Minutes:
(1) The Leader stated his intention to update the Council on the potential crisis in the future delivery of social care, particularly in relation to the spending review announcement on 25 November 2015. He also intended to refer to the asylum issue, progress in moving towards a commissioning authority, the approval of the new Sevenoaks grammar school annex and English devolution.
(2) In relation to social care funding Mr Carter referred to the efforts of the Cabinet Member, the County Council Network and the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services in pressing the essential need for an additional £2 billion to take up the cost of the increased demand and the impact of the living wage. He stated that he was optimistic that the need for adequate funding was high up the risk register of the government and the treasury.
(3) Mr Carter referred to the asylum issue and stated that the number of young people who were the responsibility of Kent was approaching 1400, which included those over 18, and the additional cost was nearing £8m. He expressed his gratitude to Mr Clarke, MP, Chairman of the Cabinet Sub-Committee on refugee and asylum issues, which was working towards identifying the additional funding not only for Kent but also to encourage other Local Authorities to participate in a dispersal system. There had been a meeting with civil servants who had validated Kent’s additional costs of £7.5m to £8m. He anticipated an announcement shortly on the dispersal system and a related funding package. There was general acceptance that the current situation, both in relation to unaccompanied asylum seeking children, and children placed in Kent by other local authorities, was totally untenable and acknowledged its potential to interrupt the support to Kent’s own indigenous young people.
(4) Mr Carter made reference to the endorsement by the Secretary of State for Education of the expansion of the Weald of Kent Grammar School, with an annex in Sevenoaks He expressed his thanks to the Headteacher of the Weald of Kent Grammar School and her Governors for the work that they had put into the detailed submission and acknowledged the efforts of parents in Sevenoaks.
(5) Regarding Commissioning, Mr Carter emphasised the importance of making sure that the £700m to £800m worth of public money spent every year in the provision of services was used to deliver best value, good quality services from providers which supported the strategic aims of this authority. He referred to the importance of the role of Members in having an over-sight of the parts of the commissioning process and service delivery. He confirmed that the Commissioning Advisory Board would continue, although it might have a slight change of direction. He and the Chairmen of the Cabinet Committees would be meeting to produce options which would be taken to a future meeting of the County Council.
(6) Mr Carter then referred to English devolution, with the removal of the rate support grant and the repatriation of commercial rates to local government, there was a move away from a bespoke devolution with a directly elected mayor. There was the opportunity to have responsibility around the extra £11 billion worth of public money, which affected and supported the residents of Kent. There was now by early spring the potential to submit an ambitious devolution proposal which would ask for significant freedoms and flexibilities in the way that money was applied. Also with much greater reach and influence in shaping how the rest of public services were delivered across this county. He hoped that this would not only be a Kent County Council proposal but one with the 12 boroughs/districts, possibly Medway and of course with the cooperation and help and support of public sector partners.
(7) Mr Birkby, the Deputy Leader of the UKIP Group (addressing the meeting on behalf of the Leader of the Opposition), stated that Mr Latchford had attended the Budget press launch and has said that it was a good PR exercise but was dependant upon the government grant settlement. He referred to the Budget consultation and expressed the view that the questionnaire had too many leading questions, and in some cases was not comparing like with like. He acknowledged the financial difficulties around the funding for adult social care.
(8) Mr Birkby expressed the view that devolution in England was the most effective way of creating jobs, strengthening healthy communities, building homes and having the ability to protect the vulnerable. He emphasised that there should not be a one size fits all solution and that a fair allocation of funding should follow the devolution of powers, the detail would need to be looked at very carefully.
(9) Mr Birkby welcomed the Sevenoaks grammar school annex. He stated that support for grammar schools was a UKIP manifesto commitment and he congratulated Cabinet Members and officers for their work to achieve this result.
(10) Mr Birkby referred to the Commissioning Advisory Board, and stated that he had gained a lot of knowledge from being a member of the Select Committee on Commissioning. He welcomed the Leader’s decision to retain the Board, which enabled members to be involved in this area of the County Council’s business.
(11) Mr Cowan, Leader of the Labour Group, referred to the current budget situation and the promises made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in 2010 and the difficult financial pressures on the County Council. He welcomed the statement made by Mr Simmonds at the launch of the budget consultation that KCC had reached the stage where difficult decisions would have to be considered regarding the potential reduction, restriction of access and the cessation of some front line services. He referred to the 2015/16 budget review presented to Cabinet which showed an underlying over-spend of £12.958 million, which illustrated the challenge of reaching a balanced budget this year. He mentioned the awaited outcome of the Comprehensive Spending Review which was due on 25 November and the subsequent provisional settlement. He stated that his Group would keep uppermost in their minds how it affected those of middle and lower incomes.
