Agenda and minutes

Cllr Spencer moved, and Cllr Edgeller seconded, and it was:

RESOLVED – That Cllr Paul Snape be elected Chairman of the County Council for the ensuing year.

The following Members declared an interest in accordance with Standing Order 16.5:-

RESOLVED – That the minutes of the meeting of the County Council held on 17 March 2022 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

Cllr Edgeller moved, and Cllr Wileman seconded, and it was:-

RESOLVED – That Cllr Phil Hewitt be appointed Vice-Chairman of the County Council for the ensuing year.

Nexxus LFT Testing Service

The Chairman informed the Council that, since the start of the pandemic, Local Authorities and their partners had played an extraordinary role in supporting the COVID-19 pandemic response.  Nexxus Trading Services, on behalf of Staffordshire County Council, created its own Community Testing Team to deliver asymptomatic testing to the general population, whilst adapting at pace, throughout, making it possible to test disproportionately impacted and underserved members of Staffordshire’s communities.

The service requirements continually varied, in line with changing guidance and demand. The community testing team grew week on week, peaking at approximately 180 staff members during the height of the pandemic. The teams on the ground grew with the project. Agile and willing to work in uncertain times to get the job done. Initially, the community teams started with supporting the education sector, delivering testing and training within secondary schools, whilst creating and developing venue-based testing teams across the county, in carefully considered locations to reach as many residents as possible.

As the project evolved, the teams were on the ground, delivering door to door, mobile testing using 4X4's and trailers, right through to supporting the PCR process and deliveries to where and when the tests were required the most, to the most vulnerable.

The commitment, resilience and support shown by the Community Testing Team had been fantastic, especially during periods of high demand. On behalf of the Council, the Chairman expressed thanks to those involved for their commitment and support throughout the pandemic and wished them well in their new ventures.

In accordance with the County Councils’ petitions scheme, to consider the petition seeking a 20MPH Speed Limit in Leek Town Centre

Members were informed that under the Council’s Petition Scheme any petition that exceeded 5,000 valid signatures automatically triggered a debate at the next available Council meeting. 

A petition had been received entitled: “20 MPH Speed Limit in Leek Town Centre”.  The petition consisted of a paper petition with a total number of valid signatures of 6,640.

Mr Roger Warrilow, on behalf of the petitioners, outlined the reasons for the petition including the following:

·       The County Council’s removal of a roundabout in the town centre had given rise to safety issues.

·       Zebra crossings in the town centre were not located in the right places.

·       Funding available under section 106 agreements for improvements to the highway network in the town centre has not been utilised.

·       Rat-running has led to additional road safety issues.

·       A reduction in the speed limit in the town centre would reduce pollution levels.

·       A 20 MPH speed limit would save lives.

In response to the petition, Cllr David Williams indicated that he could not support the request for the 20 MPH speed limit for following reasons:

·       The County Council took road safety issues very seriously.

·       Staffordshire had one of the safest highway networks in the Country and targeted its resources at road safety interventions which had the greatest impact.

·       The Council worked closely with local communities on road safety issues including community speedwatch.

·       The use of 20 MPH speed limits was only advocated outside of schools.

·       20 MPH zones usually required additional traffic calming measures or repeated signing.

·       A recent Department for Transport study has highlighted that 20 MPH speed limits had no impact on road safety and, on average, only resulted in a 0.7% reduction in a drivers’ speeds.

Cllr Charlotte Atkins spoke in support of the petition and indicated that one in three towns in the UK already had, or were planning to implement, 20 MPH zones in areas with high pedestrian traffic.  She added that the 2013 Department for Transport Circular stated that, where there was support from local communities, highway authorities should consider the implementation of 20 MPH speed limits; and that Mr Warrilow had clearly shown that there was widespread community support for such proposals this in Leek.  Cllr Atkins also indicated that lower traffic speed would encourage more walking and cycling and would also reduce pollution; and that most 20 MPH zones were self-enforcing and would not require additional enforcement by the Police.

