Venue: Sparkenhoe Committee Room, County Hall, Glenfield
Contact: Mr. S. J. Weston (Tel: 0116 305 6226) Email: sam.weston@leics.gov.uk
No. | Item |
---|---|
In Attendance: Mr. P. C.
Osborne CC, Cabinet Lead Member for Climate Change and County Council representative
on the LeicesterShire Promotions Board (for minute 262) Mrs. L. A.
S. Pendleton CC, Cabinet Lead Member for Transport (for minute 263) |
|
The Leader of the County Council - Mr. D. R. Parsons CBE CC Minutes: Dr. Feltham CC reported that the Leader of the
Council, Mr. D. R. Parsons |
|
Minutes: The minutes
of the meeting held on |
|
Question Time. Minutes: Elector Ms. Joanne Peryer asked the following
question of the Commission:- (A) School
Transport Charging. “1. On the wider issue of transport charging policy, I am pleased
that my daughter has been given a place on a bus – the cost of £120 per term is
much cheaper than a private taxi. However, my daughter has to rise at 2. On farepaying places in taxis: should Leicestershire County
Council maximise the income from out of catchment pupils, ensuring that all
available places in taxis or buses are utilised where there is demand (provided
that such people are placed on notice that if additional in catchment pupils
are identified they may have to give up their place)?” Mr. Galton CC replied as follows:- “1. The provision of farepaying places on
school transport by the Council is entirely on a discretionary basis and
generally reflects the decision of a parent(s) to send their child to a school
that is neither their catchment school, nor their nearest school. For the
catchment or nearest school, if the home address was over three miles from the
school then statutory free home to school transport would have been provided.
If the farepaying place is accepted it is on the basis of the offer, including
potentially longer journey times, which are made clear. Guidance from the
Department for Education suggests a maximum journey time for secondary school
pupils of 75 minutes and we do not normally offer farepaying journeys that are
longer. If parents do not accept the
journey time, they do not have to accept the farepaying space, but no other
offer will be made as this is not a statutory school journey. 2. Five taxi farepaying spaces have been agreed this academic
year (three secondary and two primary spaces) and three spaces have not been
agreed including the above request. We have 560 farepaying spaces on contract
buses. It is recognised that such places, when granted, offer additional income
for the Council but the basis on which they are offered could cause problems
for parents who rely on such arrangements. Generally, when the Council offers a
farepaying place it is done so on the basis that the space is guaranteed for
the entire academic year. This offer is made so that parents and pupils can
plan their attendance at school in a consistent way. The Council does not
consider that the removal of such spaces at short notice is reasonable, nor is
it likely to be acceptable in practice to most parents. Spare capacity is
retained for children requiring statutory free home to school transport who
move into the area after the start of the academic year.” Ms.
Peryer asked the following supplementary question in relation to the reply to
question 1: “What criteria are used to make a decision on farepaying places? Why this is not made transparent for parents? The present arrangements are not sufficiently flexible for parents” The Chairman replied to the effect that places were offered on a discretionary basis in order that the Council had sufficient flexibility to ensure that all children were transported to school. He promised that a more detailed answer would be provided to Ms. Peryer in writing. |
|
Questions asked by members. Minutes: The Chief
Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order
7(3) and 7(5). |
|
Urgent Items. Minutes: There were no
urgent items for consideration. |
|
Declarations of Interest. Minutes: The
Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interest in respect
of items on the agenda for the meeting. The
following members each declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest in respect
of the item relating to transport consultation (paper ‘C’) as holders of
concessionary bus passes: Dr. R. K.
A. Feltham CC Mrs. M. E.
Newton CC Mr. R. J.
Shepherd CC Mr. D.
Slater CC Mrs. P.
Posnett CC declared a personal, non-prejudicial interest in respect of the same
item as a grandparent of a school travel pass holder (minute 263 refers). |
|
Declarations of the Party Whip. Minutes: There were no
declarations of the party whip. |
|
Presentation of Petitions. Minutes: The Chief
Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 36. |
|
Review of Tourism Support Services. The Leader of the Council and Mr. P. C. Osborne CC (in
his capacity as County Council representative on the Leicestershire Promotions
Board) have been invite for the discussion on this item. Additional documents: Minutes: The Commission considered a report of the
Chief Executive to the Cabinet concerning proposals to go out to tender for the
provision of Tourism Support Services. A copy of the report, marked ‘BB’, is
filed with these minutes. The Chairman welcomed to the meeting the
Cabinet Lead Member for Climate Change, Mr. P. C. Osborne CC – who represented
the County Council on the LeicesterShire Promotions Board. Mr. Osborne CC introduced the report by
stating that it was the intention of the Authority to go out to tender for the
provision of Tourism Support Services. A market testing exercise would be
carried out to understand more about the number of service providers that would
be interested in providing these services to the Council in the future. Arising from discussion, the Commission made
the following suggestions for consideration within the context of the
formulation of the business plan for the tourism offering in the County: ·
Leicestershire
was not considered to be “natural” area for tourism, though it did have areas
of particular interest – such as the National Forest, Bosworth Battlefield and
the food and drink culture offer in Melton Mowbray. It was acknowledged that
there might not be one central reason to come to Leicestershire for an extended
stay, however there were a number of attractions and activities that could for
instance sustain a short stay; ·
The
County had a historical and heritage background (eg. Lady Jane Gray, the
Bosworth Battlefield and the Great Central Railway) which was highly marketable
to tourists both domestically and abroad. It was felt that this historical
context was not currently expressed clearly enough to potential visitors; ·
