Minutes - Community Support Overview Group - 11 January 2005

Minutes - Community Support Overview Group - 11 January 2005

BOROUGH OF POOLE

MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT OVERVIEW GROUP

TUESDAY 11TH JANUARY 2005

IN THE COMMITTEE SUITE, CIVIC CENTRE, POOLE

The meeting commenced at 7.00p.m and concluded at 10.10p.m.

Members Present:

CouncillorBulteel (Chairman)

CouncillorMrs Hillman (Vice-Chairman)

CouncillorsAdams, Mrs Deas, Gillard, Mrs James, Matthews, Meachin, Rampton, Mrs Stribley and Miss Wilson.

Also Present: Councillor Wilson

1.APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ms Atkinson (substituted by Councillor Mrs Deas), Councillor Mrs Dion (substituted by Councillor Adams), Councillor Smith (substituted by Councillor Gillard) and Councillor Wretham (substituted by Councillor Mrs Stribley).

2.MINUTES

The minutes of the last meeting held on Tuesday 23rd November 2004 were confirmed as a true record and signed by the Chairman.

3.DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors declared personal interests in various matters on the agenda, including:

  • Councillors Bulteel and Mrs Hillman as Members of the Poole Housing Partnership Board
  • Councillor Meachin as a non executive Director of the Poole PCT
  • Councillor Rampton as a shared carer
  • Councillor Matthews as his wife was on the housing waiting list and also worked for the Council’s Adult Social Services (Provider) Unit
  • Councillor Wretham as Hon. Secretary of the Poole Council of Voluntary Services and Chairman of Age Concern, Poole.
  • Councillor Mrs Butt as a Member of the Dorset Police Authority and a Eucharistic Minister at St. Mary’s Catholic Church
  • Councillor Adams as his daughter was an employee of the Adult Social Services (Provider) Unit
  • Councillor Miss Wilson as a member of the Housing Consultative Panel.

4.TO CONSIDER ANY BUSINESS WHICH, IN THE OPINION OF THE CHAIRMAN, IS URGENT

There were no matters of urgent business.

5(a)RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SUB-GROUP ON SMOKING IN ENCLOSED PUBLIC PLACES

As Chairman of the Sub-Group commissioned to review the need to prohibit smoking in enclosed public places, Councillor Adams presented the Report, highlighting the following key points:

  • the evidence on health risks associated with passive smoking were compelling, with approximately eight million people affected by cancer, heart disease and other related illnesses
  • during the process of the Review carried out since October 2003, the shift of opinion had overwhelmingly moved towards a ban on smoking in enclosed public places which had also been reinforced by the findings of a GOSW survey carried out of the opinion of Poole residents
  • the Review had found that whilst ventilation went some way to reduce the build up of smoke in enclosed places, it did not help to remove carcinogens
  • the view of the majority of those consulted was for a national, rather than a local, ban
  • the view of the local Tourist Board and Town Centre Management Board was that a complete ban in enclosed public places should be enforced rather than any temporary or partial measure
  • the Sub-Group believed that the White Paper “Choosing Health” contained flaws, particularly relating to its proposal that a ban should only be enforced on licensed premises which prepared and served food
  • a possible ninth recommendation could be to engage schools in a campaign to tackle underage smoking and to better educate people from the earliest opportunity of the ill effects of smoking.

Councillor Adams then guided the Overview Group through the recommendations of the Report.

Before proceeding to consider the recommendations, the Overview Group thanked all who had been involved in the carrying out of the Review, including Dr Adrian Dawson of Poole Primary Care Trust and Jon Dowty. In response, Dr Dawson further informed the Overview Group that the Chief Executive of the Dorset and Somerset Strategic Health Authority had written to all Chief Executives of the NHS Trusts in Dorset and Somerset explaining the intention of the Authority to introduce a “smoke free NHS” one year ahead of the Government’s target. In order to assist local Trusts in this, Dr Dawson explained that the Government would be releasing guidance to NHS Bodies.

During the ensuing discussion, those members in favour of the recommendations referred to other countries where a total smoking ban on enclosed public places had been enforced with success.

Particular points made to further strengthen the recommendations included:

(a)amending recommendation 1 to request details of the process and costs involved in making a bylaw to ban smoking in enclosed public places in Poole;

(b)qualifying precisely where smoking should be prohibited in terms of Council premises, as in recommendation 3; and

(c)adding a 9th recommendation to take account of the need to tackle the problems of smoking for children and young people.

These Members considered that, having carried out this extensive consultation and having established such an overwhelming view of the public, a ban should be put in place. They nonetheless accepted that the process of its implementation would not be easy and that careful regard should be paid to the concerns and needs of smokers and of those who ran licensed establishments.

With regard to the third recommendation, concerning the prohibition of smoking in all Council enclosed work places and places to which the public had access, Members in favour of this recommendation stressed that this could only work in conjunction with a programme of assistance to Officers and Members who currently smoked.

