Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence

Apologies for absence were received from Cllr H Murray and A Barratt.

It was agreed that Councillor M Grant be appointed as Chairman for the meeting.

Councillor M Grant took the Chair

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any disclosable pecuniary and non-pecuniary interests in any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of interest

To provide an opportunity for Members to declare the existence of a party whip in relation to any item on the agenda.

There were no declarations of party whip.

A total period of 15 minutes is allocated for members of the public to make a statement(s) on any matter that falls within the remit of the Committee.

Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes, but the Chairman will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned, where there are a number of speakers.

Note: In order for officers to undertake any background research, it would be helpful if members of the public contacted the Scrutiny officer listed at the foot of the agenda, at least one working day before the meeting to provide brief details of the matter to be covered.

There were no members of the public wishing to speak

To approve the minutes as a correct record

RESOLVED

That the minutes of the meeting be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive a presentation by the Assistant Chief Executive on the work of Cheshire Probation

The Assistant Chief Executive of Cheshire Probation Trust gave a presentation on the work of the Trust. The presentation outlined:

·         The staffing structure

·         East Cheshire Organisation Chart

·         An outline of the caseload

·         Factors contributing to offending

·         Community partnership work

·         Conviction data/offending rates, pre, during and post nominations

It was highlighted that the Ministry of Justice intended to transform service delivery by introducing a diverse range of providers to drive innovation and achieve efficiencies.

The probation service would retain an important role, approximately 30% of cases, focused on protecting the public by:

o   Managing those offenders who pose the highest risk of serious harm to the public, including MAPPA cases

o   Continuing to carry out assessments of the risk of serious harm posed by each offender

o   Advising the courts and parole board

o   Handling most breach cases

The majority of offenders (low and medium risks) would be managed by independent providers, through a 7-10 year contract. There would be 21 contract package areas and Cheshire and Manchester will form one of these, Contracts are likely to be awarded by April 2014.

A national, centrally led commissioning function will be developed that:

o   Supported a supply chain

o   Avoided undue complexity and duplication; and

o   Responsive to local needs.

Providers would be commissioned to deliver community order and licence requirements and would be incentivised to reduce reoffending. Members raised strong concerns that payments would be by results, based on the success of reducing reoffending.

Discussions were ongoing with the Unions with regard to how staff would be TUPE’d over, but some redundancies are likely.

The Assistant Chief Executive was asked to highlight the potential advantages to the proposals and suggested that:

·         Offenders with a sentence under 12 months would have supervision.

·         IT systems could be improved

·         Additional investment and funding for interventions might be likely

·         Further career opportunities for staff

It was agreed that progress reports would be brought back to the Committee as implementation progresses

RESOLVED

That further update reports be brought back to the Committee when appropriate.

To receive a verbal update by the Head of Community Services

The Head of Community Services reported that the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice had now been issued and would be circulated to the Committee. It was noted that the Councils response to the consultation had been completed online, Members agreed that the response would be circulated to the Group. Cheshire East Council complied with the 12 points of the code as it was simply a duplication of the framework the Council already operated under.  The aim of the code was to bring together all the current legislation within one document. A review to assess whether or not the cameras were fit for purpose was already well underway.

With regard to the possible financial contributions by the Town and Parish Councils it was noted that a service level agreement would be required which would cover:

·         Camera availability

·         Maintenance/repair and replacement

·         Image quality

·         Sharing of information

·         Camera locations

·         Monitoring of cameras.

Members raised questions regarding how the charging tariffs would be applied as it would be unfair to charge small villages the same as larger towns. Also the issue of Macclesfield not having a Town Council would need to be addressed as the Macclesfield Local Service Delivery Committee did not have legal authority to make such a decision.

One Town Council had confirmed that it was happy to contribute financially towards CCTV, the rest had confirmed that they were happy for the review to take place and would discuss financial contributions at a later date. Members raised concerns that the review would not be completed by the September deadline. If the Town and Parish Councils were unwilling to contribute, the cameras would not be actively monitored, repaired or replaced.

With regard to providing cameras at Queens Park, Crewe, it was noted that discussions were currently ongoing and the Chairman of the Friends of Queens Park should be involved.

RESOLVED

1.    That the new National Code of Practice for CCTV and the Council’s response to the consultation be communicated to Members of the Committee.

2.    That the Chairman of the Friends of Queens Park, Crewe be involved in any discussions relating to camera provisions.

To give consideration to the work programme

Consideration was given to the work programme. It was agreed that as the Regulatory Service Food Law Enforcement Plan and Budget did not fall within the remit of the Committee, it would be removed from the work programme.

It was agreed that an overview of the Fire Authority’s Vision for the future would be received a future meeting of the Committee.

RESOLVED

1.    That the Regulatory Service Food Law Enforcement Plan and Budget be removed from the work programme.

2.    That an overview of the Fire Authority’s Vision for the future would be received a future meeting of the Committee.