Better
joint working with the City Council and other neighbouring authorities and
district/borough councils would ensure a more coherent ‘message’ was delivered
to potential visitors. A clear, easy to use and information rich website would
also be necessary to attract visitors and make it as easy as possible to do so. RESOLVED: (a)
That the proposal for Tourism Support Services to be procured
through a competitive procurement process be noted; (b)
That the suggestions put forward for marketing of the County’s tourism
offering be noted for consideration as part of the formulation of the business
plan. |
|
Consultation on Proposed Changes to Transport. The Cabinet Lead Member for Environment and Transport,
Mrs. L. A. S. Pendleton CC has been invited for the discussion on this item. Additional documents:
Minutes: The Commission considered a report of the Director of Environment and Transport to the Cabinet which set out the results of the public consultation into proposals for Home to School Transport and the Concessionary Travel Scheme and proposed changes thereto. A copy of the report, marked ‘CC’, is filed with these minutes. The Chairman welcomed to the meeting the Cabinet Lead Member for Transportation, Mrs. L. A. S. Pendleton CC who was present to respond to any questions raised by the Commission. During the course of the ensuing discussion, the following comments/decisions were made:- A. Concessionary Travel The Commission was advised that the County Council was having to subsidise the English National Concessionary Travel Scheme to the tune of £1million per year and that it was likely that the level of subsidy would need to be increased in the future as Central Government was further reduced. The Commission
noted the proposals which would result in the removal of the following
discretionary elements with effect from 1st October:- ·
Half fare on community
transport; ·
£33 of vouchers as an
alternative to a bus pass; ·
Free travel before · Free travel after 11.00pm – Monday to Friday for all concessionary pass holders. Some members
expressed concern at the proposals to remove free travel before Concern was also expressed about the impact of the proposal to cease to provided vouchers as an alternative to bus passes particularly to disabled people who were unable to access bus services. In this regard the Commission was advised that the County Council was looking to expanding Demand Responsive Transport as an alternative to buses in rural areas and this might offer an opportunity for disabled people. B. Home to School Transport – Revised Policy - Appendix G In response to questions by Mr Shepherd
CC, the Scrutiny Commission was advised that a number of
complaints had been made to the Local Government Ombudsman about the withdrawal
of transport to school and the assessment of walking routes. These were still subject to that complaint
process and therefore it would not be appropriate to comment in detail at this
stage. The Ombudsman's Investigator had raised some issues
in relation to the application of the DfES guidance
issued in 2007. As a result, the
County Council proposed to amend its internal guidance for assessing routes.
The proposed guidance set out in Appendix 3 of report expanded and enhanced the
previous guidance on this issue and took into account the DfES
guidance as well as guidance recently issued by Road Safety GB. Subject to the
Cabinet agreeing the new policy it was intended to review against the new
criteria those routes where complaints had been received. C.
Home to School Transport (a)
Academies The
Commission noted that the proposals would have the following effect: ·
September 2012 – No change to mainstream home to school transport
existing catchment areas; ·
September 2013 – No change to mainstream home to school transport
existing catchment areas; ·
September 2014 – Mainstream home to school transport introduced to nearest
available school. Transport Eligibility areas introduced for new pupils only
and existing pupils to have existing eligibility until they leave school. During the discussion, some concern was expressed that the proposals now being put forward regarding transport to the “nearest available school” might not have been clearly understood during the consultation process, particularly as the traditional local authority boundaries would no longer apply. This might go some way to explaining why there was a low ... view the full minutes text for item 264. |
|
Park and Ride. The Director of Environment and Transport will deliver a presentation
under this item. Minutes: As there was insufficient time to consider this item, the Chairman proposed that consideration of the presentation be deferred to a future meeting in order for a full debate to take place on the progress made with Park and Ride. RESOLVED: That the item be deferred. |
|
Corporate Asset Management Plan 2012/13 - Progress Report. Additional documents: Minutes: The Commission considered a report of the Director of Corporate Resources concerning the County Council’s Corporate Asset Management Plan 2012/13. A copy of the report, marked ‘D’, is filed with these minutes. In response to questions, the Commission was advised as follows:- · The value of the asset holdings had reduced by £55 million partly as a result of a reduction in freehold assets (54 less) and reduced values of assets; · The Office Accommodation Strategy was on target for completion later this year and the anticipated savings of £700,000 per annum would be realised; ·
Work was in hand to engage with other partners
to build on the success of joint working arrangements undertaken in Melton and
planned for Harborough and · The County Council was responding to the Academies agenda and working with schools regarding asset transfer. In this regard was be noted that the freehold would reside with the County Council, Academies would have a 125 year lease. On the issue of disposal of surplus playing fields, Academies would require the approval of the County Council as landlord and would also require the consent of the Secretary of State. · Discussions were still ongoing as to whether the County Council would remain responsible for carbon emission from schools once the building assets and transferred to Academies. RESOLVED: That the Cabinet be advised that the Scrutiny Commission supports the Corporate Asset Management Plan and in particular alignment of the Plan with the Council Capital Strategy and Medium Term Financial Plan. |
|
Date of next meeting. The next meeting of the Commission is scheduled to take
place on Wednesday 30 May at Minutes: It was noted
that the next meeting of the Commission would be held on Wednesday 30 May at |