Those Members who felt unable to support the recommendations highlighted issues such as:-

  • the difficulties in enforcing the ban in Poole when other neighbouring Authorities were not enforcing such a ban
  • the real struggle smokers endured in trying to refrain from smoking and the huge pressure the Council would be placing on these people
  • the need to focus efforts on targeting initiatives to prevent people from taking up smoking in the first place, beginning with addressing underage smoking, including tackling those who sold and bought cigarettes for underage children
  • a ban on smoking within the Civic Centre would displace smokers to the various entrances of the building and would not present a good image to passers by.

In putting these views, one of the Members who felt unable to support the recommendations requested that Jon Dowty provide information on whether or not the question “How often do you frequent a pub/club?” had been asked as part of the public consultation and what response had been received as a consequence. John Dowty undertook to provide information to the member on this issue.

In conclusion, the Community Support Overview Group agreed that the recommendations of the Sub-Group should be submitted to Cabinet and Council subject to recommendation 1 and 3 being strengthened as discussed above and the addition of a ninth recommendation.

RESOLVED to recommend the following to Cabinet and Council:

1.Given the clear weight of evidence that passive smoking causes premature death and illness action should be taken without delay to prohibit smoking in enclosed public places in Poole. With this in mind, a report is requested to assist members’ consideration of the process and likely costs involved in the making of a byelaw prohibiting smoking in enclosed public places in Poole.

2.Notes the smoking measures and timetable for implementation announced in the Public Health White Paper and recommend a letter of protest is written from the Council to the Secretary of State for Health stating they do not go far enough.

3.Instructs officers to take the necessary steps to prohibit smoking in all Council enclosed work places and places to which the public have access in conjunction with a programme of assistance to officers and members who wish to quit smoking.

4.Instructs the Health Scrutiny Committee to enter into a dialogue with the Chief Executives of local Health Trusts to explore their intentions regarding the proposed ban on NHS premises.

5.Enters into dialogue with organisations and businesses that will be affected by the White Paper proposals to explore opportunities for moving more quickly locally on introducing smoke free establishments.

6.Offers continued support to the Poole Primary Care Trusts’ Smoke Stop service.

7.Enters into dialogue with neighbouring councils and primary care trusts and communicates the Council’s position through area committees, the media and other suitable mechanisms.

8.Develops a public awareness and education campaign based around a local branding of smoke free establishments.

9.Develops an education campaign aimed at schools and youth establishments to tackle the proliferation of under-aged smoking, and a strategy to more rigorously enforce the prohibition of the sale of cigarettes to under-aged smokers.

For: Cllrs Adams, Bulteel, Mrs Deas, Gillard, Mrs James,

Meachin and Mrs Stribley

Against: Nil

Abstentions: Cllrs Mrs Hillman, Matthews, Rampton and Miss Wilson

5(b)TO CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING MOTION AS REFERRED FROM COUNCIL ON 14th DECEMBER 2004

“The result of our consultation is an overwhelming confirmation that the people of Poole want a total ban on smoking in enclosed public places. Therefore, we request the Council to make the strongest representations to the Government, to strengthen the legislation proposed in the White Paper “Choosing Health”. The enhancement would be to include in the ban all licensed premises to which the public has access, irrespective of whether or not they prepare and serve food. This change will recognise in full the wishes of the large majority of the people of Poole.”

Signed by:Councillors Adams, Bulteel, Mrs Deas, Gillard, Mrs Lavender, Meachin and Wilson.

The Overview Group considered this Motion in the light of its previous discussion at Minute 5(a) and agreed that the Motion should be forwarded to Cabinet and Council for further consideration.

RESOLVED that the Motion be forwarded to Cabinet and Council for consideration.

For:Councillor Adams, Bulteel, Mrs Deas, Gillard, Mrs James, Meachin and Mrs Stribley.

Against:Nil

Abstentions: Councillors Mrs Hillman, Matthews, Rampton and Miss Wilson

5(c)FUTURE WORK PROGRAMME AND PRIORITIES OF THE COMMUNITY SUPPORT OVERVIEW GROUP

The Policy Director (Social Services) presented the Report, which provided information to assist Members in their consideration of priorities for the Overview Group and its Work Programme for the coming year, and a summary of the Group’s achievements over the past 12 months.

The Overview Group then carried out an exercise to identify its priorities for the future Work Programme and to list its training needs required to support this work.

The Overview Group noted that the priorities identified and training requested would be summarised in a report and presented to the Overview Group at its March meeting.

RESOLVED

1.to note that the priorities identified for the Overview Group in the coming year would be presented in a report to the Overview Group at its March meeting;

2.to note that the Overview Group’s Forward Plan would be updated in accordance with the priorities identified to also include provision for two joint meetings with the Learning Overview Group in 2005 for the consideration of matters relating to the Children’s Services;

3.to note that the areas of training requested would be written into a report and presented to the March meeting of the Overview Group.

For:Unanimous

5(d)SUPPORTING PEOPLE STRATEGY

The Report was presented by Neil Smurthwaite, Principal Officer (Adult Social Services – Commissioning) who summarised the background to the Supporting People initiative, the need for a five year strategy and the issues involved in progressing this strategy.

Members were asked to note the contents of the Report and to nominate a group of three Members to meet with the Supporting People Service during February 2005 to assist and advise on the final recommendations for the Strategy.

