Brighton & Hove City Council
Policy & Resources Committee
4.00pm24 March 2022
Hove Town Hall - Council Chamber
Minutes
Present: Councillor Mac Cafferty (Chair) Druitt (Joint Deputy Chair), Gibson (Joint Deputy Chair), Allcock (Joint Opposition Spokesperson), Appich (Joint Opposition Spokesperson), Bell (Group Spokesperson), Clare, Evans, McNair and Moonan
Also present: Dr Anusree Biswas Sasidharan, Standing Invitee
Part One
112 Procedural Business
(a) Declarations of Substitutes
1.1 Councillor Moonan was present in substitution for Councillor Yates.
(b) Declarations of Interest
1.2 Councillor Druitt declared an interest in three items:
Item 118 – Notice of Motion, Residents/Visitors ‘Bus Gate’ Fines. Involvement with the Big Lemon bus company involved in community transport and whilst they had no involvement with the Bus Gates and had any remuneration from the fines that are collected, the company did benefit from the enforcement action on bus lanes. Dispensation had been granted to speak but would not vote on that item.
Item 122 – Home to School Transport Re-Procurement 2023-2027. The Big Lemon Bus was a home to school transport operator and so would leave the Chamber when that item was discussed.
Item 125 – Local Transport Plan 2022/23 Capital Programme. Dispensation had been granted to speak and vote on that item.
1.3 Councillor Moonan declared an interest in Item 123 Education Capital Resources and Capital Investment Programme 2022/2023. She was a governor of West Hove Learning Federation, which covers two schools: West Hove Infant and West Hove Juniors both of which were recipients of some of the grant funding.
1.4 Councillor McNair declared an interest in Item 123 Education Capital Resources and Capital Investment Programme 2022/2023. He was a governor at Carden Primary School.
(c) Exclusion of Press and Public
1.5 The Committee considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of any of the items listed on the agenda.
1.6 RESOLVED: There were no Part Two items.
113 Minutes
RESOLVED: The Minutes of the meetings held on 27 January 2022 and 10 February 2022 were agreed as a correct record of the proceedings.
114 Chair's Communications
114.1 The Chair gave the following communication:
This week marks two years since
the first Covid lockdown in the UK.
Day of reflection on 23rd March. 570 people died in the city since start of
pandemic – we remember them. Thank those who made
sacrifices.
We can’t give up
now. Cases in Brighton & Hove are up 60% in a week and as high
as they were in January. Worryingly, so are hospitalisations. This
is exactly where we don’t want to be and the
government’s reckless plan to lift all public health measures
- including scrapping free testing I personally think is a
disgrace.
Public health advice remains the
same: if you feel unwell, take action to stop covid spreading.
Meeting outside or in well ventilated spaces and wearing a face
mask indoors reduces risk. Take up your offer of a vaccine
including the booster.
The soaring cost of living crisis now compounds all this. Instead
of using the opportunity to intervene, I’m appalled at
government’s Spring Statement that has abandoned people to
more hardship.
This failure to act, according to
the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, will see a whopping 600,000 people
pulled into poverty, a quarter children, while the country will
experience the biggest fall in living standards since
rationing.
Families in poverty are now £446 per year
worse off compared to if benefits had been increased with current
inflation levels. Conservatives have run the country for more than
10 years and held the purse strings. Yet welfare support is at its
lowest level in real terms since 1985. Destitution and poverty has
risen and they must see that it is crunch point. You know when the
man renowned over 20 years for providing money saving advice,
Martin Lewis, has said that he’s “out of tools”
to help people there’s no more advice he can give- this
proves that something has gone badly wrong.
People in some of the worst positions in society and in the most
hardship are being abandoned by government to destitution.
Disgraceful when it’s clear across the length and breadth of
the country people urgently need national intervention. Joined
calls with BH Food Partnership to make access to food a legal right
for example.
Locally we are focused on doing what we can to help. Our community
hub can advise anyone struggling with food, bills or debt: please
phone 01273 293 117.
Finally, our Spring clean-up of Brighton & Hove begins Saturday
25th March. Council teams will once again jet wash our streets,
remove graffiti and tackle waste. Community groups and businesses
are encouraged to get involved, and we’ll be launching tidy
up plans at Saturday’s family friendly event at Preston Park.
