Agenda and minutes

Councillors Brett Beetham, Barbara Brown and Caroline Phillips.

Councillors Sarah Boad, Andy Crump, Judy Falp, John Holland, Heather Timms, and Adrian Warwick declared a pecuniary interest in item 4 on the agenda - Warwickshire Pension Fund Accounts 2022/23 - indicating that they were members of the Warwickshire Council Pension Fund.

Councillors Sarah Feeney and Sarah Millar also declared a pecuniary interest in item 4 on the agenda - Warwickshire Pension Fund Accounts 2022/23 - indicating that they were members of the Local Government Pension Scheme.

The minutes of the meeting of Council held on 26 September 2023 were agreed as a true record.

(a)      Death of Former Councillor Jenny St John

The Chair stated that it was his sad duty to inform Council of the recent passing of former County Councillor Jenny St John. Jenny, from the Labour group, served as a Warwickshire County Councillor for Warwick North between 2013 and 2017.  The Chair extended condolences to her family and friends.

Councillor John Holland spoke in memory of former Councillor Jenny St John reflecting on her achievements during her four years in office. 

Councillors Isobel Seccombe and Sarah Boad also expressed their condolences to former Councillor St John’s family before Council stood for a

a minute’s silence in remembrance.

(b)      Welcome to New Councillor Dale Keeling

The Chair noted that Councillor Keeling was elected to represent the Dunsmore and Leam Valley Division in Rugby at a by-election on 14 December 2023 held following the resignation of Councillor Howard Roberts.

(c)      Engagements

The Chair reflected on his year in office to date, noting that some of the occasions he had attended so far were celebrated as part of the collage of engagements which featured on his official Christmas card.  He had attended some interesting events over the last quarter, including Remembrance Day services, charity events and the Annual Service for Charity Workers which had offered a unique opportunity to see the diverse groups volunteering to support the community.

To note any requests to speak on any item on the agenda in accordance with the Council’s Public Speaking Scheme (see note at end of the agenda).

None.

Councillor Peter Butlin (Deputy Leader of the Council) moved the motion and introduced this report, noting the improvement since the previous year’s report.  Councillor Adrian Warwick seconded the motion.

Mr Avtar Sohal was in attendance as a representative of Grant Thornton to present the report.  Mr Sohal drew attention to the executive summary in the report, and noted that overall it was a good report with no significant weaknesses to be highlighted. 

Councillor Holland stated his understanding that the purpose of the external auditor’s report was to reassure the public and asked for comment on recent media reports describing the Audit & Standards Committee Chair experiencing ‘discomfort’ at the way an historic issue had been handled by the auditors.  Mr Sohal explained that this related to an objection to a previous set of accounts which was being dealt with and would be completed shortly.

Vote:

A vote was held. The recommendation was agreed by a majority.

Resolved:

That Council:

1.     Notes the Annual Audit Report of the External Auditors, attached to the report at Appendix A; and

2.     Requests that Audit and Standards Committee review the delivery of the management action in response to the recommendations in the Annual Audit Report.

Councillor Peter Butlin (Deputy Leader of the Council) moved the recommendation and was seconded by Councillor Parminder Singh Birdi.  Councillor Butlin observed that the report clearly demonstrated the Council’s financial position and how it was intended to meet the Council’s financial commitments.

Councillor Bill Gifford commented on the difficult financial landscape and expressed concern regarding the Council’s responsibilities to provide funding for SEND with little control over the expenditure in this area.  Councillor Butlin acknowledged these concerns and noted that the situation was reflected in authorities across the country. 

Vote:

A vote was held. The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

Resolved:

That Council approves the Warwickshire County Council Statement of Accounts for 2022/23.

Councillor Christopher Kettle moved the recommendation set out in the report and the additional recommendation that had been tabled at the meeting. Councillor Brian Hammersley seconded.

Councillor Bill Gifford commended the Pension Team and Fund Advisors for the good health of the Fund, which was well managed with the careful assessment of risks.   He also noted that the Pension Fund Investment Sub-Committee had taken a keen interest in seeking improvements in the pension fund’s responsibilities in terms of climate change and sustainability.

Councillor Ian Shenton welcomed the growth that had been seen in recent years and was reassured that the fund was stable for its members.

