Agenda and minutes

There were no substitutes at the meeting.

To receive questions / statements from the public, if any.

None received.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 11^th October 2023.

The minutes of the meeting held on 11^th October were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

Members are asked at this stage to declare any interests that they may have in any of the following items on the agenda. The Code of Conduct for Members requires that declarations include the nature of the interest and whether it is a disclosable pecuniary interest.

Cllr Dr V Holliday declared an interest in Agenda item 14: Council Tax Discounts & Premiums Determination 2024 – 2025. She advised the committee that she had a dispensation from the Standards Committee to take part in the debate and vote.

To determine any other items of business which the Chairman decides should be considered as a matter of urgency pursuant to Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

None received.

To consider any petitions received from members of the public.

None received.

To consider any requests made by non-executive Members of the Council, submitted to the Democratic Services Manager with seven clear working days’ notice, to include an item on the agenda of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

None received.

To consider any responses of the Council or the Cabinet to the Committee’s reports or recommendations:

The Democratic Services Manager advise that there were no responses from Cabinet to recommendations made by the Committee.

Mr P Aylward, Regional Director (RD) and Mr G Edwards’ Senior Contract Manager Norfolk (SCMN), were in attendance on behalf of Serco Environmental Services.

The Chairman invited Cllr C Ringer, Portfolio Holder for IT, Environmental & Waste Services to introduce this item. Cllr Ringer explained that the report set out the recent performance of the waste contract against various collection streams. The impact of route and round reorganisation followed by industrial action earlier in the year had placed additional pressures on staff. The peak in missed bin collections occurred in March/April 2023 and was associated with the industrial action. Since this had been resolved, there had been a steady decrease in the number of missed collections. 

Cllr Ringer went onto say that Serco now undertook more assisted bin collections (due to the ageing demographic in the district) which placed additional pressures on the service. Consequently, there was currently a higher level of missed collections for the assisted bin collections service. In future, there would be ongoing focus on improving these collections. Cllr Ringer reminded members that the service continued to improve and expand. A new battery collection service had been introduced earlier in the year and food waste collection was on the horizon. He said that two new vehicles were in the pipeline to support garden waste and trade waste collections. These were both ‘paid for’ services and brought in much needed revenue. Once the new vehicles were in place, pressure would be eased on general waste and recycling collection. He concluded by saying that the overall service was much improved and he thanked members for bringing issues to his attention and officers for their continued support. His inbox was no longer full of issues and complaints relating to waste collection, which indicated the service was moving in the right direction. 

The Chairman invited the Director for Communities (DFC) to speak. He began by saying that the main focus in recent months had been on achieving a significant and sustained improvement in collection rates. He was satisfied that this was now within an acceptable range and it should be acknowledged that it would never be 100% every day. Regarding garden waste, he said that there were challenges around capacity on certain days due to both the number of collections and the volume and weight. The added travel time to empty the vehicles impacted on the number of collections that could be completed in a day. The growth in garden waste subscriber numbers meant the rounds had reached capacity. The purchase of an additional vehicle would help ease this issue. It was the same for trade waste, with a new vehicle expected to reduce the current pressures on the service and also domestic rounds as well as supporting growth of the trade service in the future.

The DFC said that one of the main concerns of the Committee when previously considering this matter, had been around the challenges facing customers who tried to contact Serco to report problems. He said that Serco  ...  view the full minutes text for item 78.

To receive a briefing from Anglian Water on sewage outflows in the District. Members were requested to submit questions in advance for this session.

The Chairman welcomed Grant Tuffs, Regional Engagement Manager (REM) and Natasha Kenny, Head of Quality Regulation and Enforcement (HQRE) at Anglian Water to the meeting. He reminded members that questions had been submitted in advance and the written responses to these had been circulated prior to the meeting. He therefore asked members to focus their questioning on additional points and issues, to avoid taking up too much time on matters that had already been covered. Cllr W Fredericks asked if the questions and written responses could be published on the Council’s website so that the public could access them. The Democratic Services Manager agreed to action this.

The Chief Executive outlined the background to Anglian Water’s attendance. He explained that concern over sewage outflows initially came to Full Council as a Notice of Motion in November 2021. Full Council made an additional recommendation to:

‘Request that all sewage water discharge events are immediately reported to the Council’s Environmental Health department and then consolidated into periodic reviews to be undertaken by the Overview & Scrutiny Committee. These reports should include a full review of all sewage water discharge events in North Norfolk and should require the Council and the Overview & Scrutiny to engage with Anglian Water and for them to report on the progress and investments being made.’

This was the second time Anglian Water had attended the Overview & Scrutiny Committee to provide an update and since their last visit in June 2022, the District had lost three blue flags at East Runton, Mundesley and Sea Palling which had caused considerable public concern.