Cllrs Northcott, Parry, and Heath indicated that they could not support the petition for the reasons outlined by Cllr David Williams.  Cllr Smith also spoke about the need to remove vehicles from town centres.

Cllr David Williams thanked Members for their comments and reiterated the need for local members to work with their community highway teams on local highway issues. 

Following a vote, it was:

RESOLVED -That the petition be not supported.

The Leader of the Council presented a Statement outlining his recent work since the previous meeting of the Council.

Highways and Transport Capital Programme 2022/23 and Staffordshire Highway Infrastructure Asset Management Plan

(Paragraphs 1 and 9 of the Statement)

In response to questions from Cllr Pardesi and Cllr Hussain concerning the use of reserves to support highway maintenance activities, Cllr Parry stated the monies to which they referred were from a “carry forward” rather than from the Council’s reserves. 

Cllr Hussain also spoke about the need to lobby the Staffordshire MPs to secure more financial support for highway maintenance in the County.

Cllr Smith referred to the high cost of minor highway works such as re-locating a bus stop.

Cllr David Williams referred to the Council’s investment in highways and added that the Authority regularly lobbied the Staffordshire MPs with a view to securing additional funding for the County’s roads.  He also referred to inflationary pressures on the budget such as the increases in the cost of bitumen; and changes to the ways of working to bring about increased efficiency.

Cllr Alan White also referred Members to the Highways Transformation Programme and how this was already bringing tangible benefits.

Economic Strategy and Rural Economic Strategy - Draft for Consultation

(Paragraphs 2 and 8 of the Statement)

In response to a question from Cllr Charlotte Atkins concerning how the Council was ensuring that, in the short-term, the Covid pandemic did not have an adverse impact on young people’s learning, Cllr Price indicated that he shared Cllr Atkins’ concerns about the impact of the Pandemic and added that schools were working hard to ensure that young people had the skills needed by business and that, for those pupils who had missed education, appropriate support was provided to enable them to “catch-up” in key subject areas.

With regard to the Rural Strategy, Cllr Winnington spoke about the importance of the Council’s Digital Connectivity Strategy which included the vision for the county to achieve 100% gigabit connectivity access by 2030; and also the need for more housing for local people in rural areas.

Cllr Philip Atkins referred to the importance of the two strategies and also spoke about the rising cost of food production.

Cllr Philip White expressed his thanks to Members for their support for the two strategies and added that it was important that the Council worked with partners to secure better paid/more high skilled jobs, encourage start-up businesses and to regenerate town centres. He also encouraged people/businesses to take part in the consultation on the two strategies.

Cllr Alan White high-lighted some of the work the Council was doing to attract investment into the County including its attendance at the recent MIPIM real estate event in Leeds where the Council Officers, together with the Leader of the Council, had worked hard to promote Staffordshire.

Agreement for Mental Health Act (Section 117) Aftercare needs

(Paragraph 3 of the Statement)

Cllr Edgeller, Cllr Loughborough-Rudd, Cllr Northcott and Cllr Deaville expressed their support for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

Members were informed that the County Council was required to establish and maintain an Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP) of between three and five members to provide advice and recommendations to the Council on its Members’ Allowances Scheme. The Panel met each year to consider the recommendations to be made to the Council in respect of the level and nature of the forthcoming year’s allowances. 

At the County Council meeting held on 22 July 2021, it was agreed “That, if required, the Audit and Standards Committee be requested to carry out a recruitment exercise for IRP members in 2022”. As of 1 April 2022, there were two members on the Panel and therefore a recruitment exercise was necessary.  This process had recently been completed and the Special Panel of the Audit and Standards Committee recommended that Ms Christina Robotham, Mr Eddie Barnett and Mr Adrian Bowen be appointed to the Independent Remuneration Panel for a period of four years ending 31 March 2026.

Members were also informed that the Council, at its meeting on 10 February 2022, agreed to instigate the recruitment process for the appointment of a Standards Independent Person(s) as required under the Localism Act 2011 and as part of the County Councils Procedures for dealing with complaints against elected members. The recruitment process involved the same Special Panel of the Audit and Standards Committee as referred to above.