This week I’ve been delighted to open brand new drinking
water fountains in the city. We’re making fresh, free clean
drinking water available to residents and visitors and encouraging
the use of refillable bottles to tackle the estimated 8 million
tonnes of plastic waste that enter the sea from land each year.
Finally, this is Nick Hibberd’s (Executive Director Economy Environment & Culture) last meeting of this committee. On behalf of all of us involved with this Committee, and personally, I wanted to thank Nick for his work, you have been an amazing tour do force for the organisation and will be sorely missed.
114(a) UKRAINE UPDATE
114(a).1 The Chair stated that due to the current situation in Ukraine he had asked for the Executive Director Housing, Neighbourhoods and Communities to provide an oral update on the preparations and response to the crisis and had agreed to take this as an additional item on the agenda.
The Chair said that at the moment the Council did not yet have
adequate, sufficient or expansive enough information from the Home
Office or DULCH to provide the necessary clarity residents or
council teams needed. We’re deeply disappointed about this.
However as soon as we do have that information, the Council will
bring further reports and updates to Councillors as and when we get
them, will update the Council’s website with information for
the public, and will bring a report to next P&R Committee in
May when we anticipate we will know more. We are hoping we will
have a parallel workstream on how we work on Ukraine refugees at
TECC Committee as well.
Anyone can go on gov website and see the guidance. What becomes
clear and obvious quickly is that so many sections are marked
‘more information to follow soon.’ Really
significant questions on important issues like safeguarding and DBS
checks are yet to be answered with, for example, the government
having no answers about how to help people while they wait for DBS
checks which as we know can be a lengthy process. Key questions
remain on what support can be offered to residents and refugees
after the 6 months initial period the government has planned for is
over. Some of this is deeply frustrating and yet again we have
another example of where local communities, councils stand ready to
help, to do the work they do best in the community, but government
insists on gripping tightly onto a centralised system. We appeal
with them to work with us to have a system that allows us to shape
it so it reflects our city and its values. Last week I wrote a
letter in collaboration with local refugee organisation Sanctuary
on Sea. In that letter we are seeking clarity as soon as possible,
as we know Brighton & Hove stands ready to help; also because
we’ve seen before, with our vocal opposition to housing
unaccompanied asylum seeking children in hotels, what happens when
government doesn’t collaborate with our voluntary sector and
with councils.
However my frustration with the government’s lack of
sufficient info is balanced out by the sheer pride we can all feel
in our residents, council teams and community and voluntary sector
organisations who, in spite of all these huge challenges are
absolutely rising to the challenge, and I am pleased that council
officials can update us today.
As we know the council has a very small, overworked but
consistently supportive team that are already working hard to
support refugees. But they are already working hard on the existing
streams of work to resettle Afghan refugees and welcome families
into the city; working on the Syrian Vulnerable Persons
Resettlement scheme and provide important links with our
city’s vibrant community and voluntary groups. The fact that
we have had to write again to the Home Office, following the
unannounced dropping of the UASCs in hotels in the city, National
Transfer schemes all in the last 12 months assert the system needs
change. The existence of these many different schemes with many
different criteria should actually serve as another reminder that
our asylum system is broken, and we urgently need, and vulnerable
people deserve, a consistent, compassionate and humanitarian
approach from this government with safe passage routes to all those
fleeing horrific circumstances, regardless of what country they are
from.
I will now hand over to executive Director Housing, Neighbourhoods & Communities and the Head of Communities & Equalities who will make a brief presentation on some of the technical information about the situation that we do know about. I will then open the issue for member questions for about 20 minutes. We also have an all member briefing tomorrow where other questions and points can be raised.
114(a).2 The Executive Director Housing, Neighbourhoods & Communities said that there were two government schemes which were relevant to this crisis. One was the Ukrainian Family Scheme which was about allowing Ukrainian family members to join families already settled in this country, and the second was Homes for Ukrainians Scheme which was the private sponsorship scheme. There may also be other Ukrainians who make their own way here or are stuck in this country and need our help, so there maybe a third group who the Council may wish to support too.
