar could be produced in Kent.  Mr Bowles said that he particularly wanted to see the introduction of transition workers with the specific role working with and co-ordinating support for these young people.  He also supported the concept of peer mentoring and resources being made available to help

facilitate better training.  The overall aim and objective was to do all that was possible to ensure these young people had the best possible chance.

(4)       Mr Maddison said that he was pleased with the outcome of the work of the Select Committee and he too paid thanks to all those who had given it their time and support.  He commended particularly Recommendation 12 which speaks about exploring the potential of establishing a programme whereby  ...  view the full minutes text for item 2.

(Report by Mr Alex King, Deputy Leader and Mr Peter Gilroy, Chief Executive)

(Mr John Wale was present for this item)

(1)       This report provided information on local boards, joint local board pilots and gave an update on the neighbourhood forum pilots currently running in Dover.  The report also detailed developments on the Localism agenda both in Kent and nationally and how member roles and new technology could influence future engagement with the public.

(2)       During the course of discussion, Mr Carter said that there was still some work to do with regard to developing the local agenda and work with colleagues and partners was therefore ongoing.  A significant step forward in this work had however been the signing of the Kent Commitment through which the local authorities in Kent would be working more closely to deliver the local agenda.  Therefore it was important to build on the good start which had been achieved but there was a need to increase the pace of the work of the Informal Member Group in taking this work forward to a conclusion in the autumn.

(3)       In considering the recommendations, Mr Carter proposed and Mr Chard seconded that recommendation (iii) set out in paragraph 23 of the report should be deleted in the interests of allowing greater freedom and flexibility for criteria within which awards are made, as long as they remained intra-vires. This was agreed.

(4)       Cabinet agreed to:-

(i)         accept the annual report for 2006/07 on Local Boards, Joint Local Boards and Neighbourhood Forum pilots;

(ii)        endorse the continuing work of the Informal Member Group “Going Local” in looking at options and principles for the future direction of localism, having regard to the Kent Commitment, the Lyons’ report and the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill, currently on its passage through Parliament; and

(iii)       agreed to co-ordinate the above work carefully with other work on future approaches, including the “Second Kent Agreement”.

(Report by Mr John Simmonds, Cabinet Member for Education and School Improvement and Mr Graham Badman, Director for Children, Families and Education)

(Mr Keith Abbott, Director for Finance and Corporate Services, Children, Families and Education Directorate was present for this item)

(1)       Mr Simmonds said that the DfES consultation paper contained little in the way of information on financial modelling and the impact some of the proposals would have on local authorities such as Kent.  Therefore, at this stage it was difficult to come to a clear view on some of the options which were being put forward.  The DfES had held a conference on the consultation paper and whilst that had provided little in the way of any additional detail, it did provide an indication as to the preferences that the DfES had on some of the options proposed.  Mr Badman said that the remit of schools was much broader than just Education as a consequence of  the Children’s Act and they were now being asked to fund not just education but a range of children’s services. He was also concerned at proposals to make a 5% levy on all schools with reserves regardless of the reasons those reserves were being held for.  Mr Badman said he was concerned at this proposal because he felt it could encourage some schools to spend unwisely rather than see their reserves levied.

(2)       Mr Abbott said that with other authorities in a similar position, the County Council would be meeting shortly with representatives from the DfES and GOSE to discuss the details of the Consultation.  Whilst submissions in respect of the Consultation need to be presented by the end of June, it was likely that the outcome of the Consultation would not be known until November.  There was therefore an ongoing opportunity for the County Council together with other authorities to continue lobbying on the issues raised within the Consultation paper.  Mr Gilroy said the DfES was setting both high specifications and expectations but was not making the resources available in order to meet those.  The proposals set out in the Consultation would not only affect education provision but would have an impact on the County Council’s financial plans as a whole.  Therefore it was essential that the County Council put forward a clear case setting out its concerns.

(3)       Mr Chard said that the proposals needed to be looked at in the round, as they had implications for the Council’s budget as a whole.  He agreed it was important to work with other counties within the South-East who were in a similar position to that of Kent.

(4)       Mr Carter said local authorities such as Kent could no longer be asked to provide increased services on less money and therefore the County Council should join with other authorities within the South-East to develop a concerted and constructive campaign in relation to the proposals set out in the Consultation paper.  He therefore proposed, and it was agreed that the County  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

(Report by Mr Graham Gibbens, Cabinet Member for Public Health)

(Mr Mark Lemon was present for this item)

(1)       Mr Gibbens said that the Consultation document had been circulated to key stakeholder and partners for comment and consideration prior to formal adoption by PCT Boards and County Council.  It was crucial that all KCC directorates, NHS colleagues and District Councils were involved in developing the final iteration of this document so that it could be taken to the wider public as the foundation of a public consultation on the various elements of public health provision in Kent and the priorities for action.  He said the six outcomes detailed in Section 18 of the Strategy, presented some challenging statistics which some people may feel uncomfortable about.  However, those outcomes put clearly into context the tasks and issues which faced public health.  In developing the strategy it was important that the County Council should not be seen as trying to impose a “nanny state” but as developing with its partners the strategies and processes which would enable people to make informed choices and live a healthier life.  The strategy would also form the basis for further discussions about how public health in the county needed to develop and in particular, how public health priorities should be reflected in the next round of strategic plans of both the County Council (for example, as part of Local Area Agreement 2) and the NHS.  Further consultation and development of the document was ongoing and this would lead to it forming the basis for discussion on health issues at the special meeting of the County Council taking place in July.

(2)       Meridan Peachey said that the report identified a number of key issues and action areas on which there needed to be more focus.  These included issues around smoking, childhood obesity and teenage pregnancy rates.  She said the document recognised and detailed the scope and scale of public health activity across the county and it would need to reflect and take on board  the views received during the consultation period before being finalised.

(3)       Mr Hill said that the report focused to a number of important issues but that the statistics relating to health and inequalities needed careful and in depth analysis.  Mr Ferrin said that it would be wrong to think that some of the health and inequality issues identified in the report were a district issue as they were in fact more at ward and sub-ward level.  What he was more concerned about was how outcomes would be achieved and there needed to be more discussion about that.  Mr Lynes said that he saw the County Council’s role in these matters as being to highlight issues and bring about changes in lifestyles so that people could make more nformed choices.  He said that innovations such as Kent TV could be used as part of bringing that message to Kent’s residents.

(4)       Mr Gilroy said that he agreed that statistics can be misleading and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

(Report by Mr Peter Gilroy, Chief Executive)

This report provided a summary of outcomes and progress on matters arising from the meeting of the Cabinet Scrutiny Committee held on 25 April 2007.  The report also set out the work programme for Select Committee Topic Review as agreed by the Policy Overview Co-ordinating Committee and provided an update on the current status of each Topic Review.