Agenda and minutes

King Richard III

The Chairman reminded members that it was the middle of reinterment week and that on the following day King Richard III would finally be laid to rest in Leicester Cathedral.  The Chairman said he was honoured to be representing the County Council.

He hoped that all members who had been to the Cathedral and the Visitor Centre the previous evening had enjoyed the occasion.

The County Council had worked closely with partners in planning the events leading up to and including the reinterment and the Chairman acknowledged that the Leader would want to pay tribute to all who had worked hard to ensure this historic event was undertaken smoothly and safely.

The Chairman paid particular tribute to Tim Webster and his Team for the key role that they played and the additional support that they provided to him and the Lord Lieutenant.  They had undertaken a huge amount of work not least in respect of the different services at the Cathedral.

Visitors

The Chairman welcomed to the meeting all visitors and guests of members and anyone who was viewing the meeting via the webcast.

It was moved by the Chairman, seconded by Mr Snartt and carried:-

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 18 February 2015, copies of which have been circulated to members, be taken as read, confirmed and signed.

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to make declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

All members of the Council who were also members of a District Council declared a personal interest in the question put forward by Mr Galton concerning recycling credits.

Dr Eynon declared a personal interest in the Annual Report of the Director of Public Health 2014 (minute 48 refers) as she was a salaried GP.

Mr Sheahan and Mr Coxon declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in the Rail Strategy for Leicestershire which formed part of the Leader’s Position Statement (minute 47 refers).

(A)   Dr Eynon asked the following question of the Leader or his nominee:-

"How does the Leader propose to address the concerns raised at the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland (LLR) - wide Mental Health Summit on 7^th March 2015 and how will he evaluate this Council’s progress towards the ideals set out in the Mental Health Charter signed on behalf of this Council in 2014?"

Mr White replied as follows:-

“It was pleasing that the key messages expressed at the summit were consistent with those captured in the Better Care Together (BCT) Mental Health work stream and the priority themes pursued by Leicestershire County Council, Leicester City Council and Rutland Council as part of their Better Care Fund plans, their Health and Well Being Strategies and the LLR Crisis Concordat.

The public health teams in Leicestershire County Council and Leicester City Council are also heavily involved in efforts to reduce the risk of suicide locally through leading the LLR Suicide Audit and Prevention Group, and through the group’s annual audits, strategy and action plans.

While we await the summit report, comprising of summaries of the presentations, action points from table top discussions and pledges made by individuals and organisations, it is clear that the summit stressed:

•         That service users should be involved in co-production.

•         That the third sector should be a more prominent partner in delivery of a much broader recovery and resilience network.

•         That organisations should develop embedded peer support.

The BCT Mental Health workstream is being progressed through inclusive and collaborative involvement of the local authority, the NHS, the Voluntary Sector, patients, service users and carers. The voluntary sector, Healthwatch, patients and carers have been especially influential in developing and shaping the work.

Providing leadership and working with CCG partners and Healthwatch we intend to synthesise the actions from the summit and use these as a basis for forming a clearer BCT implementation plan for Resilience and Recovery.  This will include our commitment to, amongst other action, the Crisis Concordat, a social prescribing pilot, the extension of the Leicestershire Partnership Trust recovery college model and our ongoing work on suicide prevention.

Leicestershire County Council recognises that the mental health charter lays out comprehensive standards of care that every person has the right to expect from mental health services locally. The County Council is working on a number of fronts to meet these expectations.

As noted earlier, the BCT mental health programme aims to improve the quality of care of and overall experience for patients with mental illness. The programme adopts a life course approach from the peri-natal period right through to old age and encompasses primary prevention, early detection and treatment and ultimately through to recovery.

In conjunction with the Council’s Mental Health Champion, Mrs Pam Posnett CC we have taken the view that the 13 points in the Charter are more principles than specific, measurable actions.

As such our priority has been to a) promote the Charter and b) try to embed these principles wherever possible. Examples of the latter include:

• Running a Communities Strategy workshop on Physical Health and Mental Wellbeing.
• Supporting the Mental Health First Aid programme throughout the Council and introducing pilot training for sections with high levels of mental health absence which focusses on the interrelationship between mental and physical health.
• Setting up a new Engagement, Representation and Equalities Challenge contract that includes mental health as a priority theme.
• Including mental health as one of the priority groups for the Local Area Coordination 18 month pilot (along with frail elderly, physical disabilities and learning disabilities).
• Including mental health  ...  view the full minutes text for item 46.

The Leader presented a position statement on the following matters:-

·       King Richard III;

·       Economic Development;

·       Superfast Broadband;

·       Rail Strategy for Leicestershire;

·       Fairer Funding;

·       Leicestershire Public Sector Commissioning Skills Academy;

·       Harborough District Council Symington Building.

The Lead Member for Children and Family Services presented a position statement on the following matters:-

·       Child Sexual Exploitation;

·       Achievements of young people in care;

·       Redmoor Academy – National Finalist in the 2015 Pupil Premium Award;

·       F40 meeting with the DfE;

·       Supporting Leicestershire Families.

The Lead Member for Health presented a position statement on the following matters:-

·       Better Care Together;

·       Mental Health Services;

·       New Congenital Heart Disease Review.

A copy of the position statements is filed with these minutes.

It was moved by Mr White, seconded by Mr Houseman and carried:-

“That the Director of Public Health Annual Report 2014 be noted with support.”