I will focus on the Homes for Ukrainians Scheme where applicants who wished to host families were matched with families from Ukraine who wanted to come to this country. This scheme would allow Ukrainians to remain in Britain for three years with the right to work and to access public services. As of today, there were around 156 matches of family hosts in the city. The Council’s role in this scheme had been limited in terms of guidance from the government. However, we do know that there will need to be DBS checks of host families, visits to properties and we will be responsible for supporting the financial scheme which will include the Thank You money to hosts of £350 per month. The Council will be required to support access to education, employment and community integration as well. The Council will receive a one-of payment of £10,500 per Ukrainian guest and there will be additional money for school placements for refugee children. The Authority were working to set up governance arrangements, as supporting the refugees would involve a number of services from across the Council and the community and voluntary sector. There would need to be a single point of contact at the Council who would liaise with all services and stakeholders. There were a number of challenges; the Council didn’t currently have detailed guidance on the services the government expected the authority to provide, there would be a delay in completing DBS checks and the Council needed to be able to keep residents informed with up-to-date information. The Council had access to the Central Government Portal which processed the applications but the data on that site was difficult to extract i.e. how many children may be involved. Another challenge was that the City only had a small Ukrainian community and that could create difficulties with finding interpreters. It was anticipated that more detailed guidance from the Government would be provided shortly.
114(a).3 Councillor Allcock noted the challenges that would arise from assisting the refugees particularly when the Homes for Ukraine’s ended and asked whether the Council should be asking the Government to suspend the right to buy scheme as that would help to ensure the viability of council housing, and as the Council had previous experience of supporting vulnerable people and asked whether the Council could liaise with other agencies whilst waiting for further Government guidance. The Executive Director Housing, Neighbourhoods & Communities said that there had been some initial guidance on right for housing for people coming to the City under the two schemes, and there would be legislative changes to enshrine their right to housing. The Head of Communities & Equalities said that the Council already had a network in place from helping vulnerable people through Covid and supporting asylum seekers and so there already contacts in place with the voluntary sector, health, police, fire & rescue, other council colleagues etc.
114(a).4 Councillor Evans asked if there was any indication on how many families may come to the City and how long it could take them to do so. The Executive Director Housing, Neighbourhoods & Communities said that currently the only information available was how many families had registered on the Government’s portal. The Local Government Association were undertaking a survey of housing associations on how many Ukrainians had requested assistance.
114(a).5 Councillor Clare asked if the £10k was a one-off payment and was advised it was.
114(a).6 Councillor Moonan asked if there would be sufficient places at the schools for any Ukrainian children and what support could be provided if it was needed. The Executive Director Families Children & Learning that there would be sufficient places and support would be provided where appropriate.
114(a).7 Councillor McNair asked if the Council were co-ordinating with other authorities on supporting refugees, and if any Ukrainians had already arrived here what issues had arisen. The Chair said that through the Local Government Association (LGA) he was already talking to other leaders across the country and had been feeding into many of the questions the LGA had raised with ministers. The Head of Communities & Equalities said that the Council had not been contacted any Ukrainian refugees, only by host families but there were some Ukrainian’s already living in the city but whose visas had or were expiring who had contacted the authority and support was providing to them.
114(a).8 Councillor Appich said that she had been contacted by many people asking how they could help and suggested that the Council provide an access point for people. The Executive Director Housing, Neighbourhoods & Communities said that the intention was to have a single point of contact for both host families and refugees.
115 Call Over
115.1 The following items on the agenda were reserved for discussion:
Item 121 Fair and Inclusive Update Including Workforce Equalities Report 202-21
Item 122 Home to School Transport Re-Procurement 2023-2027
Item 123 Education Capital Resources and Capital Investment Programme 2022/2023
The following items on the agenda were agreed without discussion:
Item 119 Corporate Financial & HR Systems
Item 120 Pay Policy Statement 2022/23
Item 124 Annual Planned Maintenance Budget and Asset Management Fund Allocations for the Council’s Operational Buildings
Item 125 Local Transport Plan 2022/23 Capital Programme
Item 126 Research and Innovation Fibre Ring Project
116 Public Involvement
116.1 There were no Petitions or Deputations, but there was one Question.
116.2 Mr Mancey-Barratt (on behalf of Ms Barratt) asked the following question:
Brighton and Hove Council owns a large area of farmland close to the city, leased out. The farmland to the East of Falmer Road and some to the West falls into this category. This agricultural landscape here is bleak and lacking in natural diversity. Such hedgerows as there are don’t really deserve the name, while most field divisions are wire fences. The public footpaths crossing fields to the East are stark and unprotected. Trees are absent.
