Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Andy Soughton, Nick Cottle, Philip Ham, Shane Collins, Mike Murphy and Tony Lock. Councillors Steve Ashton and Dawn Johnson were present as substitutes.

To receive and note any declarations of interests in respect of any matters included on the agenda for consideration at this meeting.

(The other registrable interests of Councillors of Somerset Council, arising from membership of City, Town or Parish Councils and other Local Authorities will automatically be recorded in the minutes: City, Town & Parish Twin Hatters - Somerset Councillors 2023 )

There were none.

To approve the minutes from the previous meeting.

The Committee was asked to consider the minutes of the meeting held on 24 February 2025.  Councillor Hobhouse proposed and Councillor Seib seconded that they be accepted as a true and accurate record and were approved subject to recording that Councillor Dave Mansell was a substitute at that meeting. Councillor Mansell said that during the meeting regarding agenda item 8 on the 2025/26 parking charges, he had requested an early “pre” consultation and suggested an amendment to the minutes.  However, Councillor Liz Leyshon advised that as every parking order goes out for consultation, there would be a risk that the public may only contribute to the “pre” consultation and not realise that there would be a further “official” consultation and therefore miss the opportunity to respond to the official consultation.

The Chair to advise the Committee of any items on which members of the public have requested to speak and advise those members of the public present of the details of the Council’s public participation scheme.

For those members of the public who have submitted any questions or statements, please note, a three minute time limit applies to each speaker and you will be asked to speak before Councillors debate the issue.

We are now live webcasting most of our committee meetings and you are welcome to view and listen to the discussion. The link to each webcast will be available on the meeting webpage, please see details under ‘click here to join online meeting’.

There were no public questions.

To consider the report.

The Deputy Leader of the Council and Lead Member Finance, Procurement and Performance, Councillor Liz Leyshon, introduced the report, which set out the final report and recommendations from the Local Government Association (LGA) Corporate Peer Challenge (CPC) that was conducted with Somerset between 12th and 15th November 2024. She said that it had been a very rewarding but very busy week Rewarding but very busy week with peers who had many years of experience. The Executive Director for Resources, Strategy and Transformation, Alyn Jones gave a further introduction and advised that the purpose of the report was to provide the Scrutiny Committee with the recommendations that were being proposed, so that Members could help influence any activities and actions prior to being approved by Executive.

There are 24 key recommendations as a result of the Corporate Peer Review.

The recommendation of the report was as that the Corporate and Resources Scrutiny Committee consider all recommendations in the Corporate Peer Challenge – Somerset Council Feedback and provide feedback to help inform the development of the Action Plan.

The Officer added that this was an opportunity to scrutinise the proposed action plan due on 12 April, but also the final action plan once decided.

During the discussion that followed a number of points were raised including:

·       The recommendation is for a people strategy. There are many recommendations with responsibility from external organisations. Is there the capacity to do this?

·       We are facing difficult financial circumstances so will the people strategy take this into account?

·       We need to empower staff and provide them with the ability to make decisions knowing the impact of these decisions.

·       The themes are not surprising and reflect a lot of the concerns that Councillors and Officers have raised themselves. Both Officers and Councillors need to be empowered the relationship between them needs development.

·       There needs to be a cultural shift and there is much work to be done with some departments to know how to work with Councillors.

·       LCNS need further development, including resourcing, which is already stretched and there have been further resignations.

·       Concern that the SWAP analysis and this Peer Review is a duplication of work.

·       Concern that information passed to Parish Clerks is not also shared with Members.

·       Some comments from the Peer review are difficult to comprehend, such as disposal of assets and also a lack of a robust approach to priority setting. Feel this is an unfair assessment.

·       Is there the resources and capacity within the Council to perform robust growth strategy the Review has asked for?

·       Would like more details on the requirement to influence of a wider group of members.

In response to questions raised, Officers advised as follows:

·       It is 10 months since they first visited and are due to be back in September or October 2025 to look at progress made. The action plan will be for 2025 to 2026 and will be for a period of 18 months. 

·       There has been allowance in the MTFP for the pay  ...  view the full minutes text for item 108.

To consider the report.

The Head of Democratic and Governance, Scott Wooldridge presented the report which set out the proposed approach to reviewing the Council’s scrutiny function and its scrutiny arrangement in partnership with the Local Government Association and Centre for Governance & Scrutiny

The report continued that the role that overview and scrutiny can play in holding an authority’s decision-makers to account remained fundamentally important to the functioning of local democracy and effective scrutiny helped secure the efficient delivery of public services and drives improvements within the authority itself. Effectiveness of scrutiny is often considered by external bodies such as regulators and inspectors, and highlighted in public reports, including best value inspection reports. Good scrutiny can therefore help to create a positive public image of the Council as a whole.