Of four expressions of interest received, two were considered suitable for interview. One of those applicants was Mr Eddie Barnett who had a background in Policing and conflict resolution. Mr Barnett had already been interviewed by the Panel in respect of his proposed appointment to the IRP and, therefore, Members views on his appointment as a Standards IP were sought without a further formal interview. Panel members gave their unanimous support.

The second suitable applicant was Mrs Sue Charles who had a background in Pharmacy/NHS. She was a long time serving, much respected voluntary member of the County Councils School Admission Appeal Panels. In view of the high regard in which Mrs Charles was held the Special Panel members were consulted on the proposal to appoint her as a Standards IP without interview.  Again, Panel members gave their unanimous support.

The Standards IP appointments were for a four-year period. The appointment of Mr Barnett and Mrs Charles would give the County Council a strong pool of four Standards IPs with contrasting backgrounds and skills (Education, HR, Policing and NHS/Public Sector).

Cllr Trowbridge extended her thanks to Members of the Special Panel in respect of the work they had undertaken to select candidates and make recommendations on the appointment of Standards Independent Persons and to the IRP.

RESOLVED – (a) That the recommendation of the Special Panel of the Audit and Standards Committee to appoint Ms Christina Robotham, Mr Eddie Barnett and Mr Adrian Bowen to the Independent Remuneration Panel for a period of four years ending 31 March 2026 be approved.

(b) That the Council’s thanks be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

Report of the Leader of the Council

The Council were informed that, in accordance with the Access to Information Rules contained within the County Council’s Constitution, the Leader of the Council was required to submit reports to the Council detailing those key decisions taken by the Cabinet where it had not been possible to give the requisite 28 days public notice of the intention to take such a decision and that, accordingly, a “General Exception” Notice had been published. The report should include the number of decisions so taken and a summary of the matters in respect of which those decisions were taken.

Similarly, where a decision being taken by or on behalf of the Cabinet was urgent and any delay likely to be caused by the call-in process would seriously prejudice the Council’s or the public’s interests or the interests of any person(s) to whom the decision relates, then the Leader of the Council may seek the approval of the Chairman of the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee to that decision being exempt from call-in; (this is referred to in the Access to Information Rules as Special Urgency provisions).  A report on the use of this procedure must also be submitted to Council.

The Council were informed of the details of the use of the “General Exception” and “Special Urgency” provisions as follows:

·       The Cabinet, at their meeting on 20 October 2021, took a key decision relating to the Government’s Household Support Fund Grant which was made available to County Councils and Unitary Authorities in England to support those most in need over the Winter period. (General Exception).

·       The Cabinet, at their meeting on 20 October 2021, took a key decision relating to the award of a Highways Construction Contract associated with the Pets at Home development at Redhill, Stafford.(General Exception).

·       The Cabinet, at their meeting on 17 November 2021, took a key decision relating to winter funding for home care.(General Exception).

·       The Cabinet, at their meeting on 16 March 2022, took a key decision relating toproposals to continueconcessionary travel reimbursement to local bus operators in Staffordshire beyond March 2022 for a period of 6 months, in line with the extension of government funding.  The approval of the Chairman of the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee was also sought to the decision being exempt from call-in.(General Exception and Special Urgency).

·       The Cabinet, at their meeting on 6 April 2022, took a key decision relating to proposals for the Sale of Bilbrook House site, Codsall.  (General Exception).

·       The Cabinet, at their meeting on 20 April 2022, took a key decision regarding Indemnity Clauses and Decision Making for Looked After Children/Use of Regulated Placements.(General Exception).

RESOLVED - That the use of the General Exception and Special Urgency provisions contained in the Council’s Constitution in respect of the Cabinet’s decisions set out above, be noted.

Cllr Spencer commended the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner on his focus to reduce offending and reoffending.  He also indicated that he was pleased to see that there was a plan to address the findings of the interim Peels inspection report which had highlighted two areas of concern - effective investigations and appropriate ongoing support for victims.  Cllr Spencer also spoke about the need to tackle issues such as burglary, vehicle theft and rural crime.

