Agenda item

To consider a report of the Leader of the Council and the Deputy Leader.

At its meeting on 18 August 2015, the Executive presented a report which included a Medium Term Financial Forecast for the period 2016/17 to 2020/21. That report illustrated the level of resources likely to be available in 2016/17 and the resulting budget position. In response to those forecasts the Executive brought forward a set of proposals for 2016/17 with the relevant proposals being considered by scrutiny committees, including the specific detailed business cases, in September 2015.

This report provides an update on each of the proposals relevant to this committee and reflects completed or ongoing consultation with Members, stakeholders and members of the public.

The Scrutiny Committee is invited to consider and comment on the following updated proposals appended to this report:-

(1) Leisure Facilities

(2) Markets, Museums and Cultural Attractions

(3) Highways and Engineering

(4) Public Safety and Protection Services

(5) Public Realm and Solutions SK

(6) Locality Working Project

Following consideration by the Scrutiny Committee, the proposals will proceed to the Executive Meeting on 16 December 2015 where they will be presented for consideration and approval.

The Scrutiny Committee is asked to review the proposals and consultation findings relevant to this Committee and provide comments.

A joint report of the Leader of the Council and the Deputy Leader of the Council was submitted (copies of which had been circulated) providing an update on those Investing in Stockport proposals considered by the Scrutiny Committee in September 2015, following completed or ongoing consultation with Members, stakeholders and the public. The proposals had been brought forward by the Executive to respond to the financial challenges facing the Council and in response to the forecasts provided by the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services.

The accompanying documents to the report provided further detail on the following Investing In Stockport proposals:-

·         Leisure Facilities

·         Markets, Museums and Cultural Attractions

·         Highways and Engineering

·         Public Safety and Protection Services

·         Public Realm and Solutions SK

·         Locality Working Project

The Executive Councillor (Supporting Places) (Councillor Martin Candler) attended the meeting to present the revised proposals and to respond to questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/issues raised in relation to the following proposals or updates:-

(a)  Leisure Facilities

·         Since the last update to the Scrutiny Committee on 24 September 2015, negotiations with Life Leisure on the proposed new arrangements for the Dual Use sites had given rise to a number of new elements for consideration including the opening hours for the facilities, repairs and maintenance and securing the best agreement for the Council in the future.

·         A Member expressed concern about the agreement which had been drawn up transferring the Council’s Leisure Facilities to the Sports Trust in 2002 and the length of time the negotiations on this business case were taking.

·         It was anticipated that the agreement with Hazel Grove High School for the new arrangements for the leisure facilities at the school would shortly be finalised. The negotiations with Cheadle Hulme High School, Priestnall School and Bramhall High School would then take place concurrently, starting early in 2016. The problems which may be encountered at those schools would become apparent from the preliminary meetings. Members requested that the timescale for the negotiations with those schools should be achievable and realistic.

·         With regard to the funding of capital works to dual use facilities, the Council and the operator would agree a ten years’ financial, operating and development plan. However, the funding of capital works would be based only on items which were judged by the Council’s surveyor to be required in the next 1-5 years.

·         The Head of Service undertook to respond to Members on why Priestnall Leisure Centre was now closing earlier on Sundays than it was scheduled to.

·         The Head of Service confirmed that the tendering process for the new leisure facility at Brinnington had commenced and it was anticipated that that the facility would be ready to be opened in Summer 2016. The proposed new leisure facility for Offerton was part of a wider development scheme for the area.

(b)  Markets, Museums and Cultural Attractions

·         It was acknowledged that expectations from Stockport Museums needed to be met otherwise visitor numbers and levels of income generation would reduce. The Head of Service clarified that following the current closure of Bramall Hall due to the refurbishment works as part of the Heritage Lottery Fund project, the staff from the hall were currently working in different roles in the service until the anticipated completion of the Bramall Hall project by 31 March 2017. Staffing reductions would take place after then by deleting temporary roles from the establishment and reducing senior management roles in the Culture and Leisure Service.