It was moved by Dr Feltham, seconded by Mr Hunt and carried:-

“That the submission on Council size set out in Appendix 1 to the report of the Constitution Committee be approved for submission to the Local Boundary Commission for England.”

It was moved by Mr Hart, seconded by Mr Rhodes and carried:-

“(a)     That the terms of reference for the Leicestershire Local Pension Board as set out in Appendix 2 of the report to the Constitution Committee be approved;

(b)      That Mr Kershaw CC and Mr Jennings CC be appointed to serve as the County Council representatives on the Leicestershire Local Pension Board;

(c)      That the Pension Fund Management Board be renamed the Local Pensions Committee.”

It was moved by Mr Rhodes, seconded by Mr Shepherd and carried:-

“That the County Council’s Pay Policy Statement 2015/16, as referred to in the report of the Employment Committee, be approved.”

It was moved by Mr Lewis, seconded by Mr Charlesworth and carried:-

“That Carolyn Lewis be appointed as Church of England representative on the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee (or other appropriate scrutiny committee dealing with Education) for the period ending with the County Council elections in 2017.”

“The destruction of Grammar Schools has led to the destruction of social mobility in our society. In December 2013 the then Secretary of State for Education blocked a Grammar School being created in Kent. Government policy is not to create anymore Grammar Schools. There are now just 164 state Grammar Schools in the country with 11 of them being in Leicestershire which are now potentially under threat as a result of the government’s academy policy. We find this very worrying.

In light of this, we call upon the County Council to:-

a)     recognise the importance of Grammar Schools and to reaffirm its commitment to protecting them;

b)     write to the Secretary of State for Education asking for her assurance that our Grammar Schools in Leicestershire are safe and under no threat.”

It was moved by Mr Sprason, and seconded by Mr Yates:-

“The destruction of Grammar Schools has led to the destruction of social mobility in our society. In December 2013 the then Secretary of State for Education blocked a Grammar School being created in Kent. Government policy is not to create anymore Grammar Schools. There are now just 164 state Grammar Schools in the country with 11 of them being in Leicestershire which are now potentially under threat as a result of the government’s academy policy. We find this very worrying.

In light of this, we call upon the County Council to:-

(a)      recognise the importance of Grammar Schools and to reaffirm its commitment to protecting them;

(b)      write to the Secretary of State for Education asking for her assurance that our Grammar Schools in Leicestershire are safe and under no threat.”

The motion was not carried, 2 members voting for the motion and 48 members voting against the motion.

1.     That this Council:-

a)    Recognises the excellent results being achieved by students attending Gartree High School, Manor High School and Beauchamp College, and congratulates these schools for their hard work and effective partnership working.

b)    Notes the disconnection between the proposals by these schools to change their age ranges and become 11+ schools.

c)     Notes the significant concerns expressed by parents during the recent consultation including:

i)       The potential reduction in the number of A Level places.

ii)     The impact on school transport policy.

iii)    The risk that these changes could lead to a drop in standards.

iv)   The capital cost of these changes in respect of primary schools.

v)     The lack of cohesion between the independent plans.

d)    Notes that the Cabinet in November 2014 in considering a strategy for the provision of school places agreed a priority to remove the 10+ system, subject to there being a strong local demand for change evidenced by consultation.

2.     This Council therefore resolves to scrutinise the age range change business cases being put forward by schools if and when requested to do by the Regional Schools Commissioner on behalf of the Department for Education and only to support changes where there is evidence that it will lead to improved educational outcomes for young people in the Oadby area.

It was moved by Mr Gamble, and seconded by Mr Kaufman:-

“1.      That this Council:-

(a)      Recognises the excellent results being achieved by students attending Gartree High School, Manor High School and Beauchamp College, and congratulates these schools for their hard work and effective partnership working.

(b)      Notes the disconnection between the proposals by these schools to change their age ranges and become 11+ schools.

(c)      Notes the significant concerns expressed by parents during the recent consultation including:

(i)                  The potential reduction in the number of A Level places.

(ii)                 The impact on school transport policy.

(iii)               The risk that these changes could lead to a drop in standards.

(iv)               The capital cost of these changes in respect of primary schools.

(v)                The lack of cohesion between the independent plans.

(d)      Notes that the Cabinet in November 2014 in considering a strategy for the provision of school places agreed a priority to remove the 10+ system, subject to there being a strong local demand for change evidenced by consultation.

2.       This Council therefore resolves to scrutinise the age range change business cases being put forward by schools if and when requested to do by the Regional Schools Commissioner on behalf of DfE and only to support changes where there is evidence that it will lead to improved educational outcomes for young people in the Oadby area.”

An amendment was moved by Mr Ould, and seconded by Mr Rhodes:-

“That the motion be amended to read as follows:-

‘1.       That this Council:-

(a)      Recognises the excellent results being achieved by students attending Gartree High School, Manor High School and Beauchamp College, and congratulates these schools for their hard work and effective partnership working.

(b)      Notes the significant concerns expressed by some parents during the recent consultation.

2.       That this Council, in line with the policy agreed by the Cabinet in November 2014, therefore resolves to scrutinise the age range change business cases being put forward by schools if and when requested to do by the Regional Schools Commissioner on behalf of DfE.’ ”

The amendment was put and carried, 28 members voting for the amendment, 11 against and 7 abstentions.

The substantive motion was put and carried, 28 members voting for the substantive motion, none against and 18 abstentions.