Agenda, decisions and minutes

Apologies were received from Cllr P Strachan. Cllr R Matthews attended in his place as Deputy Cabinet Member (Town Centre Regeneration).

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 11 July 2023.

RESOLVED – That the Minutes of the Meeting held on 11 July 2023 were agreed as a correct record.

There were no declarations of interest.

The following hot topics were reported:-

Cabinet Member for Health and Wellbeing

The Cabinet Member reported that there had been a good response to the consultation on the Autism Strategy. The consultation ended on 24 September 2023.

https://familyinfo.buckinghamshire.gov.uk/news/the-autism-strategy-consultation-is-live/

Reference was made to the launch of the transfer of care hub which would help people get out of hospital as soon as they were medically ready and would, wherever possible, return them home or to an appropriate setting. Anybody requiring ongoing care would be able to access the right care, in the right place, at the right time. This should help manage patient flow for those fit for discharge. The Leader welcomed this initiative and commented that it was important to get patients out of hospital as soon as possible to stop them becoming ‘deconditioned’ to independent living.

Cabinet Member for Education and Childrens Services

Buckinghamshire Council was aware that three schools within the county were on the Department for Education RAAC list that had been published this week. The Council had been supporting these schools which were academies, meaning the Council did not have responsibility for maintaining and managing their sites. All settings were able to continue face to face learning for all students with no disruption to usual teaching.

Of the three Buckinghamshire schools on the DfE list:

Waddesdon School, Waddesdon (academy) - the school has had a structural survey this week and RAAC had only been identified as being present in the restaurant area. It meant all teaching blocks were open and the school was returning to full face to face learning as always planned at the start of the new academic year for all year groups

St Joseph’s Catholic Primary School, Chalfont St Peter (academy) - the school had already undertaken remediation works and was fully open with no disruption to normal teaching arrangements

St Michael’s Catholic School, High Wycombe (academy) - the school had informed the Council that RAAC was previously identified on site and remedial works were underway with arrangements already in place to teach students in temporary blocks on site as required, so there was no disruption to normal teaching arrangements.

The Cabinet Member reported that all maintained schools had completed their surveys, but academies were still completing theirs. The Leader reported that this was good news that schools did not have to return to remote learning and thanked the Cabinet and Local Members for their support in this area.

Cabinet Member for Transport

The Cabinet Member referred to pupils going back to school and commented that Buckinghamshire was top of the national league table with 60 schools having well used travel plans which impacted on 25,000 pupils and reported that home to school transport at the beginning of the school year had started well including the support of school crossing patrollers.

The Cabinet Member also paid tribute to the teams working on the road network with 20,000 potholes fixed and also work was well underway on the larger, capital intensive carriageway re-surfacing programme  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Question from Councillor Robin Stuchbury to Councillor Peter Strachan, Cabinet Member for Planning and Regeneration

Buckingham Town Council recently wrote to six of its local Buckinghamshire Councillors to ask how they could be more involved in the early stages of Section 106 agreements.  This could include involvement in such issues as an automatic inclusion of the right to adopt, limiting the necessity for management companies as so to reduce the economic tariffs on new developments to the bare minimum, and looking at economic considerations so that agreements match the aspirations in Buckinghamshire Council’s Parish Charter.

Could the Cabinet Member please explain what steps Buckinghamshire Council is willing and able to take to work and engage earlier with Buckingham Town Council on future developments and infrastructure projects?

Question from Councillor Thomas Hogg to Councillor Peter Strachan, Cabinet Member for Planning and Regeneration

You requested that I lead on the Design Code in June 2022. Since then I have worked with the Planning Officer team on the Code, but have not made the progress that I had anticipated on this issue. I have developed an optional Design Guide which has been proposed as a first step towards better urban design. It has no legal weight, which means it cannot be enforced, but the document is not meant to be. It focuses on showing property developers the merits of evidence-based urban design and how to follow the NPPF.

Could the Cabinet Member and his team re-consider the proposals contained within the Design Guide that would provide many benefits to our Buckinghamshire Communities which has such strong support within our scientific community, as evidenced by many surveys and research papers?