Councillor Hammersley assured Members that the fund was being properly managed and the Pension Fund Investment Sub-Committee was ably supported by a number of independent advisors.

Councillor Christopher Kettle noted that the Fund was in an excellent position and reflected on the Pension Fund Investment Sub-Committee’s areas of focus in terms of climate change, cyber security and business continuity.  He also expressed thanks to the officer support team, some of whom were leaving the authority (Andy Felton, Victoria Moffat and Vicky Jenks) and acknowledged the contribution that they had made to the Sub-Committee’s meetings.

Vote:

A vote was held. The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

Resolved:

That Council:

1.     Approves the Warwickshire Pension Fund Statement of Accounts for 2022/23; and

2.     Authorises the Executive Director for Resources in consultation with the Chair  of the Council to amend the accounts for any final adjustments requested by the external auditors prior to the accounts being formally published and requires a report to the next Audit and Standards Committee setting out the changes.

Councillor Isobel Seccombe (Leader of the Council) moved the motion and introduced this report, which presented the 2022/23 Annual Governance Statement for consideration by the Council.  The motion was seconded by Councillor Yousef Dahmash.  There were no questions or comments on the report.

Vote:

A vote was held. The recommendation was agreed unanimously.

Resolved:

That Council approves the 2022/23 Annual Governance Statement.

Councillor Kam Kaur (Portfolio Holder for Education) introduced this comprehensive report relating to projects at Wharton Nethersole CofE Primary School and St John’s Primary School in Kenilworth and moved the recommendations as set out in the report. 

Councillor Peter Butlin (Portfolio Holder for Finance and Property) seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Tracey Drew welcomed the statement in the report that “all future school capital projects will be developed in accordance with statutory regulations which include the revised Building Regulations 2021” and sought more detail regarding the challenges set out in section 5 of the report.

Councillor Dave Humphreys welcomed the project in Wharton Nethersole, but noted that much of the housing development in the area was already complete and he asked if the possibility of receiving Section 106 monies at an earlier stage could be considered for future projects so that amenities were available at an early stage in the development not at the end.

Councillor Jonathan Chilvers welcomed additional places in Kenilworth given the amount of growth, but expressed concern that St John’s was some distance from the new growth which led him to believe that this would raise questions regarding transport at the planning stage.  Additionally, whilst these places were needed, he noted that there were two new junior schools to be built in the east of Kenilworth which seemed some time away from being in place.

Councillor Marian Humphreys welcomed the project in Wharton Nethersole.

In seconding the recommendation, Councillor Butlin commented on the three developments taking place in Wharton, including one where the Council was the developer, and how much the area needed this project.  He also considered that the project at Kenilworth demonstrated how much growth was taking place in Warwickshire, a reflection that it was a good place to both develop and live.

In response to the debate, Councillor Kaur stated that if sufficient funds and time were available, then the Council would seek to complete projects with full green sources but, in this case, providing the places was of paramount importance.  The Council would endeavour to use fossil fuel-free and zero carbon wherever possible but older buildings presented challenges in this regard. In terms of development funding and section 106 monies, she was only aware of one area where the developer had provided school amenities prior to building homes (Houlton).  She explained that the sufficiency team was a small unit consisting of just four individuals who undertook forecasting of demand for the whole of Warwickshire.  In-year changes, as a result of development, was causing some pressure but prioritisation would be given to those areas where demand was generating a need for school places.

Vote:

A vote on the motion took place which was carried unanimously.

Resolved:

That Council:

1.         Approves the addition of £2.868m to the capital programme to deliver the scheme at Warton Nethersole CofE Primary School, to be funded by developer contributions and the Department for Education (DfE) Basic Need Grant.

2.         Approves the addition of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Councillor Yousef Dahmash (Portfolio Holder for Customer and Transformation) introduced this comprehensive report which followed a Motion to Council in March 2023.  Councillor Pete Gilbert seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Sarah Feeney stated that the proposed revisions to the scheme did not meet the ethos of the motion that had been put forward in March 2023, which was to ensure that residents received a meaningful response.  Whilst she acknowledged that the revisions provided more clarity around member engagement, she did not think it offered a better service.  Whilst she understood the time sensitivities involved in preparing reports for debate, she considered this could have been built into the process.  She noted that under the provisions of the scheme, only the person who submitted the petition received a response, not those who signed it.  She was also of the view that the scheme did not provide an opportunity for petitions to hear an acknowledgement from the Council, however, she did welcome the provision to inform the Local Member who may wish to submit a motion in support.

