Issue - meetings

To consider a report of the Cabinet Member for Health.

The Director of Public Health has published his 24^th Annual Public Health Report and has invited the Cabinet to provide a formal response. The attached document is the Cabinets response to each recommendation. It was collated from information provided by the relevant Heads of Service in liaison with the appropriate Cabinet Member.

A copy of the approved Clinical Commissioning Group response is also attached for information.

Cabinet is invited to receive and approve the response to the Director of Public Health's 24th Annual Report.

Officer contact: Karen Kime, 0161 474 3574, Karen.kime@stockport.gov.uk

The Cabinet Member for Health submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Cabinet to agree its formal response to the recommendations contained in the 24^th Annual Report of the Director of Public Health Report.

Cabinet Members stressed the centrality of public health and prevention to the broader challenges facing the Council.

Cabinet Members highlighted a range of activities related to their portfolios that contributed to the response.

RESOLVED – That the response to the Director of Public Health's 24th Annual Report be received and approval.

To consider a report of the Deputy Chief Executive.

The report sets out the responses of the Council, Stockport Homes and the approved response of Stockport CCG to the 24th Annual Public Health Report. The Council Cabinet is due to consider the response on 12 June 2018.

The Health & Wellbeing Board is asked to:

·         Consider the 24th Annual Public Health Report;  

·         Review the 49 recommendations of this Report which the Cabinet has accepted in its response, including two which are updates to recommendations made in the previous year’s report;

·         Highlight any significant issues or challenges with the proposed response to be fed back to the Cabinet; and

·         Highlight areas of good practice in existing work which can be offered in support of the Cabinet’s response.

Officer contact: Karen Kime, 0161 474 3574, Karen.kime@stockport.gov.uk

(Note: the Chair was of the opinion that this item, although not included on the agenda, should be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 in order that the matter could be considered prior to its consideration by the Cabinet meeting on 12 June 2018.)

A copy of the draft Cabinet response to the 24^th Annual Public Health Report was submitted (copies of which had been circulated) that was due to be considered by the Council’s Cabinet on 12 June 2018. The report also included the approved response of Stockport CCG to the recommendations of the Director of Public Health.

The Director of Public Health welcomed the response and engagement of partners.

The links between the recommendations contained in the report and Stockport Together were stressed, in particular the causes of pollution from unnecessary or duplicated journeys of health professionals that could be reduced by joined-up health records. The availability of integrated, real time information would be cost saving but more importantly improve care given to clients.

RESOLVED – That the 24^th Annual Public Health report be noted and the responses of the Council and Clinical Commissioning Group to it be endorsed.

To consider a report of the Deputy Chief Executive

This report contains a series of recommendations made by the Director to the Council in the 24th Annual Public Health Report is available at: https://www.stockport.gov.uk/public-health/annual-report-of-the-director-of-public-health. The Cabinet has responded to each of the recommendations directed towards the Council, either on its own or in partnership with other agencies with whom it shares a Public Health duty.

Scrutiny Committee is asked to:

·         Consider the 24th Annual Public Health Report;  

·         Review the 49 recommendations of this Report which the Cabinet has accepted in its response, including two which are updates to recommendations made in the previous year’s report;

·         Highlight any significant issues or challenges with the proposed response to be fed back to the Cabinet; and

·         Highlight areas of good practice in existing work which can be offered in support of the Cabinet’s response.

Officer contact: Karen Kime, 0161 474 3574, karen.kime@stockport.gov.uk

The Cabinet Member for Health submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) inviting the Scrutiny Committee to consider the Cabinet’s draft response to the recommendations contained in the Director of Public Health’s 24th Annual Public Health report. The Scrutiny Committee were invited to comment on the response before the Cabinet considered the report.

The Director of Public Health was in attendance to respond to questions.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

·         Clarification was sought on whether it was proposed that everyone prescribed anti-biotics would receive a leaflet (recommendation 7 refers). It was clarified that this would only apply in the case of

Urinary Tract Infections, where there was a particular concerns as evidence indicated that repeated prescribing for persistent infections could exacerbate the condition. It was further commented that anti-biotic resistance was being passed on through agricultural methods.

·         How was it proposed to influence developers to provide more socially useful housing types (recommendation 25)? In response it was acknowledged that developers would build houses they thought would sell best, rather than would meet the needs of the population, but that the Local Plan and Greater Manchester Spatial Framework presented opportunities to steer developers appropriately. Discussions were also ongoing with social landlords to develop housing that were designed in such a way as to not require extensive modification should a resident’s needs change.

·         Was there any progress on identifying a designated traveller site (recommendation 30)? In response the difficulty of identifying and progressing a site was emphasised, given the public anxieties, but that the lack of such a facility placed pressure on the Council in responding to traveller incursions.

·         The suggestion of designing more easily adaptable homes was welcomed (recommendation 33). In response it was stated that this may actually be cheaper for developers, who perhaps were unsure of the marketability of such properties. It was further commented that this recommendation had been included in response to comments made by the Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.