Question from Councillor Robin Stuchbury to Councillor Peter Strachan, Cabinet Member for Planning and Regeneration 

“Buckingham Town Council recently wrote to six of its local Buckinghamshire Councillors to ask how they could be more involved in the early stages of Section 106 agreements.? This could include involvement in such issues as an automatic inclusion of the right to adopt, limiting the necessity for management companies as so to reduce the economic tariffs on new developments to the bare minimum, and looking at economic considerations so that agreements match the aspirations in Buckinghamshire Council’s Parish Charter. 

Could the Cabinet Member please explain what steps Buckinghamshire Council is willing and able to take to work and engage earlier with Buckingham Town Council on future developments and infrastructure projects?” 

RESPONSE from Councillor Matthews 

Local Ward Members and Parish/Town Councils are consulted on planning applications and can provide comments on all aspects of the proposal. It is during the application process, prior to a determination that Members and Town/Parish Councils have an opportunity to identify and request mitigation proposals. It should be noted that identifying and requesting mitigation if the planning application is to proceed, does not prejudice or undermine your overall position. Any mitigation requests must be considered by officers in relation to the tests of lawfulness detailed within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the associated guidance (PPG) and within the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) regulations. Paragraph 002 of the PPG details that planning obligations can assist in mitigating the impact of unacceptable development to make it acceptable in planning terms.? 

As set out within the NPPF (para 57) to meet the tests obligations must be:? 

• necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms.? 
• directly related to the development; and? 
• fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.? 

At the stage of drafting and finalising an S106 agreement, we are working to approved Heads of Terms. The S106 agreement is simply the legal mechanism that secures the obligations as set out in the recommendation to approve (either by the officer or planning committee). We do however publish S106 drafts 10 working days prior to completion albeit this is not a formal consultation. The Council also publishes an Infrastructure Funding Statement in relation to developer contributions secured and spent. 

The Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan sets out the following under Policy I1 Green Infrastructure: 

? 

“Green infrastructure being provided must have a long-term management and maintenance strategy to be agreed by the council with assets managed for at least 30 years after completion and during this time secure a mechanism to manage sites into perpetuity. The management and maintenance strategy shall set out details of the owner, the responsible body and how the strategy can be implemented by contractors" 

? 

Long term stewardship of the public realm is important to ensure that open space provided from development is maintained to high standards. We are supportive of Town and Parish Council’s taking on the ownership and maintenance of Open Space, however, as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Leader introduced the Forward Plan and commended it to all Members of the Council and the public, as a document that gave forewarning of what reports would be discussing at forthcoming meetings.

RESOLVED – That the Cabinet Forward Plan be noted.

For Cabinet to note the Select Committee Work Programme.

The Leader introduced the Select Committee Work Programme and commended it to all Members of the Council and the public, as a document that gave forewarning of what Select Committees would be discussing at forthcoming meetings.

 RESOLVED – That the Select Committee Work Programme be noted.

A ‘Stop investing in fossil fuels’ ePetition had been considered at the full Council meeting on 12 July 2023, at which the Cabinet Member for Accessible Housing and Resources requested it be referred to Cabinet for further consideration.  The ePetition was detailed at Appendix 1 to the Cabinet report.

Cabinet considered a report that set out the concerns raised in the petition and the approach that Buckinghamshire Pension Fund in partnership with the Brunel Pension Partnership was taking towards carbon reduction and meeting its target of net zero by 2050.

RESOLVED –

(1)               That the approach being taken by the Buckinghamshire Pension Fund and the Brunel Pension Partnership in reducing overall carbon intensity in its investment portfolios be ENDORSED.

(2)               That the situation with the Council’s banking contract be NOTED.

A ‘Stop investing in fossil fuels’ ePetition had been considered at the full Council meeting on 12 July 2023, at which the Cabinet Member for Accessible Housing and Resources requested it be referred to Cabinet for further consideration.  The ePetition was detailed at Appendix 1 to the Cabinet report.

Cabinet considered a report that set out the concerns raised in the petition and the approach that Buckinghamshire Pension Fund in partnership with the Brunel Pension Partnership was taking towards carbon reduction and meeting its target of net zero by 2050. The Partnership covered nine local authorities covering a geographical area from Buckinghamshire to Cornwall as well as the Environment Agency and held the Buckinghamshire Pension Fund as pooled funds. This Partnership had delivered increased returns and savings of £34 million per year to the organisations involved ahead of its initial target of £28 million by 2025. The Brunel Partnership made investment decisions on behalf of the Pension Fund although the Council maintained an investment allocation strategy. The Chairman Cllr Tim Butcher attended the oversight board together with the participating authorities.