Regardless of the nature of the current leases, or their length, is there any Council-led engagement with the custodians of these important landscapes concerning environmental improvement, and, if not, could there be?
The Chair provided the following response:
Thank you very much for your question. Brighton & Hove City Council owns a large amount of farmland on the City Downland Estate which covers 12,862 acres. The council’s rural estate is a tenanted landscape with much of the day to day management undertaken by the council’s farming tenants. 78% of this is farmland is let on various tenancies across 16 farm holdings on either older Agricultural Holdings Act (AHA) agreements which allow the tenant long term security and successions whereby the farmers have freedom to crop or more modernised Farm Business Tenancies (FBT) granted in1995 that enable a more flexible approach and where there is no security of tenure.
This part of the Estate is very representative of Brighton’s open downland and does contain some very important and biodiverse habitats such as the chalk grassland at Castle Hill. More can be done to both improve the quality and extent of these rare habitats and to connect them via wildlife corridors.
In this regard, the council has currently embarked on an extensive public consultation exercise to develop a future vision and plan for the Council’s City Downland Estate over the next hundred years. The City Downland Estate Plan will include actions on how best to undertake these improvements that will focus on specific actions to be implemented over the next 10 years.
Our tenant farmers, stakeholders, the South Downs National Park and other associated organisations have been closely involved in this process and we hope, as this consultation nears a conclusion, that it will lead to, as you say, positive actions to improve open access land and hedgerows.
The Council are currently leading on this extensive engagement through the development of a Whole Estate Plan called the City Downland Estate Plan. The Plan will create an overarching vision and framework for the future management of the rural Estate and an implementation plan of improvements. This will lead us to jointly create farm scale plans with our farming tenants, which will consider specific opportunities for biodiversity improvements including wildlife corridors, hedgerows and public access infrastructure. There has been a huge amount of interest and support for the Whole Estate Plan process and we can provide you with further information and weblinks on the engagement process so far.
Once you have had an opportunity to review the extensive information through the portal we would encourage you to make contributions when the portal reopens in the Summer for public consultation.
Mr Mancey-Barratt asked the following supplementary question:
It was extraordinarily difficult to find anything out about the Council agricultural land that I was interested in. The only information on the Council website is a link to Savill’s Property Consultants, which proves to lead to no information about Brighton and Hove at all. Could specific information about Council holdings, including a map, be provided on Brighton and Hove Council’s website?
The Chair provided the following response:
We are sorry you have not been able to find the information easily, the council is in the process of improving its website.
All the information for the consultation has been published on the website with extensive information about the City Downland Estate and associated maps. We can provide you with this information, weblinks to the City Downland Estate consultation process and findings and to the interactive map of the City Downland. Once we have completed the Whole Estate Plan process the information will continue to be made available on our website in the specific section for the City Downland Estate.
117 Items Referred from Council
117.1 A Notice of Motion on ‘Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation’ which had been presented at Council held on 3 February 2022 had been referred to this Committee.
117.2 RESOLVED: That the Committee agreed to undertake the actions as set out in the Notice of Motion.
118 Member Involvement
118.1 There were no Petitions, Written Questions or Letters but there was one Notice of Motion from the Conservative Group ‘Residents/Visitors ‘Bus Gate’ Fines’.
118.2 The Chair asked Councillor McNair to propose the Notice of Motion.
118.3 Councillor McNair said the public did not know what Bus Gates were, whether they were technically legal or otherwise the signage was awful, the road layouts around the junction was counter intuitive and fines should be returned to residents as they had been extracted on an immoral basis. Bus Gates were very short bus lanes, which were a legal oddity in legislation where the length of a bus lane was not defined. In this place cars could be seen travelling freely on the other side of the Bus Gate line, and tens of thousands of residents and visitors had fallen foul of the Bus Gate shakedown. Bad signage remained in place despite assurances that it would be improved, and access to the bus gate lane still looked inviting, and turning was still counter intuitive as the road did not look like a bus lane. Motorists were still making the error and being fined, and a redesign would be easy to do. Millions of pounds of fines had been issued, and it was unacceptable that the Council is being funded from a badly designed road layout and the money should be returned.
