Agenda and draft minutes

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors B Wernham, L Patrick, A Harid and Councillor B Kelly (Portfolio Holder for Cumberland Policy and Regulatory Services).

To receive declarations by Councillors of disclosable pecuniary interests, personal interests, other registerable interests and any other interests in respect of items on the agenda

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct Councillor Ghayouba declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in agenda item 6 – Procurement Policy due to working for Sellafield Ltd.

In accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct the following Members declared a registrable interest in respect of agenda item 8 - Outside Bodies as they represented the Council of on the outside bodies listed:

Councillor Ghayouba – Cumbria Community Foundation West Cumbria Panel and NULEAF

Councillor Grisdale – Mayport Harbour Authority and North West Reserve Forces and cadets

Association

Councillor Pegram – Maryport Harbour Authority

Councillor Wills – Currock Community Centre

Councillor Minshaw – Community Coastline Community Rail Partnership

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during consideration of any items of business on the agenda.

RESOLVED – It was agreed that items in Part A be dealt with in the public, there were no items in private to be dealt with in Part B when the public and the press were excluded.

To receive the minutes of the Business & Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 28 January 2025.

RESOLVED – that the minutes of the meetings held on 28 January 2025 be approved.

To receive the corporate performance report for Quarter 3 2024/25.

The Assistant Director of Strategy and Policy provided the Committee with an overview of the Quarter 3 Performance by-exception report which, though provided in totality, focused on the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and activities that were showing as red and amber to help build a picture of areas to watch or where improvements were required. She explained that the Committee’s previous recommendation to improve navigation had been actioned through links being imbedded within the electronic version of the report She also pointed out that, with regard to two-and-a-half year reviews, improvement was expected in 2025/26 with a new provider in place.

In considering the report Members raised the following comments and questions:

-        Was the recommission of sexual health services projected to improve?

The Director of Business Transformation and Change noted that the current provider had extended their contract until November 2025 to enable a longer potential mobilisation period of the new provider. She assured the Committee that, once the new provider was in place, an update on the services would be provided.

-        Were all Building Control staff working to receive the accreditation and would there be a link with education and promoting the service through schools.

The Director of Business Transformation and Change noted that all staff were expected to undertake the accreditation and work was being undertaken regarding recruitment, apprenticeships and targeting further education to build a workforce for the future.

-        Had the number of Freedom of Information (FoI) requests increased and were the Information Commissioners Officer (ICO) assured that improvements were being made.

The Chief Legal Officer (MO) confirmed that there had been an increase in the number of FoI’s received, with complexity and staffing issues adding to the delays in responses. She added that the ICO were being kept informed and working with the Council while the backlog had marginally improved.

-        Members discussed staffing issues within planning enforcement and Building Control, they requested additional KPIs and further exploration into the issue.

The Assistant Director of Strategy and Policy noted that, while there was no specific KPI for planning enforcement within the report, more specific information could be provided upon request.

Members agreed to recommend that the Place Overview and Scrutiny Committee review issues and data around planning enforcement and building control and how these may be impacting on local economic growth.

-        Members discussed staffing issues across the Council and the impact on services.

The Director of Business Transformation and Change noted that work was being undertaken with Directors to review capacity and links to performance. She commented that there was a focus in recruitment to difficult to appoint to roles while being mindful of the resources available.

RESOLVED that the Business and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

a)    Noted the overall performance relating to the delivery of the Cumberland Council Plan priorities as measured by the activities and key performance indicators set out within the report.

b)    Noted the potential improvement with a new provider in place for two to two-and-a-half year  ...  view the full minutes text for item BROS130/24

To scrutinise the Cumberland Procurement Policy.

The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement provided the Committee with an overview of the Procurement Act and the development of Cumberland’s Procurement Policy. He reported that Cumberland Council were at the forefront of local authorities in implementing the changes and highlighted the award of tenders on Social Value, with 93% awarded on 10% of Social Value and 43% awarded on 20% of Social Value. The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement also commented on the contract management standardisation and the impact on Children’s Services.

In considering the report Members raised the following comments and questions:

-        How would Social Value be monitored in Cumbria through partners and the Council.

The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement explained that each organisation would show the impact of Social Value, with the Council working on an appointment map to show delivery, the aim would be to have a contractual monitor for all applications. He also noted that the Council had two KPIs to help monitor Social Value and feedback from partners, including Sellafield Ltd and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) also helped show how Social Value was being realised as part of the anchor institution model being implemented to help Social Value stay in Cumbria.

-        Was there an obligation for sub-contractors in place to ensure the appropriate work was delivered.

The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement explained that there was a legal obligation for the Council to put clauses in place to ensure that delivery was guaranteed and best value.

-        Was guidance, advice and training available to businesses.

