Agenda item

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

The Scrutiny Committee will be invited to consider and comment on the revised business cases for the following Investing in Stockport proposals:-

·         Information, Advice & Guidance

·         Health & Social Care (‘Plan D’)

Officer contact: Holly Rae; 0161 474 3014; holly.rae@stockport.gov.uk

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 December 2015, following completed 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:-

·                   Health & Social Care (including the integration of health and social care, the redesign of the mental health and support work service, and the remodelling of the Stockport Learning Disability Services)

·                   Information Advice and Guidance

The Executive Councillor (Independence & Wellbeing) (Councillor John Pantall), the Director and Deputy Director of Public Health and representatives of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services and Service Director (Adult Social Care) 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:-

Information, Advice & Guidance

·         Library usage in Priority Areas was traditionally lower than other parts of the borough. Further consideration should be given to providing promotional activities in the Town Centre or other location to capture those who might not use libraries.

·         It was important to keep the use of technical language to a minimum so as to allow access for those with lower literacy levels or confidence.

·         Queries were raised about the ability of residents to keep or print information or advice provided, either digitally or from the face-to-face activity. In response it was stated that through the procurement of ‘Better Off’ software, residents would be able to store information they had previously accessed within the system, to print off where needed. The Council had already reduced the amount of information it provided in printed formats in any case.

·         In relation to delays experienced by those seeking advice, it was commented that the Contact Centre had been able to address this demand through signposting to ensure that those with the greatest need were able to access face-to-face advice services.

Health & Social Care Proposals (‘Plan D’)

·         Concerns were expressed that many of the milestones in the Business Case were referred to as ‘under development’ despite being only four weeks from implementation.

·         In particular, concerns were expressed about the deliverability of proposals in relation to out-of-borough learning disability placements. In response it was acknowledged that returning placements to the borough may prove challenging, but that this would be done incrementally to minimise disruption. It was also commented that because of the significant costs of these placements even a low number of ‘returns’ could realise significant savings.

·         Councillors expressed concern and disappointment about the unanticipated reductions to the Public Health grant announced by the Government and the impact this might have on the ability of local health and social care partners to deliver their ambitious transformation programme. In response, it was stated that the flexibilities being developed by the expanded S75 Pooling arrangements, through Stockport Together and working across Greater Manchester, would allow opportunities to minimise the impact. Nevertheless, the potential negative impact was acknowledged.

·         Representatives of Healthwatch Stockport expressed concerns about the difficulties in responding to the consultation given the rapidly changing proposals. Councillors echoed these concerns.

·         Confirmation of the accuracy of the figures set out in the Integration Health & Social Care Section 6 ‘Investment Profile (2016/17 and beyond)’ Business Case. An undertaking was given to provide a written response.

·         Confirmation was sought on whether the Greater Manchester Health and Social Care Locality Plan had been considered by the Scrutiny Committee in October 2015, as stated in paragraph 3.2 of the covering report. In response it was stated that the matter had not been considered by the Scrutiny Committee.

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.

(3) That the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services be requested to provide confirmation of the accuracy of the figures set out in the Integration Health & Social Care Section 6 ‘Investment Profile (2016/17 and beyond)’ Business Case.