The Chairman thanked the Chief Executive and invited members to speak. He reminded them that although a question had been submitted regarding water supply, this was not an area of focus for the Committee and no further questions on this would be considered.

          i.        Cllr Dr V Holliday asked what was in the effluent that was being discharged from the storm overflows at the Holt water recycling centre into the River Glaven. She felt that the written response from Anglian Water (AW) had still not clarified this. The Head of Quality Regulation and Enforcement (HQRE) replied that the water recycling centre at Holt discharged continuous final effluent to the watercourse. There was also a storm overflow there. These two separate discharges were permitted by the Environment Agency and each permit would specify the conditions set in order to ensure that the ecology of the receiving watercourse was not harmed. She said that AW did not have a requirement to monitor storm overflow discharges (as in sample them) as they were very low impact discharges, as long as they complied with the conditions of their permit. AW did however record and report the number of times that discharges were made. She added that the continuous final effluent discharge from the water treatment centre was the treated discharge that ran through the sewage treatment works. There was a requirement to test for certain parameters, as set out in the permit,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 79.

The Chairman invited Cllr L Shires, Portfolio Holder for Finance & Assets, to introduce this item. She began by saying that the report that would be presented to Full Council would be updated to reflect the recent staff pay award. She then outlined each of the recommendations in turn and directed members to the relevant sections of the report, which set out the supporting detail for each one. Cllr Shires then spoke about page 37, section 2.8 of the report, which detailed the increasing cost pressure of providing temporary accommodation to homeless households. She asked Cllr W Fredericks, Portfolio Holder for Housing to elaborate on this.

Cllr Fredericks said that she had recently been asked to speak at a National Temporary Accommodation Summit, along with four other councils, presenting to 110 councils. The aim was to ask to Government for more financial support to deal with the issue of homelessness. She said that the main reasons for the increase in homelessness were domestic abuse and private lets coming to an end – often because the properties were being sold or because they were being turned into holiday lets. The original budget was between £600-700k a year and it was likely to be £1.2m in the next financial year, which was a huge increase. Many families were placed in bed and breakfast establishments, usually out of District and away from family, work and school. She said that this was a nationwide problem and all councils were asking for financial support from Government. She said that the Council was doing everything it could but was running out of feasible solutions.

Cllr L Shires concluded by referring members to page 39, section 3.7 of the report. This set out the current position with retained business rates.

The Director for Finance & Resources (DFR)advised the Committee that officers were taking measures to review budgets and make savings. The savings that had already been achieved on staffing would be taken forward.

The Chairman invited members to speak:

      i.        Cllr C Cushing referred to the amount of money that the Council was spending on borrowing, approximately £300k. He said he had raised this as a concern previously and had asked how this could be avoided in the future and he wondered if there were any other examples of when access to available cash may be needed at short notice. The DFR replied the Council was required to hold a certain level of liquid assets in terms of cash and everything else was tied up in investments. The amount lost in payments on interest on borrowing had been off-set by the amount not taken from investments.  She added that she was closely monitoring any borrowing to ensure that it was managed very carefully and only done for short periods of time. Cllr Cushing followed up by asking if there was a facility for Councils to access funds on a short-term basis without losing too much interest. The DFR replied that the Council had access to money market funds but  ...  view the full minutes text for item 80.

The Chairman invited the DFA to introduce this item. She said that the report set out the treasury management activities undertaken during the first half of the 2023/2024 financial year compared with the treasury management strategy for the year. It included an economic forecast and a forecast of interest rates.

It was proposed by Cll G Bull, seconded by J Boyle and

RESOLVED

To support the Cabinet recommendation to Full Council to approve the Treasury Management Mid-Year Report 2023-2024

Cllr L Shires, Portfolio Holder for Finance & Assets, introduced this item. She drew members’ attention to recommendation 5, which related to care leavers and the cost of which was fully compensated by Norfolk County Council and recommendation 9, which set out the intention to introduce a second homes premium of 100% from 1 April 2025. The Revenues Manager referred to Recommendation 8 which allowed the long-term empty property premium of 100%  to be brought forward to increase from 12 months rather than 24 months from 1 April 2024. He said that this would bring in additional income to the Council of approximately £68K and he added that it did seem to be encouraging people to bring empty homes back into use. 

The Chairman invited members to speak :

i.        Cllr V Holliday referred to the second home premium and said that she thought that the income would have been higher than that forecast. She also asked if it would be ring-fenced as several of her constituents had sought assurances regarding this. The Chief Executive replied that that there was an anticipated £550K return to NNDC as a share of the collected council tax, however, the overall figure that went to the County Council and the Police & Crime Commissioner was significantly higher. He said that it was the wish of the Leader and the Portfolio Holder for Finance & Assets to continue to press for more money to be returned to NNDC and then ring-fenced for future social housing provision.

ii.         

The Revenues Manager said that there were currently 4,764 second homes in North Norfolk and the gross charge for those properties currently was over £9.3m and this could potentially be doubled once the charge came into effect. However, he cautioned that the details of the Levelling Up Bill had not been shared yet and more accurate estimates could be provided once this was the case.