118.4 Councillor Bell seconded the Notice of Motion.
118.5 Councillor Evans said that the road layout had been thoroughly reviewed by the Council and the signage was already being addressed, the bus gates were necessary to ensure the efficiency of public transport, and all disputed or appealed fines had been reviewed by an independent tribunal and the procedures for the fines had satisfied a government body. The Labour Group would not therefore be supporting the Notice of Motion.
118.6 Councillor Gibson noted that the traffic tribunal had not found that the Council had done anything wrong and had not asked the Council to make any changes to the signage and so the Green Group would not be supporting the Notice of Motion.
118.7 Councillor Bell accepted that the signage may have met the minimum standards set by the Government, but as soon as the number of fines being issued became evident the Council should have realised that there was a problem and addressed it.
118.8 The Chair noted that the number of fines issued had reduced by 53%, and whilst none of the signage had been found to be at fault it was being reviewed. What the Notice of Motion asked the Committee to do was legally difficult as the traffic orders were made legally and a repayment of the fines would have to be a gratuitous payment and would be ultra vires.
118.9 The Committee voted on the Notice of Motion – Councillor Druitt did not vote on this item.
118.10 RESOLVED: That the Notice of Motion was not agreed.
119 Corporate Financial & HR Systems
119.1 This item was agreed without discussion.
119.2 RESOLVED: That the Committee –
(i) Approved the award of a contract via a compliant framework for the continued support and maintenance of the financial system to Civica UK Ltd for an initial term of 3 years with an option to extend for up to 2 periods of 12 months, and grants delegated authority to the Executive Director, Governance, People & Resources to authorise those extensions if required;
(ii) Approved the award of a contract via a compliant framework to Softcat, with MHR acting as their approved sub-contractor for the continued support and maintenance of the HR and payroll system for a term of 3 years.
120 Pay Policy Statement 2022/23
120.1 This item was agreed without discussion.
120.2 RESOLVED: That the Committee recommends to Council the adoption of the pay policy statement for 2022/23 attached at Appendix 1.
121 Fair & Inclusive update including Workforce Equalities Report 2020-21
121.1 The Committee considered the report of the executive Director Governance People & Resources which provided an update on the Fair and Inclusive Action Plan and the Annual Workforce Equalities Report 2020-21. The report was introduced by the Director Human Resources & Organisational Development.
121.2 Councillor Appich asked what issues regarding equality were keeping officers awake at night; how were the 16 delegates in the Diverse Talent Programme selected; what was the uptake for the Equality training? The Director Human Resources & Organisational Development said that the issue which concerned her most was the statistics for BME staff at senior level, and that had been identified as a key priority. With regard to the Diverse Talent Programme, data had showed that there was a drop of BME workers from Senior Officer 1 grade, and so the programme was opened up to anyone in the three grades below that. Sixteen was a good number to be on the programme and each participant had a mentor who was a senior officer. The Fair and Inclusive training was delivered to around four thousand members of staff.
121.3 Dr Sasidharan was pleased to note that the percentage of BME and White Other staff within the workforce continued to increase and suggested that it would be useful to have a breakdown of the upper and lower pay bands for those staff, as well as more information on staff with disabilities and areas where men are under-represented. With regard to establishing ethnically diverse panels, if there were any external staff would they receive a payment, and if there were internal staff it would be useful to acknowledge that in their appraisals. BME staff were asking for more meaningful PDPs and asked how managers could ensure that that happened. The Director Human Resources & Organisational Development said that with regard to pay bands, disabled workers and areas where men were under represented a written answer would be provided. The comments on diverse panels were helpful particularly regarding using external staff. Data regarding PDPs had been significant, and would be used as part of the performance management process for senior officers.
121.4 Councillor Moonan noted that many staff worked from home and asked if a member of staff was disabled whether they had the appropriate equipment to do so, and whether working from home or a hybrid model could be included in the staff survey. The Director Human Resources & Organisational Development said that a lot of equipment had already been provided to enable officers to work from home, but all staff also had the option to come into the office if they preferred. The 2020/21 staff survey included questions about working from home and many staff preferred the flexibility of being able to do that.
