Agenda item

To consider a joint report of the Cabinet Members for Adult Social Care and for Health.

The Cabinet have been preparing its medium term strategy in response to its medium term financial plan. The latest update was presented in October. This frames the choices the Council will make about its budget both next year and in future years aligned to five key themes:

·           Getting the most out of our spending

·           Improving Customer Experience

·           Making sure we have the right property in the right places

·           Sharing Services with other organisations

·           An organisation fit for the future.

This latest update is presented to scrutiny for consideration and is comprised of:

·           An overview report summarising the strategy and budget choices;

·           Appendix for each theme which outlines the strategic direction and ambition for each theme as well as a suite of proposals for 2019/20.

The Scrutiny Committee is invited to:-

·           comment upon the strategic direction of travel outlined in the overall report and across the five themes; and

·           comment on the report and the proposals presented within the report relevant to the remit of the Scrutiny Committee

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

The Cabinet Members for Adult Social Care and for Health submitted a report of the Cabinet (copies of which had been circulated) seeking the views of the Scrutiny Committee in respect to the strategic direction of travel outlined in the overall report and across the five themes and to comment specifically on the proposals presented in the report relevant to the remit of the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

·           The introduction of the five broad themes for the budget was welcomed.

·           Concerns were expressed about the proposals in respect of the Stockport Local Assistance Scheme. It was commented that the approach in Stockport had been innovative and targeted support where it was needed. Assurance was sought that vulnerable residents would continue to have access to financial support between presenting to services and receiving benefits. In response it was stated that the total projected saving would be £486,000 and that as part of the strategic commissioning proposals work had begun on a review of support and possible alternative funding streams. Commitment was given to providing further detail on the proposals to the next meeting. Members welcomed efforts to mitigate the impact of these changes be restated their concern about the significant impact removal of the scheme could have on the wellbeing of residents and ultimately lead to greater costs elsewhere in the Council.

·           Concerned were expressed that reducing Local Transport provision would impact on respite options for carers. Others commented that previous attempts to reduce budgets in this area had proven unsuccessful. It was commented that in so far as was possible, transport provision should move away from bespoke solutions to group or communal options as this had a social benefit for the users. Greater priority needed to be given to transport training.

·           Reservations were expressed that increasing the offer of online facilities was hampered by the limitations of the Council’s current website and comment was made that allowance needed to be made for people who were not able to use digital communications. Other members stressed the importance of facilitating those who could and wanted to access services digitally.

·           In relation to reduced investments in the public realm, it was commented that reductions in service levels must not lead to public health problems and greater costs, such as increased flooding because of less gulley cleansing. Enabling community groups to maintain or develop public open spaces should also be encouraged.

·           Concern was expressed about the scope for using procurement to build community wealth given the role of STAR and the Council’s current contract procedure rules.

·           The appropriateness of reducing spend in schools by £1.1m in view of the increasing birth rates and demand on school places was questioned.

·           Concern was expressed that ‘services at a premium’ would lead to a second class service for those who could not pay.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.