Brunel shared the Council’s target of a net zero impact by 2050 and had already achieved a reduction of 35% on their 2019 carbon emissions baseline. Brunel have retained their status as a signatory to the stewardship code and their 2023 responsible investment and outcomes report which could be viewed on their website provided a wealth of information and how they met its requirements. The Brunel approach was one of engagement rather than divestment as they believed it delivered a greater impact. With £35 billion of investment assets of which Buckinghamshire held £4 billion the Partnership could exercise a significant influence. The Pension Fund Committee and its Chairman were fully supportive of this approach. In addition to concerns about pension fund investments in fossil fuels there had also been concerns about the Council’s current banking partner; the current contract with Barclays ran until 2027 and was purely for the provision of banking services with no investment activity. Barclays had also committed to a net zero strategy and in view of this there was no proposal to move the Council’s bank account. A Leader asked about the signatories on the petition and it was noted that local residents could be identified through a tick box although their address could not be verified.

RESOLVED –

(1)               That the approach being taken by the Buckinghamshire Pension Fund and the Brunel Pension Partnership in reducing overall carbon intensity in its investment portfolios be ENDORSED.

(2)               That the situation with the Council’s banking contract be NOTED.

The Children’s and Education Select Committee had agreed to set up a rapid review in November 2022 with the aim of investigating the pathways to finding information for children and young people with SEND when first trying to access services and support. This involved:

(a)               assessing views from different sources with regards to the availability and accessibility of information required by parents to gain support from services for their children, and

(b)               gaining understanding on information for services specifically relating to gaining help for children with autism, ADHD and anxiety/depression.

The group took part in a range of evidence gathering sessions from November 2022 to March 2023 with a wide range of council officers, through visits to primary, secondary, grammar and special schools, with lead professionals from related organisations and by interviewing parents with SEND children.

The final stage of evidence gathering with individual meetings with parents provided a crucial insight into the first-hand experiences of parents in accessing the system of services potentially available to them when concerned about gaining help for their child. This process highlighted a range of issues such as difficulties in knowing where to go for assistance, how to gain diagnoses, and symptoms being recognised and supported.

The review was chaired by Councillor Diana Blamires and comprised Councillors Sarah James, Sophie Kayani, Paul Turner and Julie Ward.  Following the evidence gathering meetings the review group then met to discuss and agree its key findings and recommendations, which were presented in the report found at Appendix 1.

Cabinet was asked to consider the recommendations of the Select Committee Review.

RESOLVED

1. That the Pathways for Children with SEND Review Group, as well as the supporting officers, be thanked for their work and subsequent recommendations. 
2. That Cabinet’s responses to the Pathways for Children with SEND Review report and recommendations, as set out and circulated to Members, be agreed. 

Note: a complete breakdown of the scrutiny recommendations and Cabinet’s responses can be found here.

The Children’s and Education Select Committee had agreed to set up a rapid review in November 2022 with the aim of investigating the pathways to finding information for children and young people with SEND when first trying to access services and support. This involved:

(a)               assessing views from different sources with regards to the availability and accessibility of information required by parents to gain support from services for their children, and

(b)               gaining understanding on information for services specifically relating to gaining help for children with autism, ADHD and anxiety/depression.

The group took part in a range of evidence gathering sessions from November 2022 to March 2023 with a wide range of council officers, through visits to primary, secondary, grammar and special schools, with lead professionals from related organisations and by interviewing parents with SEND children.

The final stage of evidence gathering with individual meetings with parents provided a crucial insight into the first-hand experiences of parents in accessing the system of services potentially available to them when concerned about gaining help for their child. This process highlighted a range of issues such as difficulties in knowing where to go for assistance, how to gain diagnoses, and symptoms being recognised and supported.

The review was chaired by Councillor Diana Blamires and comprised Councillors Sarah James, Sophie Kayani, Paul Turner and Julie Ward.  Following the evidence gathering meetings the review group then met to discuss and agree its key findings and recommendations, which were presented in the report found at Appendix 1.

Cabinet was asked to consider the recommendations of the Select Committee Review.