Cllr Huckfield and Cllr Edgeller also commended the work of the Commissioner.  Cllr Edgeller also highlighted the ability for the public to submit written questions to the Commissioner.

Cllr Hutton referred to the need to improve 999 response time and asked that the Police, Fire and Crime Panel give consideration to this matter at a future meeting.

Cllr Alan White commended the Commissioner and the Panel on the appointment of Louise Clayton, a former County Council Officer, as the Chief Executive Officer of the Office of the Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner for Staffordshire.

Cllr Cox thanked the Members for their comments and indicated that they would be taken on board and reported back to the Commissioner as appropriate.

RESOLVED – That the report be received.

To consider the appointment of the members to Committees on the nomination of Group Leaders.

Cllr Alan White moved, and Cllr Philip White seconded, and it was:

RESOLVED – That the Members indicated below serve on the Committees listed for the period up to the Annual Council meeting in 2023:-

Cllr Alan White moved, and Cllr Philip White seconded, the nominations for the appointment of Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of Committees.

RESOLVED – That the under-mentioned be appointed as Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Committees stated for the period up to the annual Council meeting in 2023:-

Cllr Alan White moved, and Cllr Philip White seconded, and it was:

RESOLVED - That the nominations of the Leader of the Council, in consultation with the Political Group Leaders, on the appointment of Members to Outside Bodies for 2022/23 be approved and that the Leader be authorised to make any changes to those appointments as may become necessary.

Questions to be asked by Members of the County Council of the Leader of the Council, a Cabinet Member, or a Chairman of a Committee.  The question will be answered by the relevant Member and the Member asking the question may then ask a follow up question which will also be answered

Cllr Pritchard asked the following question of the Cabinet Member for Highways and Transport whose reply is set out below the question:-

Question

Tamworth Borough Council is seeking to install the LitterCam system on lampposts in Tamworth that overlook roads that see significant litter deposited by motorists.

What can Staffordshire County Council do to ensure that the permission, installation and operation of the LitterCams system on Staffordshire County Council lampposts is as simple and efficient as possible for Staffordshire’s district councils?

Reply

The County Council will of course support the Borough Council to safely roll-out the use of Litter-Cam systems in the right locations.

Please could you put your lead individual in contact with me and I will make sure they work with the relevant leads from the County Council and our Street Lighting PFI contractor E.on.

It will be important to understand the locations where the use of the Litter-Cam is planned so we can quickly assess whether the local streetlighting system is even capable of hosting such equipment, this should help speed up the process. Where it isn’t possible, we will of course support you to find alternatives for the equipment installation both on and off the public highway.

Finally, it is worth noting that there are strict requirements for the temporary or permanent attachment of ancillary equipment and connection of electrical power supplies from lighting equipment on the public highway which will need to be met.

Cllr Pardesi asked the following question of the Cabinet Member for Education (and SEND) whose reply is set out below the question:-

Question

How often is the condition of school buildings assessed and monitored and what has been the result of that assessment over the last 5 years? What remedial work is being carried out by SCC?

Reply

We only have a role in maintained schools which is now approximately a quarter of the school’s estate by building number.

We inspect schools every three years and produce a programme of maintenance works based on priority for “safe, warm and dry” issues. Typically, the works are – windows, roofs, heating systems, electric’s, lighting, external play areas and security.

The funding is specific grant from central government and over the last five years has been:

As can be seen from the funding, the government changed its allocation methodology from 2021 which increased the amount of funding we receive. 

Whilst the figures above are only for maintained schools the same increase will apply for independently funded academies, correcting previous years allocation methodologies under which we got a smaller share.

We have also been successful in bidding for de-carbonisation funding and have delivered £3m of improvements to heating and lighting in schools which saves them money on bills and reduces carbon emissions.

The full details of our schools maintenance spending is in the Statement of Priorities and within the School Capital Programme.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

There were no petitions on this occasion.