121.5 Councillor Evans was concerned that 69% of staff did not feel that issues of bullying, harassment and discrimination were taken seriously. The Director Human Resources & Organisational Development said that the percentage was improving but it was a key area which the organisation was focusing on, and would provide more information after the meeting.
121.6 Councillor McNair noted that in 2020/21 57.9% of the workforce were female and 42.1% male, and asked what steps were being taken to increase the number of men in the organisation, and why was there a target of 46.4% female and 53.6% male? The Director Human Resources & Organisational Development said the targets were based on the economically active population in the City and would be reviewed once the new census data was received. The percentage of male and female varied depending on the area of work, and areas such as Care tended to have more females. Each directorate had its own equalities data and they would identify specific actions to address any disparity. The Executive Director Governance People & Resources said that in addition to the support from HR, the Executive Leadership Team received regular data and were champions for equality in their own areas.
121.7 The Chair noted that there was a Labour Group amendment and asked Councillor Appich to propose it.
121.8 Councillor Appich proposed the amendment said that the pay gaps should be broken down into categories rather than simply having ‘White British’ and ‘Other’, and that a report come to the October meeting of this committee setting out how the actions and initiatives taken contribute to achieving the Equality Objectives. Councillor Evans formally seconded the amendment.
121.9 Councillor Clare said that the Green Group would support the amendment.
121.10 Councillor Bell said that Conservative Group would support the amendment.
121.11 The Committee voted and agreed the amendment.
121.12 RESOLVED: That the Committee –
(i) Noted the report;
(ii) Continued to support and champion the actions within the Fair & Inclusive Action Plan;
(iii) Instructed officers to publish voluntary 2021 ethnicity and disability pay gap reporting in Autumn 2022 to allow meaningful engagement with stakeholders, and to break down the ethnicity pay gap into the categories Black Asian Minority Ethnic British, Black Asian Minority Other, White British, White Irish, White Other, rather than White British/All other, as agreed at Policy & Resources Committee in July 2021;
(iv) Further instructed officers to bring a report back to the October meeting of the Policy & Resources Committee outlining how the actions and initiatives taken contribute to achieving the Equality Objectives that the Council has set for itself and published in compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty.
122 Home to School Transport Re-Procurement 2023-2027
122.1 The Committee considered the report of the Executive Director Families Children & Learning regarding the re-procurement of a Dynamic Purchasing System to provide home to school transport (HTST) to pupils with special educational needs, and other hired transport for vulnerable children and adults on behalf of social care teams.
122.2 Councillor Druitt left the Chamber during consideration of this item.
122.3 Councillor Allcock asked if officers saw any difficulties with the DPS working, any issues with the recruitment of staff, pressures on home to school transport such as additional service user and increase to cost of fuel and how would any risks be mitigated. The Executive Director Families Children & Learning said that the DPS was working and that it was the best available option, surveys showed 95% of users were happy with the service and had not had any complaints from the providers and noted that the DPS was supported by the LGA. There had been some problems with recruiting staff but interviews were being held next week. Increased costs were a risk and higher fuel prices would have an impact, and there had been an 18% increase in demand since last year. It was important to mitigate any risks and to assist with that, officers ensured that there was communication with all partners and the Council at all times.
122.4 Councillor Bell noted that children felt safe with drivers that they knew and some children needed to travel on their own, and hoped that could be continued going forward. The Executive Director Families Children & Learning said that there would be some level of disruption as the re-procurement was undertaken but would try and mitigate that as much as possible. All parties would be kept informed of any changes, children would be introduced to their drivers and all drivers would undergo training. Single person journeys would be based on as assessment and put in place where necessary.
122.5 RESOLVED: That the Committee –
(i) Approved the procurement of a Dynamic Purchasing System for home to school transport for a term of four years from 1 September 2023 to 31 August 2027;
(ii) Granted delegated authority to the Executive Director of Families, Children & Learning to tender routes using the Dynamic Purchasing System;
(iii) Agreed that operators should be required to pay their directly employed staff the living wage.
