Download the Agenda

THE RUGBY BOROUGH COUNCIL

You are hereby summoned to attend an ORDINARY MEETING of the RRugby Borough Council, which will be held at the TOWN HALL, RUGBY, on Tuesday 22 July 2014 at 7pm.

A G E N D A

PART 1 – PUBLIC BUSINESS

1. Appologies for absence.

2. To approve the minutes of the meeting of Council held on 22 April and the Annual Council Meeting held on 5 June 2014.

3. Deeclaration of Interests.

To receive declarations of -

(a) non-pecuniary interests as defined by the Council’s Code of Conduct for Councillors;

(b) pecuniary interests as definedd by the Council’s Code of Conduct for Councillors; and

4. To receive the Mayor’s Announcements.

5. To receive a presentation from Dr John Linnane, Director of Public Health Warwickshire on his Annual Report - ‘Learning from the Past, Pllanning for the Future’.

6. Q uestions pursuant to Standing Order 10.

7. To receive the reports of Cabinet and Committees which have met since the last meeting of the Council and to pass such resolutions and to make such orders thereon as may be necessary:

(a) Cabinet – 30 June 2014

(1) Finance and Performance Monitoring 2013/14 – Outturn – Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council.

(2) Adoption of the new Sport and Recreation Strategy 2014-2017 – Economy, Development and Culture Portfolio Holder.

(b) Overview and Scrutiny Management Board – 16 June 2014

(1) Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2013/14.

8. To receive and consider any reports.

(a) Constitution Update – Report of the Monitoring Officer.

(b) Cawston Parish Community Governance Review – Report of the Legal and Elections Manager and Monitoring Officer.

(d) Dementia Action Alliance – Action Plan – Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council.

(e) Equality and Diversity Excellence Peer Challenge – Deputy Leader of the Council and Head of Customer and Information Services.

9. Notice of Motion pursuant to Standing Order 11.

To consider the following Motion of which notice has been duly given under Standing Order 11.

“In light of the fact that Rugby is the fastest growing town in the whole of the West Midlands and will continue to be so for the next 5 Years, could I ask for all Councillors to support the notice of motion below.

The Council reviews the current opening hours at Hunters Lane recycling centre to see if they meet the needs of the local community now and in the future.

The review includes robust community engagement processes which should include surveys and focus groups as well as national recommendations.

Once the review is completed, if there is an identified need to increase the opening hours of the recycling centre at Hunters Lane, officers implement the revised opening hours as soon as practicable.”

Councillor Mrs O’Rourke.”

10. Correspondence.

11. