Agenda item

To consider a joint report of the Cabinet Member for Communities, Culture & Sport and Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways & Transport Services.

Following the November meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, the report provides further detail on the budget change proposals, taking into consideration the Cabinet response.

The appendix to the report outlines the change proposals being considered by Cabinet to address financial and demand challenges, enable longer term transformation, and ensure the delivery of shared strategic partnership ambitions.

The Scrutiny Committee is requested to consider the report and proposals presented that are relevant to the committee’s remit.

Officer contact: Gill Lawton 0161 474 3686 | gill.lawton@stockport.gov.uk

The Cabinet Member for Communities, Culture & Sport and the Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways & Transport Services submitted a joint report (copies of which had been circulated) providing further detail on the budget change proposals, taking into consideration the Cabinet response.

The appendix to the report outlined the change proposals being considered by Cabinet to address financial and demand challenges, enable longer term transformation, and ensure the delivery of shared strategic partnership ambitions.

The Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways & Transport Services (Councillor Grace Baynham) and the Cabinet Member for Communities, Culture & Sport (Councillor Frankie Singleton) attended the meeting to respond to councillors’ questions.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

Library Services

·         Members requested further detail related to the proposals to standardise staffing hours at libraries. It was noted that some libraries had longer staffed opening hours than others which might result in some libraries losing out on their staffed opening hours and others gaining hours.

·         In response it was stated that the intention of the proposal was to retain the status quo, whilst reducing staffing hours, and that further information would be given at a future meeting of this Committee.

·         It was noted that an extra day of Open+ would affect all libraries equally, losing an additional 52 days of staff time per year, equating to 676 days of library time lost at the 13 libraries which operate Open+ across the borough.

·         It was further noted that libraries in areas of high deprivation such as Brinnington, Reddish, Edgeley and Great Moor had longer staffed opening hours than libraries in areas with lower socio-economic need. Members sought reassurance that libraries in more deprived areas would not lose staffed opening hours, particularly in the light of the Equalities Statement which highlighted the importance of low socio-economic communities having local staffed library hours.

·         It was also noted that High Lane library was an outlier in terms of the number of staffed hours, being much lower than other libraries within the borough.

·         In response it was stated that further details on how the proposals related to library staffing hours were likely to affect library service provision would be provided to a future meeting of this Scrutiny Committee.

·         It was noted that library users were unable to use the full range of services during unstaffed, Open+ hours such as printing and paying fines, and the only option for paying cashless fines was at Stockport Central library.

·         In response it was stated that work was ongoing to enable remote printing and a digital offer which would operate in a non-staffed environment. Details of when these systems were likely to be in place would be provided at a future meeting.

·         It was noted that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) had identified that those with socio-economic needs would be negatively impacted by a reduction in staffed library hours. Families in the most deprived areas of Stockport utilised library services for digital support and family hubs. Members queried whether any alternative approach to cutting staffed library hours had been considered.

·         In response it was stated that different proposals had been considered and that the proposal before the Scrutiny Committee was the best response to ensure that all libraries across the borough remained open. It was also stated that the council would ensure that library staff were well connected in terms of being able to signpost residents and provide additional advice.

·         A number of council libraries had worked with Stockport Homes in order to share costs and create efficiencies. The council was actively seeking further opportunities to work with other organisations to achieve similar economic efficiencies, one example being the shared facilities at Marple leisure centre and library.

·         Members expressed concern about the impact of those proposals upon library staff and asked whether the Council had engaged with unions and what, if any, scope there was for library staff to work flexibly under these proposals.

·         In response it was stated that the intention was to introduce these changes flexibly and that the reduction in staffing hours was likely to come about in an uneven way, as the transition would take place over the course of a year through natural churn.

·         The council had engaged with the workforce and trade unions and it was expected that the proposal to reduce staffing hours could be achieved with no redundancies.

·         One advantage of increasing the number of Open+ hours was that staff would be able to take breaks without closing the library. 

·         It was reported that at Reddish library it was not possible for members of the public to use the toilet facilities during Open+ hours. Members expressed concern about this situation in particular for vulnerable library users, along with potential health and safety risks for disabled toilet users. Officers confirmed that toilet facilities should be accessible during Open+ hours and that this issue would be investigated.

·         Following the pilot in the Heatons to register all library users as Open+ users, it was reported that scheme had been extended to a further six libraries and the intention was to roll this scheme out across the whole borough.

Taxis

·         The process for licencing taxi drivers within Stockport was recognised as robust, with drivers and cars held to high standards. Drivers who were licenced outside of the borough, but operating within it, in some instances, had smaller fees to pay but were subjected to less rigorous regulation. Members queried whether the council was able to counter this situation.

·         In response it was stated that the council was unable to stop taxi drivers from obtaining licences with other local authorities. The Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways & Transport Services had written to the Secretary of State on this matter but the likelihood of any change to the legislation was slim.

·         It was not within the control of the council to ensure that other local authorities were imposing the same standards applied by Stockport Council to its drivers and their vehicles.

·         It was reported that a clean air proposal would be considered by the Economy, Regeneration and Climate Change Scrutiny Committee, part of which involved bringing Stockport in line with other authorities across Greater Manchester in relation to the age of vehicles for existing taxi drivers in order to support the clean air agenda. Part of this proposal would include a grant for a scrappage system which would enable taxi drivers to replace old, polluting vehicles with more modern vehicles. Drivers eligible for that grant would only be those licenced within Greater Manchester and it would, therefore, be a benefit to those taxi drivers licenced with Stockport Council.

·         Concern was expressed that drivers licenced outside of the borough posed a risk to Stockport residents as the standard of regulation at some local authorities was low. Members suggest that Stockport residents should be encouraged to use local taxi firms and Stockport licenced drivers and that the council could do more to promote those taxi firms who employ Stockport registered drivers.

·         Members also commented that private hire drivers were charged more to set down and pick up at Manchester Airport than hackney cab drivers. Officers stated that this matter would be investigated.

Car parking

·         In relation to the proposal to start charging at 15 council car parks which were currently free, members enquired about the consultation process. In response it was stated that once the feasibility work was complete, reports would be submitted to Area Committees to present proposals to local Members and generate a public discussion.

·         It was noted that the Hibbert Lane/Church Lane car park had been listed as being within the Marple North ward but it was, in fact, in Marple South & High Lane ward.

·         Members commented on how these proposals might affect Edgeley residents. There were a number of pay and display carparks in the area which were not well used whilst people parked for free on local roads. Members enquired whether district centre parking would also be reviewed as part of this process.

·         In response it was stated that the introduction of charging at some car parks formed part of the feasibility work and consideration would be given to which car parks were likely to generate income. It was not planned that charging would be introduced at all car parks which were currently free. The approach taken by the council had been to consider public car parking spaces in district centres, taking a logical approach and alleviating inconsistencies. It was noted that there were some differences in Edgeley district centre, taking account of match-day parking.

·         A report would be provided to a future meeting of this Scrutiny Committee on car parking, including on-street parking, how traders pay for parking and how pay and display machines work.

·         Members requested the Cabinet Member for Parks, Highways & Transport Services gave consideration to a request from the residents of St Matthews Terrace to introduce a permit scheme rather than charging all users for parking. 

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.