The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement explained that pre-market engagement was being undertaken, with advice and guidance on commissioning, procurement, tenders, contract management and delivery available to help educate applicants as much as possible before the tender process started with training also being provided to the third sector. The Service Manager – Procurement and Contract Management added that applicants were informed of the Council's desires, ambitions and preferred outcomes were discussed as part of the pre-marketing engagement process.

-        Would there be targeted workshops organised to help micro-businesses with applications and required accreditation.

The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement commented that, where possible, officers were advised to split the contracts to signpost for small sub-contracts to help micro-businesses and keep contracts as local as possible.

-        How many officers still required training and would there be a summit for businesses.

The Assistant Director of Commissioning and Procurement noted that 180 staff had been trained through the new legislation and requirements to address gaps identified. The Service Manager – Procurement and Contract Management explained that officer interaction was now greater than the previous 12 months because of the required pre-tender notice and there had been five training sessions so far, with ongoing conversations as to whether further sessions were required. She explained that engagement days with businesses were planned, some online and some in person, with those in person having a higher local business turnout while online events had a  ...  view the full minutes text for item BROS131/24

To consider the findings of the community hubs trials.

The Director of Resources provided the Committee with some background information on the Community Hubs.

The Service Manager – Libraries and Community Hubs provided the Committee with an overview of the presentation and report on Community Hubs which highlighted the two pilots in Workington Library and Morton Community Centre and their varying results, the vision for Community Hubs across Cumberland and the case studies and feedback from the pilots.

In considering the report Members raised the following comments and questions:

-        Consultation with Members on potential venues for Community Hubs would be beneficial, especially for rural areas, such as Seascale Library which was already a well-used hub.

The Director of Resources agreed that using Seascale Library as a trial for a more rural Community Hub would be beneficial and the Service Manager – Libraries and Community Hubs noted that work was being done to explore venues outside of the main three towns in Cumberland following the learning from the pilots.

-        Would mobile libraries be considered to help address rurality access issues.

The Director of Resources commented that the ongoing library services review would consider the re-introduction of mobile library services to help with access rather than the Community Hubs.

[Councillor Wills left at 16:37]

-        What was the difference between a Family Hub and a Community Hub and could they be combined.

The Director of Resources explained that while the two hubs operated on the same principle, Family Hubs were specifically for children and family users and Community Hubs focused on Council Services. He commented that the aim was to have the maximum number of services possible in one building but that it would not be done to the detriment of one service.

-        Were conversations being carried out regarding the closure of banks and the post office to possibly co-ordinate adding those services to the Community Hubs.

The Service Manager – Libraries and Community Hubs noted that conversations were being undertaken with all potential partners to explore possible additions and opportunities for capital.

RESOLVED that the Business and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

a)    Noted Community Hubs report and presentation.

b)    Noted the feedback provided which would inform the development of the Community Hubs.

c)     Recommended that Seascale Library be used as a trial for Community Hubs in a rural area.

[The Director of Resources and Service Manager – Libraries and Community Hubs left at 16:51]

To scrutinise the Outside Bodies for 2025/26.

The Chief Legal Officer (MO) provided the Committee with an overview of the Outside Bodies report which highlighted the statutory requirements of the Council, the links to the Council’s priorities, the final list of Outside Bodies at Appendix 1 and the comments and feedback received from Councillors on the Outside Bodies they were appointed to at Appendix 2, with an updated copy of Appendix 2 tabled at the meeting.

In considering the report Members raised the following comments and questions:

-        Members discussed the number of Outside Bodies without any feedback associated with them and the difficulty to be able to effectively scrutinise the value of being on an Outside Body without further information. They requested an additional push to receive further information from Councillors where none was provided and to add a mid-year review to the work programme.

The Chief Legal Officer (MO) agreed to contact those Councillors who had yet to send feedback and share the feedback with the Committee, she acknowledged the request for a mid-year review on Outside Bodies.

Members recommended and agreed that the Outside Bodies which had no appointments made for 2024/25 should be removed from the Outside Bodies list.

-        Was the £375,000 annual fee for the North Western Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority correct.

The Director for Business Transformation and Change noted that North Western Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authority was part of a wider North West arrangement and the annual fee appeared to be a grant from the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.

-        Members raised concern that a previous recommendation had not been actioned and requested that the membership on Copeland Community Fund, which was set up under a Section 106 planning agreement with Copeland Borough Council, be amended to include one Councillor from South Cumberland Community Panel and one Councillor from Whitehaven and Coastal Community Panel, to represent the whole former Copeland area.

The Chief Legal Officer agreed to submit the recommendations to Full Council for agreement.

-        Were the number of ‘Transport for the North’ Outside Bodies accurate or duplications.

The Chief Legal Officer (MO) noted that the numbers were accurate and part of four different strands.