It was proposed by Cllr J Boyle, seconded by Cllr R Macdonald and

RESOLVED to support the following recommendations to Full Council:

That under Section 11A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Finance Act 2012 and other enabling powers that:

1.    The discounts for the year 2024-25 and beyond are set at the levels indicated in the table at paragraph 3.1.

2.    To continue to award a local discount of 100% in 2024-25 for eligible cases of hardship under Section 13A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as amended). See the associated policy in Appendix B.

3.    That an exception to the levy charges may continue to be made by the Revenues Manager in the circumstances laid out in section 3.2 of this report.

4.    The premiums for the year 2024-25 and beyond are set at the levels indicated in the table at paragraph 4.2.

5.    To continue to award a local discount of 100% in 2024-25 for eligible cases of care leavers under Section 13A of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (as  ...  view the full minutes text for item 82.

The Chairman invited Cllr H Blathwayt, Portfolio Holder for the Coast, to introduce this item. Cllr Blathwayt said that there had been a Member Briefing on the new Coastwise scheme and the slides and recording link had been circulated to all members. He went onto say that the Coastwise project was a fantastic example of where North Norfolk was leading and others would be following. He added that the recent LGA Peer Review had praised it as ‘work of national importance’.

The Chairman invited members to speak :

Cllr P Fisher referred to recent storms and asked whether the sandscaping scheme was still holding up as expected. Cllr Blathwayt replied that regular surveys were being undertaken. It didn’t sit within the remit of Coastwise but the sandscaping scheme was still holding up well and was operating as anticipated. He added that the sandscaping scheme just bought more time and Coastwise was focussed on how to use that time to prepare for the future. The Coastal Transition Manager (CTM) confirmed that there was ongoing monitoring for the sandscaping scheme which was undertaken by Coastal Partnership East (CPE) in conjunction with Bacton Gas Terminal. He said that it was functioning well and although there were fluctuations, he believed that if the scheme had not been implemented there would have been many more flooding events following the increasing number of storms that were occurring. He agreed that it had bought time but said that Coastwise’s aim was to ensure that the most was achieved from this additional time. There were difficult challenges ahead but he was hopeful that Coastwise would support local communities to adapt and move forward in a positive way.

Cllr V Holliday commented on the risk register and asked whether it would go to Governance, Risk & Audit Committee (GRAC) for assessment. The Chief Executive replied that the corporate risk register went to GRAC on a quarterly basis but if members wanted to refer the Coastwise risk register to GRAC then that was an option. It was a large scheme with a considerable amount of funding (£15m). The Chairman of GRAC, Cllr J Toye, said that the committee could consider the risk register at the next meeting and decide if it was something that should be included in their work programme on an ongoing basis.

Cllr N Housden asked whether, under the Coastwise Scheme, the risks to NNDC coastal assets had been considered. The CTM replied that Coastwise was focussing on areas of the coast where there was erosion and not on the ‘hold the line’ areas. He said that the Council did own assets such as car parks in some of these areas and discussions would take place with local communities. Cllr Housden asked whether such issues that arose during each stage of the scheme could be reported to Overview & Scrutiny Committee. The CTM confirmed that this could be done if members requested it. He added that there was a new Coastal Erosion Risk Mapping project that was underway and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 83.

To note the upcoming Cabinet Work Programme.

The Democratic Services Manager (DSM) updated members on the Cabinet work programme and advised them that it was relatively light for December. This was due to the majority of financial reports coming through to Overview & Scrutiny Committee for pre-scrutiny first in December and then onto Cabinet in January.

To receive an update from the Scrutiny Officer on progress made with topics on its agreed work programme, training updates and to receive any further information which Members may have requested at a previous meeting.

The DSM said that the work programme for the committee was heavy in December due to the number of financial reports coming through for pre-scrutiny. There had been a request to consider the Local Economic Strategy & Action Plan in December but it may be best to push this back to January to allow for a full discussion of this item. She concluded by saying that the previous Scrutiny Officer had contacted NHS Norfolk & Waveney ICB regarding various questions that had been raised at the last meeting of the committee. A response to those questions had recently been received and the DSM would circulate that information to all members after the meeting.

Cllr J Boyle, the Committee’s representative on the Norfolk Health Overview & Scrutiny Committee (NHOSC) said that she had been tasked with putting two questions to NHOSC and she had the responses to share with members. She said that there was also a request from NHOSC to make a recommendation that the Leader of the Council writes to the Cabinet Member for Public Health in support of school dentistry, as this was a significant gap in dentistry provision for children. The Chairman suggested that Cllr Boyle shared the written responses with the DSM and she would circulate them with the NHS responses.

To pass the following resolution, if necessary:

“That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the press and public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph _ of Part I of Schedule 12A (as amended) to the Act.”