The Chairman, Councillor Diana Blamires presented the report. Councillor Julie Ward was also in attendance who was Chairman of the Children and Education Select Committee. 90% of parents who flag that they believe that their child had autism, ADHD, anxiety or depression turned out to be right. It was therefore imperative that they get the advice and information they need when they raise the alarm. Following the Council’s OFSTED report one of the priorities was to provide better guidance for parents and this Review Group was set up to see what support parents could be given. Visits were undertaken to primary, secondary, grammar and special schools. Separately there were 15 meetings with the Council, voluntary groups and other organisations. The Group spoke to parents and looked at best practice from other Councils particularly with information on their websites. She gave some examples of the experiences of parents in obtaining the right support. As well as providing better information to parents from the start of their journey it was recognised that there needed to be improving training of SENCO’s, teaching and nursery staff. They needed to be more aware of behaviours associated with autism, ADHD, anxiety and depression. A parent had flagged an issue at primary school. However because it was only recognised at secondary school level the needs of that child had become more complex. Early intervention was vital and it was important for parents to be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The Buckinghamshire Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2023-2024 provided details of progress made against agreed outcomes for Children and Young People. It outlined priorities, alongside potential future challenges for the partnership over the coming year. It also highlighted the partnership arrangements and budget position for the Youth Offending Service Partnership.

The Buckinghamshire Youth Justice Strategic Plan for 2023-2024 was produced in consultation with strategic partners. This was done through a series of focus groups which were held with representatives from the police, probation, magistrates, health, and Buckinghamshire Council services, including Children’s Social Care, Education and Community Safety, as well as representatives from voluntary organisations such as Barnardo’s and ‘SAFE!’. The plan was produced in line with guidance published by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and must be submitted to the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales and published in accordance with the directions of the Secretary of State.

RESOLVED –

That the Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2023-24 be endorsed, and it be forwarded to Council who be recommended to adopt it.

The Buckinghamshire Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2023-2024 provided details of progress made against agreed outcomes for Children and Young People. It outlined priorities, alongside potential future challenges for the partnership over the coming year. It also highlighted the partnership arrangements and budget position for the Youth Offending Service Partnership.

The Buckinghamshire Youth Justice Strategic Plan for 2023-2024 was produced in consultation with strategic partners. This was done through a series of focus groups which were held with representatives from the police, probation, magistrates, health, and Buckinghamshire Council services, including Children’s Social Care, Education and Community Safety, as well as representatives from voluntary organisations such as Barnardo’s and ‘SAFE!’. The plan was produced in line with guidance published by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and must be submitted to the Youth Justice Board for England and Wales and published in accordance with the directions of the Secretary of State.

The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Education reported that providing the Strategic Plan was a legislative requirement. The purpose of the report was to show the work, and the results of previous work of the Youth Offending Service, which was a multi-agency partnership which included Thames Valley Police, Council, Health Services, Community Safety, Voluntary Sector and Probation. The Youth Justice Board oversaw the work of the Partnership. The ages that were covered were 10-18 and the numbers were small approximately 100. The data in the Plan showed the number of people who entered the Justice System for the first time and also tracked re-offending. HMI Probation provided a report in January 2023 and Buckinghamshire received a rating of good. Some areas for improvement had been identified such as Restoration, Repatriation and helping people to get on the right path was the first aim. The second aim related to ethnic disproportionality which needed to be addressed looking at areas of depravation. The third aim was a Government initiative called Child First, having greater involvement with young people and engaging them in questions about how life was for them and understanding the reasons for their life choices.

The Leader reported that it was concerning to see the rise in the re-offending rate which had risen to 30% since January 2021. The Corporate Director explained that whilst a large proportion reoffended (9 youth as compared to 6 the year before), there was a smaller cohort who offended at all (30 compared to 37). Therefore, the small numbers involved and the reduction in the overall cohort that offended, made the reoffending figure appear significant in percentage terms. The Corporate Director reported that all the recommendations from the Inspection had been incorporated into the Plan which included out of court disposals, which was prevention work. This year as the Partnership Board was in a stronger place a sponsor had been assigned to each of the recommendations. The funding for this was £1.7 million and as a Council funding was provided of £726,000 which was a significant amount.

Another Cabinet Member commented that prevention was key and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The confidential minutes of the meeting held on 11 July were agreed as a correct record.

10 October 2023 at 10am

10 October 2023