(12) Mr Cowan expressed disappointment that the government did not welcome Kent’s cross party call to reform the South-East Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and asked the Leader a series of questions relating to this situation.
(13) Mr Cowan referred to the Commissioning Advisory Board and stated that, as a member of the Select Committee on Commissioning, he was pleased that it was going to continue its work. He mentioned his groups stance on making sure that the County Council retained control of a minimum of 51% of the services commissioned out. He stated that the information that Members had been given had been very much valued and they had learned a lot about the role of commissioning authorities.
(14) In relation to grammar schools, Mr Cowan questioned why the Weald of Kent annexe was being provided in Sevenoaks and not on the Weald of Kent site.
(15) Mrs Dean, Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, referred to the social care budget, the cuts to the welfare benefits system and the negative impact that these would have on the vulnerable.
(16) In relation to asylum she agreed with the Leader that a national dispersal system had to be put in place. She referred to what the breakdown of the 20,000 refugees would mean for each district, for example in Tonbridge and Malling it would mean 8 per year, and for Kent it would mean 400 over the five year period. This gave a more local context to inform a sensible debate.
(17) In terms of devolution, Mrs Dean referred to government statements on intervention to determine fracking applications centrally in certain circumstances, the suggestion that the regional growth fund may be withdrawn, the possibility of government establishing a national infrastructure framework and consideration of the merging of 89 local authority pension funds to ensure their investment in infrastructure.
(18) Regarding the budget, Mrs Dean expressed the view that what had happened recently in terms of commissioning had convinced her that the County Council needed to be looking at smaller packages of contracts, in order to increase the number of potential bidders.
(19) Mr Whybrow, Leader of the Independents Group, stated that he was very pleased that the Commissioning Advisory Board would be continuing. The work done by Members of that Board had been exceptional. He expressed the view that the County Council was getting better at commissioning and he hoped that staff could now proceed to a period of calm following the decision to keep the back office in house.
(20) Referring to Mr Carter’s update on devolution, Mr Whybrow stated that he was cynical particularly in relation to Councils retaining business rate income, based on the introduction of the living wage combined with cutting working tax credits. Mr Whybrow also referred to the scope for inequality within the devolution agenda particularly in relation to business rates. The Local Government Chronicle had estimated that the south east needed to retain 62% of its business rates to be self-sufficient but the comparable figure for the north east was 131%.
(21) In relation to the budget, Mr Whybrow referred to the Spending Review and Autumn Statement announcement due on 25 November 2015 and Kent’s net projected over-spend of £14.6m which demonstrated the struggle that the County Council was having to cope within its current budget.
(22) In replying to the other Leaders comments, Mr Carter referred to the grammar school issue and expressed the intention to seek the establishment of a Select Committee to look at increasing social mobility into grammar schools to be chaired by Mrs Whittle. He referred to the major role that primary schools should play in making sure that young people with the potential for a grammar school education, irrespective of class or background, got the support that they needed to go to a school that matched their academic ability. He hoped that the opposition groups would take part in this piece of work.
(23) Regarding the budget consultation, he stated that it was still not known whether Kent would be funded for the additionality of the living wage and the pressures in social care. The spending review would either be a disappointment or an opportunity to address those massive challenges. If funding was not made available then some unpleasant decisions would need to be made in the diminishing of services currently enjoyed by Kent residents. The percentage of local government budgets being spent on children’s services and adult social care was becoming an increasingly large proportion of the totality of local government budgets. He hoped that the spending review would address these concerns.
(24) In relation to devolution, he stated that Mr Cowan’s questions about a LEP devolving to Kent and Medway out of the South East LEP was appropriate to the devolution debate. There had not been a formal explanation as to why the break-up of the South East LEP was not going ahead. However, there was now a real federation where Kent and Medway could arrive at their own priorities and decisions for the vast amount of funding streams that flow through the LEP.
(25) Mr Carter mentioned Mr Cowan’s reference to the savings that this authority had delivered over the past 5 years. Mr Carter stated that although the challenges ahead would increase he hoped that there would be some redress for those growing issues in social care budgets across the county.
(26) In response to a point of clarification from Mrs Dean relating to the reinstatement of free school transport to grammar schools, Mr Carter stated that he believed that the withdrawal of free school transport to grammar schools had been the right decision due to equity and affordability issues, and put £8m into the universal young people’s travel pass.
(27) The County Council noted the Leader’s oral report.