Agenda item

(1) The Scrutiny Committee received ‘bids’ for three Select Committee topics to be completed by March 2017.

Emergency Financial Assistance

(2) Mr Vye presented Emergency Financial Assistance and explained that the emphasis of his proposal was not on the Kent Support and Assistance Service but rather prompted by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation report on the extent and causes of destitution in the UK, which showed that destitution was increasing.  The definition of destitution, as used in the Joseph Rowntree report, was:

If they or their children lacked two or more of these six essentials over the past month because they could not afford them; shelter, food, heating, lighting, clothing and footwear or basic toiletries or their income was so extremely low they were unable to purchase these essentials for themselves.

(3) The report concluded that at a point during 2015, 1.25million people were in a state of destitution.  Destitution had an effect on services provided by KCC; it was a major contributor to domestic violence, poor educational attainment and poor mental health.  Mr Vye cited some of the causes of destitution: lack of affordable housing, lack of support for vulnerable people, poor debt management options, low wages and poor quality/intermittent employment.  Mr Vye was proposing a Select Committee to look at the following:

• The scale and causes of destitution in Kent,
• The nature and extent of other emergency assistance including counselling, to people who find themselves in destitution,
• Whether better co-ordination of this assistance is desirable and achievable,
• And whether KCC can take a lead in this co-ordination

(4) It was not suggested that KCC should become a major provider of financial assistance; however, KCC had a role as a facilitator and a leader and had strong relationships with the voluntary sector.   Mr Vye referred to the December 2014 report to the Adult Social Care and Health Cabinet Committee, which found that there were gaps and overlap in the assistance available. 

(5) Mr Gibbens confirmed that he appreciated the concern expressed by Mr Vye; however the issues raised had been and continued to be given considerable focus.  Supporting vulnerable people was the top priority of the Cabinet Member.  The Cabinet Committee had undertaken work in the area and in addition the Policy and Resources Cabinet Committee had also discussed issues around welfare reform.  There was a strong focus on ensuring that the voluntary sector was properly supported and the Council had a strong record in this.  It was not considered to be the appropriate time to conduct this Select Committee. 

(6) Mr Ireland expressed concerns about ‘mission creep’   away from core business; many of the issues were not the direct responsibility of the County Council as a provider and commissioner of services.  Reservations were expressed about expectations of such a review, which was looking into areas that, in the main, were the responsibility of other agencies.  Mrs Anthony confirmed that there were a range of services in Kent; KCC was working with over 500 organisations in Kent to support vulnerable families.  The scope of the proposed review was enormous and there were concerns over whether the review would deliver what it was hoped to. 

Digital Exclusion

(7) Mr Bird presented the bid for a Select Committee on Digital Exclusion and explained that this proposal was not about the role out of high speed broadband.  It was accepted that in Kent everyone had potential access to digital services but there were difficulties around affordability, lack of understanding, lack of trust/confidence and lack of perceived need.  10% of Kent residents were digitally excluded.  It was considered that those who were digitally excluded were socially and economically disadvantaged.  An example was given of consumer tariffs for gas and electricity; the best tariffs could be found online with prices up to 25% cheaper online.  Another example was given of a long distance rail ticket, which was £200 cheaper online.  Elderly people were being encouraged to live independently and Mr Bird gave an example of the support provided by family members doing online shopping for them.  Referring to primary school children being required to use the internet for their homework, families did not all have internet or a computer in their homes.  It was suggested that these families use the library; however this was not practical for all families.  KCC had completed a thorough review into social mobility in the school system; however this review had not addressed the issue of school children without access to the internet at home.  Education was needed through voluntary organisations and District Councils via a co-ordinated county wide approach to ensure that residents understood the internet, felt confident using it, saw the need to use it and could afford to do so.

(8) Mr Dance responded to Mr Bird’s proposal, some good points had been raised.  In relation to young people with access to superfast broadband, the council had worked hard to ensure that superfast broadband was available in as much of the county as possible.  A lot of work had been done to ensure that internet access was available in the libraries with buddy systems in libraries.  Mr Dance offered a briefing to all members of the County Council to discuss the issues around internet access. 

Mrs Harrison stated that Mr Bird had identified an important subject, over the last 5 years KCC had undertaken a range of initiatives to ensure people were online using digital technologies.  The work undertaken by KCC had been seen as outstanding nationally and all KCC libraries had access to free wifi in addition to the training courses run alongside the volunteer buddying system.  Free computer courses were offered by the adult education centres and courses were also available nationally through a number of national organisations.    There was also a prolific availability of free wifi in Kent.  A number of policy changes were on the horizon, with a UK digital strategy expected later in the year covering the next 5 years.   It was not considered to be the most appropriate time for this Select Committee to undertake its work.  

(9) A Member commented that the proposal was not about the availability of high-speed broadband but about those residents who did not have access to the internet in their own home, the difference between children who had access to a computer versus a child without a computer was widening.  It was understood that 25% of people attending the Citizen’s Advice Bureaux (CAB) for assistance did not have access to the internet. 

(10) Mrs Harrison explained that work was underway focussing on increasing the number of people getting online in libraries as well as a national programme which the Council was part of relating to increasing skills and knowledge to allow people to get online. 

(11) Another Member commented that, in his area, there were many young people who did not have access to the internet and because libraries were time restricted it was not always practical to use computers in libraries.  The officer explained that there were a large number of wifi spots throughout Kent and an increasing number of people were using smart phones and tablets to access the internet.  The Member did not consider that the families he was referring to would have the income to purchase smart phones and tablets so a library was the only option available. 

Bus Transport in Kent and its Public Subsidy

(12) Mr Sweetland presented Bus Transport in Kent and its Public Subsidy on behalf of Mr Brazier who was unable to attend the meeting.  Mr Sweetland summarised the information contained within the Select Committee topic proposal form in the Scrutiny Committee agenda.  Since the local bus service was deregulated 30 years ago it was hoped that increasing competition would improve services and reduce fares.  However, commercial bus operators would only run services which were profitable therefore many communities in Kent would have no services unless they were subsidised by the public transport authority, Kent County Council.  Mr Sweetland stated the proposed terms of reference as set out in the topic review form.     

(13) Mr Balfour supported this select committee, budgets were being constrained and it was essential to look for the best service available in Kent in relation to subsidised buses and bus routes.  Of particular interest was KCC’s support to the community bus sector, which had been extremely successful in Kent.  Mrs Cooper also supported the proposed Select Committee; it would be helpful to increase understanding of the bus market in Kent of which only 3% was subsidised by KCC.

(14) In response to a Member’s question it was confirmed that the Terms of Reference were not final, they would be agreed by the Select Committee and should consider all areas. 

(15) Members then discussed how each Select Committee proposal would benefit Kent and how much influence KCC had in relation to each proposal.  Members also discussed the timing of each proposed review and which was the most appropriate review to undertake at this time. 

(16) The Chairman asked for a show of hands for each Member’s top priority Select Committee Topic.  The Select Committee on Bus Transport in Kent and its Public Subsidy received the majority of votes and would be established with a view to reporting to County Council in March 2017.  A Member asked that the other two select committee proposals be considered post May 2017 when the Select Committee work programme was re-considered.

RESOLVED that the Select Committee on Bus Transport in Kent and its public subsidy be established to report to County Council in March 2017.