The recommendation within the report was the Committee are asked to consider, comment and agree:

1.     The proposed approach for the 2025 Scrutiny Review as set out in this report;

2.     The draft Terms of Reference for the Scrutiny Review Working Group and its membership.

The Head of Democratic and Governance suggested an amendment to recommendation 2 regarding membership of the Scrutiny Review Working Group, to delegate authority to the Monitoring Officer to confirm and agree the membership of the Working Group with the Chair.

During the discussion that followed a number of points were raised including:

·       The report is welcomed and recommendations are largely in line with what would be expected.

·       Recognised that there have been occasions when Scrutiny due process has not been followed, possibly due to timing, which has caused problems.

·       Important to allow appropriate time for Scrutiny.

·       Suggest more Task and Finish Groups.

·       Query regarding limiting the members of the Working Group to just Scrutiny Committee Members as many substitutes provide valuable contributions.

·       Concern that the Scrutiny function is Executive focussed and has to fit into the corporate framework.

·       Scrutiny has involved a lot of information seeking at the new Council. Hope to see more scrutinising of policies.

·       Scrutiny often seen as a hurdle. Need to improve engagement from Members and educate our colleagues.

·       Important that we get this right and not be pressured by deadline dates.

·       Concern that some Scrutiny Members do not feel confident to offer comment or criticism. Perhaps a survey of Members may be useful to find out why.

·       To run a good Scrutiny function requires Officer support. Concern about losing specialised Officers who have provided excellent support to the function.

In response, Members were advised as follows:

·       The timescales are ambitious and the key to success will be the willing involvement of Members and the arrangement of the Working Group.

·       There needs to be an improvement in the balance of what is brought to Scrutiny.

·       There is no plan for public consultation, but the Working Group can give consideration to this.

At the conclusion of the discussion Members noted the report and the Chair summed up the discussion. He asked for expressions of interest from Members from all 5 Scrutiny committees, and that Members would  ...  view the full minutes text for item 109.

To consider the report.

The Deputy Leader of the Council and Lead Member Finance, Procurement and Performance, Councillor Liz Leyshon, was invited to introduce the report. She advised that there was an improved position over Month 9 and everything depended on the approval from the MHCLG remaining at the original ask figure to reduce the drawdown on the reserves. The actual figure is unknown until the outturn, nor do we know the full cost of the redundancy until the end of the restructure.

The Month 11 report and will be a provisional outturn and it will be interesting and important to see where we have savings in this financial year, whether these can continue into the next financial year.

Detail was then provided by the Service Director of Finance and Procurement, Nicola Hix who highlighted the most significant movements since Q3 as follows:

·       Adults Services has an increased underspend of £0.015m due to the My Life, My Future transformation programme.

·       Children, Families & Education Services, has a decreased overspend of £1.673m mainly due to a reduction in the External Placement overspend.

·       Community Services has an increased underspend of £1.438m mainly attributed to an overachievement in income for Bereavement Service.

·       Climate & Place Services has a decreased overspend of £1.255m due to a reduction in the Waste overspend, delayed maintenance within Carparking and updated forecasts within Planning Services that has highlighted some salary savings.

·       Strategy, Workforce & Localities has an increased underspend of £0.297m due to further reduced spend on training and increased income in Legal Services.

·       Resources & Corporate Services has a decreased overspend of £0.477m largely due to an increased external income.

She also advised that there was a deficit in the DSG due to the mitigation of the service which was to enable the setting of the next years budget. They would continue to work with the Services. There was a slight improvement in the MTFP savings, and when the Month 11 report is presented, Members will note that the “on track” or “at risk” columns removed. The assessment will be whether achieved, or not. The impact of this will then be assessed.

There appears to be a decrease in the council tax collection but does not feel it to be a true decrease and is due to the introduction of a new system with an income management system. Some payments were held up so that Officers could perform proper checks. Therefore, in Month 11, this should show an increase.

She pointed out a significant Council Tax write off at over £100k. As such it has had to be reported to the Scrutiny Committee. She added that it was not unusual to see some write-offs at the end of the financial year as the Auditors look at whether arrears are truly collectible. She reassured the Committee that there had been a

a significant amount of work done involving many Officers to try to collect this Council Tax debt and it had been a very challenging case.

During the discussion that followed a number of points were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 110.