123 Education Capital Resources and Capital Investment Programme 2022/2023
123.1 The Committee considered the report of the The Executive Director Families, Children & Learning regarding the level of available capital resources allocated to support education buildings and which recommended a capital programme for 2022/23 in respect of School Condition Allocation (SCA) and Basic Need funding.
123.2 Councillor Moonan noted that the slippage arising from the 2021/2022 Capital Programme would be incorporated into the 2022/2023 programme when the capital accounts were closed on 31 March 2022 and asked how much that slippage was expected to be and why was it happening. Two schools Homewood College and Moulsecoomb Primary had become Academies but the Capital Budget for 2019/20 had allocated money to create a central hub to incorporate Homewood College and the PRU and asked if that funding was still appropriate now that Homewood College had become an academy and some money was still being allocated to Mouslecoomb Primary. The Head of Capital Strategy usually occurs when a tender comes in higher than expected, for example refurbishments of toilets at schools can only be undertaken during holidays and so if tenders are too high it has to be done later in the year, and there had been problems with the SEND school estate and it had been prudent not to allocate the funding later. The paper had been written before the academisation of Homewood College, and that funding had now been paused. With regard to Mouslecoomb Primary the funding was allocated for this financial year and before it became an academy and the work for 2022/23 will not now be undertaken and the funding would be reallocated.
123.3 Councillor Appich was concerned that the report contained inaccurate information and asked if a further report could be provided with the correct figures. Councillor Clare confirmed that a report on Homewood College would be coming to a future meeting of the CYPS Committee.
123.4 The Committee voted on the recommendations, with six votes for and four abstentions (Labour Group).
123.5 RESOLVED: That the Committee granted delegated authority to the Assistant Director of Property & Design to procure the capital maintenance and basic need works and enter into contracts within these budgets, as required, in accordance with Contract Standing Orders in respect of the entire Education Capital Programme.
124 Annual Planned Maintenance Budget and Asset Management Fund Allocations for the Council's Operational Buildings
124.1 This item was agreed without discussion.
124.2 RESOLVED: That the Committee agreed -
(i) That the annual programme of planned maintenance works for the Planned Maintenance Budget as detailed in Appendices 2 and 3, at a total estimated cost of £3,496,740 be approved;
(ii) That the Asset Management Fund allocation for 2021-22 totalling £1,000,000, as detailed in paragraph 3.4.2 of this report be approved;
(iii) That delegated authority be granted to the Executive Director Economy, Environment & Culture and Assistant Director Property & Design to procure the Planned Maintenance Budget and Asset Management Fund improvement works and award contracts within these budgets.
125 Local Transport Plan 2022/23 Capital Programme
125.1 This item was agreed without discussion.
125.2 RESOLVED: That the Committee agreed the 2022/23 Local Transport Plan capital programme budget allocation of £6.357 million, as set out in Appendix 1 of this report.
126 Research and Innovation Fibre Ring Project
126.1 This item was agreed without discussion.
126.2 RESOLVED: That the Committee –
(i) Noted the work done to date to deliver the RIFR project using Getting Building Fund money from government, including the progress made to date on the 5G test bed and further notes the procurement options that have been explored to deliver the fibre;
(ii) Agreed to the council joining the Cooperative Network Infrastructure (CNI) and Brighton Digital Exchange co-operatives;
(iii) Agreed to use £310,000 of the Getting Building Fund grant, to commission CNI to use their status as a Communications Provider to ensure access to existing Openreach infrastructure, and notes that this fibre will be delivered broadly in line with the map shown at Appendix 1;
(iv) Delegated authority to the Executive Director for Economy, Environment and Culture to enter into the agreements necessary to deliver the fibre element of the RIFR;
(v) Noted how the RIFR project fits into a wider sub-regional digital delivery programme at a Greater Brighton level, as set out at paragraph 3.19, and that Brighton & Hove will work with the Greater Brighton Economic Board to maximise the strategic benefits of the new fibre;
(vi) Agreed to commission a £25,000 (maximum) programme of digital education and support to maximise the benefits of the RIFR project to the wider digital economy of the city and to the city’s communities – as set out at Appendix 2.
127 Items Referred For Council
127.1 RESOLVED: That no items be referred to the next meeting of Council
The meeting concluded at 7.20pm
|
Signed
|
Chair |
||
|
Dated this |
day of |
|
|