·         It was clarified that the £0.4m was an earmarked reserve to safeguard resources for the delivery of this Investing in Stockport project and the Bramall Hall project, and fund staffing costs between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017.

·         Continued accreditation from the Arts Council was important in maintaining the quality of Stockport Museums and in attracting funding.

·         It was clarified that the enhanced role of Friends of Groups/volunteers to maintain quality customer delivery would enable Stockport Museums to have staff in every room in a museum, thereby enhancing the visitor experience. This would be achieved by piloting a volunteering scheme in a similar manner to many other visitor attractions in the country. The volunteers would be suitably trained and supported by full-time members of staff, and they would perform a very different role to volunteers in other services such as parks.

·         The potential option of transferring Museums to a third party operator was not being pursued at this moment in time and longer term management options for the service were being considered regarding increased collaboration between the Museums service and the Library service.

(c)  Highways and Engineering

·         The balance to be struck was for the Council to maintain a strong position in the commissioning and provision of highways and engineering services compared to the other local authorities in Greater Manchester, whilst maintaining local accountability.

·         One of the objectives of a highways shared service would be to enable peaks and troughs in demand to be more easily met by the greater flexibility which the service would offer. It was anticipated that this would lessen the need to employ consultants.

·         A Member expressed concern that other local authorities in the shared service would not look favourably upon schemes in Stockport as the Council currently had a large Highways and Engineering Capital Programme. In addition, he expressed concern that the shared service would become too dominated by Officers.

·         Stockport’s transport needs were different than some of the other local authorities in Greater Manchester where people with overall lower incomes owned fewer cars.

·         The Head of Service confirmed that Council Officers had had a number of comments on the first draft outline business case produced by Transport for Greater Manchester and it was in the process of being significantly amended.

(d) Public Safety and Protection Services

·         A Member expressed concern that one outcome of the proposals would be that an increasing number of local residents would contact Councillors with issues, and that that the scale of the savings was too great to provide an effective service.

·         The move back towards a ‘generalist’ role for staff in the service was being replicated across the country.

·         Concern was expressed that staff’s perceived loss of professional status and specialist roles would affect their career prospects.

·         Staff with specialist knowledge, for example in the area of food safety, would still be encouraged to maintain their skills and share their knowledge across the service.

·         The two dog warden posts within the service would be reviewed separately following an AGMA wide procurement process which it was anticipated would result in a better and cheaper service. Cover for this service would be provided out of normal office hours.

·         The bereavement service was unaffected by the proposals.

(e) Public Realm and Solutions SK

·         A Member expressed concern that it was acknowledged that the proposed reductions would have an impact on the appearance of the public realm across the borough.

·         The Head of Service confirmed that, as a result of the consultation, it was now proposed in the report to the Executive Meeting on 16 December 2015                that the proposal to reduce the frequency and comprehensiveness of the marking of football and cricket pitches would not go ahead. However, there was support from Members of the Scrutiny Committee for the trial to test better quality paint mixes to continue.

·         A Member expressed concern about the consultation being undertaken by the Council and whether in certain cases it was reaching the right people or organisations, as in a number of cases only a small percentage of consultees had responded.

·         Support was expressed for the Council to actively encourage residents and visitors to the borough to take litter home with them.

·         The commitment to a five years’ contract for CCTV for Solutions SK would enable the purchase of digital equipment which would offer an increase in the number of commercial opportunities for Solutions SK.

·         The Council’s policy remained not to allow residents to cut the grass verge outside their property as it was cheaper and more economical for the Council to cut the whole of a grass verge on a road.

(f)  Locality Working Project

·         The Investing in Stockport Project Lead clarified that the Locality Working Project was a work in progress, did not propose any changes to the Council’s structure of Area Committees and was not proposing a ‘one size fits all’ solution to supporting community organisations and engaging communities in public service design, prioritisation and delivery.

RESOLVED – (1) That the report be noted.

(2) That the comments of the Scrutiny Committee in relation to the Investing in Stockport proposals be referred to the Executive for consideration.