Councillor Pete Gilbert considered that the revised scheme provided for more flexibility and continued the Council’s tradition of listening to residents. 

Councillor Dahmash reflected on the comments made during the debate and considered that it would be possible to learn from the changes after they had been introduced and there would be opportunities to make further changes in future as a result. However, he noted that the scheme made provision for the Local Member to speak on petitions presented at Council and expressed the view that there were logistical challenges which prevented a response to all signatories to a petition.

Vote:

A vote on the motion took place which was carried by a majority.

Resolved:

That Council approves the proposed changes to the Council’s Petitions Scheme as set out at Appendices 1 and 2 to the report and delegates the consequent amendment of the Constitution to the Monitoring Officer

Councillor Yousef Dahmash (Portfolio Holder for Customer and Transformation) introduced this report and moved the recommendation.  In doing so, he explained the structure of the Local Pension Board and the robust process followed to make this appointment.

Councillor Brian Hammersley seconded the recommendation and reserved the right to speak.

Councillor Sarah Millar supported the appointment and welcomed the gender diversity being introduced into the Board as a result.

Councillor Andy Crump also expressed support for the appointment and congratulated Councillor Dahmash for improvement in the recruitment process which had resulted in the appointment.

Councillor Dahmash noted that the best candidate had been selected for appointment.

Vote:

A vote on the motion took place which was carried unanimously.

Resolved:

That Council approves the appointment of Mrs Beverley Farmery as a Scheme Member representative on the Local Pension Board.

To consider the following motions submitted by members in accordance with Standing Order 5:

(1)      Liberal Democrat Motion:

Care Experience as a Protected Characteristic

           This Council recognises that the Equality Act 2010 currently protects people against discrimination for protected characteristics including age, race, gender and sexuality, but not care-experience.

The council notes that there is research suggesting that those who are care-experienced are more likely than the general population to face significant challenges in their life, such as mental health issues, barriers to further education, prison sentences and early mortality.

This council will therefore write to the Government asking them to amend the Equality Act 2010 to include care-experience as a protected characteristic and commits that Warwickshire County Council will ensure that in designing its policies and undertaking any form of Equality Impact Assessment care experience is considered as a protected characteristic pending any change to legislation.

           Proposer: Councillor Jerry Roodhouse

           Seconder: Councillor Kate Rolfe

(2)      Labour Motion 1:

           Average Speed Cameras

           There are areas of the County where residents have raised significant concerns about excessive speeding by drivers.  

There has also been a report published by the RAC Foundation on the effectiveness of average speed cameras.  On average, the permanent average speed camera sites analysed saw a reduction in injury collisions, particularly those of a higher severity: 

•                 Fatal and serious injury collisions fell by 25-46% 

•                 Personal injury collisions fell by 9-22%

The report also suggested that average speed cameras are becoming more cost effective. 

The Council’s pilot of average speed cameras was approved in November 2022. 

This Council resolves that:

1.              A report is brought to Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee in Summer 2024 to update on findings of the pilot and explain the policy for installation and operation of average speed cameras, and

2.        Consideration is given to increasing average speed camera use across the county as part of the MTFS budget proposals

           Proposer: Councillor Sarah Feeney

           Seconder: Councillor Sarah Millar

(3)      Labour Motion 2:

           Electric Vehicle Charging

Electric Vehicle numbers are on the increase in Warwickshire (and across the country there are more than 1 million plug in vehicles according to figures from the Society of Motoring Manufacturers and Traders).

There are concerns that the rate of uptake is not being matched by the availability of chargers. In some of Warwickshire’s towns there are specific off street vehicle charging challenges. 

Whilst innovative technologies exist and others are emerging, like lamppost chargers and pavement cable bays, attempts at deployment have been challenging.

This Council resolves that:

1.              Consideration is given to accelerating the implementation of EV charging facilities across the county as part of the MTFS budget proposals;

2.              A report is brought to Cabinet before the end of March 2024 recommending an electric vehicle charging policy; and

3.              A strategic approach to the procurement of charging technology is taken to support a flexible roll out that identifies community need and engages local members in identification of additional sites.