During the ensuing discussion, Members discussed the difficulties facing the Supporting People Service as a result of the reduction of the Administration Grant for 2005/06 and considered it appropriate that Officers should write to the Local Government Association to request assistance in helping to appeal against this funding decision.

Clarification was given regarding the point made in paragraph 10 of the Report that, through joint working with the Housing Service, move on quotas for supported housing schemes would enable those schemes to nominate households to receive offers of permanent accommodation, and where the household takes up that offer, the accommodation they leave, would then become available to meet another need.

In discussing paragraph 5, the Members discussed what efficiency savings could be made through a Joint Commissioning Strategy with Housing, Adult Social Services, the Supporting People Service and the PCT, and it was noted that this was being explored as part of the Strategy.

In conclusion, the Overview Group agreed to support the recommendations, requesting that a third recommendation be agreed that Officers approach the Local Government Association in conjunction with the Portfolio Holder to request a way to redressing the reduction in Administration Grant awarded to Council for 2005/06.

RESOLVED

1.to note the contents of the Report and the results of the consultation to date;

2.that a group of three Members be established to meet with the Supporting People Service during the period of consultation on the Draft Strategy (February) to advise on final recommendations to be made to the March 2005 meeting of the Community Support Overview Group.

It was agreed that Councillors Rampton, Mrs Dion and Miss Wilson be appointed to this Group.

3.that Officers, in conjunction with the Community Support Portfolio Holder, approach the Local Government Association to ask for assistance in appealing against the reduction in Administration Grant awarded for 2005/06.

For:Unanimous

5(e)DRAFT ANTI SOCIAL BEHAVIOUR STRATEGY 2005/2008

The Anti Social Behaviour Co-ordinator presented the Report, stressing that it was in draft form and changing daily, as consultation took place, and that the final Strategy would be approved by the Poole Safe Together Partnership as the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership for Poole.

In guiding Members through the Draft Strategy, the Anti Social Behaviour Co-ordinator explained that the document included information on why a Strategy was needed and what objectives needed to be agreed in order to tackle anti social behaviour in Poole.

He stressed that anti-social behaviour would be actively challenged in the Borough’s communities, whilst also highlighting that local incidents were comparatively low.

He explained that the Strategy would be implemented on a multi agency basis, and that residents’ preference for the use of education/prevention as opposed to enforcement would form a focal point of the Strategy.

Key points highlighted from the Strategy were:

  • new legislation had been introduced to help the Police, Social Landlords and Local Authorities to tackle anti social behaviour more effectively
  • the Strategy would be monitored by the Poole Safe Together Partnership and its Strategic Management Groups
  • extensive consultation was being carried out, a key finding of which was that anti social behaviour was a number one priority for residents when considering issues of crime and disorder, with alcohol noted as its primary cause
  • a number of generic anti social behaviour issues in Poole had been identified which would be progressed as part of the Strategy.

The Anti Social Behaviour Co-ordinator then ran through the various aims of the Strategy as detailed in the Action Plans.

During the ensuing discussion Members commented in support of the Strategy, highlighting a number of points and seeking matters of clarification. Key issues discussed included:

  • there was a need to co-operate with adjacent Authorities in tackling anti social behaviour, both to take account of the fact that such problems spread across boundaries but also to take advantage of best practice and resources/facilities in other Authorities
  • equal standards in tackling anti-social behaviour should be practiced by Registered Social Landlords as well as Poole Housing Partnership Ltd to ensure that fair treatment was given to all
  • work to progress the Strategy should be carried out in conjunction with the progressing of the Open Spaces Strategy
  • tackling anti-social behaviour by supporting families which exhibit challenging behaviour would be carried out in partnership with the Children’s Services
  • the need to address misunderstandings between the young and the old should be included in this Strategy.

In conclusion, the Overview Group agreed to note the contents of the Draft Strategy and the concerns expressed by residents alongside the findings of the Crime and Drugs Audit.

RESOLVED to note the contents of the Draft Anti-Social Behaviour Strategy.

For:Unanimous

5(f)RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE BOROUGH OF POOLE’S RESPONSE TO THE BICHARD INQUIRY

The Personnel Manager (Education) presented the Report, highlighting that the Management Team had requested that the Council consider the recommendations from the Bichard Inquiry.

She explained that consideration of the recommendations had been carried out by Personnel and Training Services in conjunction with Pupil and Parent Support and Children and Families Services, and highlighted that, whilst the Council already had a strong recruitment and selection policy, it was always keen to review this as appropriate.

The Personnel Manager then guided Members through the contents of the Report, referring specifically to paragraphs 5-17.

During the ensuing discussion, certain Members considered that points made at paragraph 7.1, i.e. that concession needed to be made for those unable to provide photographic identify, and suggested that Officers needed to look into the possibility that even if a driving licence or passport could not be submitted, a simple photograph countersigned by a trustworthy member of the public or practitioner could be accepted.

The Overview Group also carefully considered the rigorousness required in not only checking Council employees but also staff contracted from agencies and other third parties. A number of reassurances were given that measures were in place to ensure that agency and contractor staff were checked and the protection of children upheld at all times.

Top View