Members requested that feedback be provided to the Committee should any recommendation from the Committee on changes to Outside Bodies not be agreed.

RESOLVED that the Business and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

a)    Noted the content of the report and the information shared by Members;

b)    Noted the recommendation for the following outside bodies to be removed from the list of bodies to which the Council makes appointments

a.     Botcherby Community Centre Management Committee

b.     Greystone Community Centre

c.     Westfield Housing Association

c)     Requested the Chief Legal Officer (MO) chase outstanding feedback from Councillors and circulate them to the Committee

d)    Added a mid-year review of appointments to Outside Bodies to their Work Programme.

e)    Recommend that the membership for Copeland Community Fund be amended to include one Councillor from South Cumberland Community Panel and one Councillor from  ...  view the full minutes text for item BROS133/24

To receive an update on Devolution for Cumbria.

The Assistant Chief Executive provided the Committee with an overview of the Devolution process, highlighting the consultation organised by the Government on a Strategic Authority in Cumbria following the publication of the White Paper in December and the Government’s preference for a Mayoral Strategic Authority. He also highlighted the three layers to Strategic Authorities; Foundation, Mayoral and Established Mayoral and the seven areas of competence available to Strategic Authorities.

In considering the report Members raised the following comments and questions:

-        What were the potential benefits of having a Mayoral Strategic Authority.

The Assistant Chief Executive explained that other areas that had a Mayoral Strategic Authority had seen numerous benefits, such as additional freedoms and powers and a strong voice for their region. Devolution in Cumbria would provide the county with a seat at the Council of Nations and Regions.

He also noted, that for progression, it would take a minimum of 18 months to become an Established Mayoral Strategic Authority once the new authority was established.

-        What resources would be required to facilitate a Strategic Authority.

The Assistant Chief Executive explained that the existing Combined Authorities were different in size and scale. The size of the organisation would depend on how it chose to exercise its powers and what other powers it might seek from Government. The authority was likely be quite small in the first instance but could grow over time.

-        What scrutiny functions would be in place for a Strategic Authority.

The Assistant Chief Executive commented that the scrutiny element would be similar to the former Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) scrutiny process and that there would also be an audit committee in place.

-        Who would make the final decision on Devolution and the path taken.

The Assistant Chief Executive explained that the Minister would make an assessment on whether Devolution could proceed following the consultation response and the two Councils in Cumbria would make a final decision to forma the new authority in the autumn.

He highlighted Cumberland Council or Westmorland and Furness Council decide that they did not want to form a Strategic Authority, then Devolution would not occur. Although the Government had indicated that they could progress Mayoral devolution in the future. The Assistant Chief Executive also commented that in the past there were numerous paths to Devolution but that the Government was working on standardising the process.

-        Members noted their disappointment that there would only be one engagement session in Penrith and queried if conversations were being had with York and North Yorkshire regarding Devolution.

The Assistant Chief Executive confirmed that sessions had been planned to talk with York and North Yorkshire and noted that the Council had suggested additional online engagement sessions.

-        Would any other Overview and Scrutiny Committee be receiving the Devolution update.

The Assistant Chief Executive noted that there was an insufficient amount of time available to speak to all Overview and Scrutiny Committees but agreed to provide further communication to Councillors to encourage them to  ...  view the full minutes text for item BROS134/24

To consider the update report and review the draft work programme for Business & Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

The Policy and Scrutiny Adviser provided the Committee with an overview of the report, highlighting the most recent Forward Plan of Key Decisions, the progress on resolutions from previous meetings, potential changes to the work programme for 2025/26 and an informal meeting scheduled on 1 April 2025.

The Chief Legal Officer (MO) reported that the processes between the Executive and Overview and Scrutiny Committees would be reviewed through a Task and Finish Group with Scrutiny Chairs, as appointed at the Annual General Meeting (AGM), the Executive and the Chief Legal Officer (MO).

The Chair queried whether the Assets Disposal Update would need to be heard under Part B, which the Director of Business Transformation and Change confirmed that, the item would need to be heard under Part B, when the public and press were excluded.

RESOLVED that the Business and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee:

a)    Noted the items on the most recent Forward Plan of Key Decisions.

b)    Noted the progress on resolutions from previous meetings.

c)     Noted and agreed any changes to the work programme for 2024/25.

d)    Noted the information presented within the report in relation to the development of the Committee’s work programme and comment on the work programme, in particular on items for the next Committee meeting.

The next meeting of the Business & Resources Overview and Scrutiny Committee will be held on Thursday 29 May 2025 at 4pm in Conference Room A&B, Cumbria House, Carlisle.

RESOLVED that the next scheduled meeting of the Business & Resources Overview & Scrutiny Committee will be held on 29 May 2025 at 4pm in Conference Room A&B, Cumbria House, Carlisle.