           Proposer: Councillor Sarah Millar

           Seconder: Councillor Sarah  ...  view the full agenda text for item 9.

(a)      Care Experience as a Protected Characteristic

Councillor Jerry Roodhouse moved the following motion, which was seconded by Councillor Kate Rolfe:

“This Council recognises that the Equality Act 2010 currently protects people against discrimination for protected characteristics including age, race, gender and sexuality, but not care-experience.

The council notes that there is research suggesting that those who are care-experienced are more likely than the general population to face significant challenges in their life, such as mental health issues, barriers to further education, prison sentences and early mortality.

This council will therefore write to the Government asking them to amend the Equality Act 2010 to include care-experience as a protected characteristic and commits that Warwickshire County Council will ensure that in designing its policies and undertaking any form of Equality Impact Assessment care experience is considered as a protected characteristic pending any change to legislation.”

Debate:

Councillor Sue Markham explained the work that the Council already undertook with care leavers, including a wide range of financial support, guaranteed interview schemes and support for young parents.  She noted that this provision provided care leavers with a level of protection and the opportunity to build a prosperous, healthy, and happy future.  She asserted that widening the number of protected characteristics gave them less meaning and children did not need further labelling.

Councillor John Holland considered that the Council would not be making the provision described by Councillor Markham if it was not needed.  In terms of widening the number of protected characteristics, he asserted that the introduction of the Equality Act in 2010 listed the lowest number of protected characteristics in order to smooth its path through to assent but there was evidence to show that wider definitions needed to be added.

Councillor Penny-Anne O’Donnell drew on her experience sitting on the Corporate Parenting Panel to highlight that the robust support available demonstrated that the voices of care experienced individuals and care leavers were already central to any policy considerations.

Councillor Isobel Seccombe welcomed the support that the Council was delivering for young people in Warwickshire and noted that the Council’s practice was to speak to, listen to, and react to the needs of children.  She did not consider that the Council needed to adopt care leaver as a protected characteristic simply because other councils had done so and, in so doing, create a label for young people who had not been asked if they wanted it.  She considered the best course of action was to continue to deliver in the right place, at the right time.

Councillor Marian Humphreys recollected her visit to the House project and meeting members of the Youth Council and how proud she was of their achievements and enthusiasm.  She did not consider that they needed to be labelled.

Councillor Kam Kaur noted that the Chamber had previously spoken about issues of equality and diversity but she agreed with the list of protected characteristics as it stood at the time of this meeting.  She considered it was more  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

A period of up to 40 minutes is allocated for questions to the Leader, Cabinet    Portfolio Holders and Chairs of Overview and Scrutiny Committees.

Councillor Sarah Millar posed the following question to Councillor Jan Matecki:

“Residents in Leamington Clarendon, for example on Wathen Road and Dale Street, have had to endure crater-like potholes and clanging man hole covers for weeks and months on end whilst the council argues with the utility companies as to who is responsible for their repair. What more can be done to more quickly identify the owner of such repair works so that residents don’t have to put up with these delays?”

As Councillor Matecki had left the meeting for personal reasons, Councillor Richard Baxter Payne responded on his behalf:

“The roles of the Highway Authority and the utility company in cases where utility apparatus is damaged is clearly defined in national legislation.

As the Highway Authority we are only able to make emergency repairs where there is a clear risk to road users.  For example in cases where manholes are noisy, this does not constitute an emergency.

For non-emergency repairs, we inform the relevant utility of the issue, who are then responsible for remedial repairs.  For these remedial repairs there is no set timescales for the repair to be undertaken by the utility.  However, they do need to agree a reasonable timescale for repair.

In order to speed up these types of repair, the County will engage with utility companies in the new year to agree standard periods for these types of remedial repairs.”

Councillor Millar asserted that the issue was not the repair, but who was responsible.  There was no guidance in this regard and she sought a process to easily identify who was the responsible authority at an early stage to ensure a better response on repairs.

Councillor Richard Baxter-Payne noted that non-emergency repairs were the responsibility of the utility company, and reiterated that in the new year officers would endeavour to secure a time frame for repairs to take place.

To consider any other items that the Chair considers are urgent.

None.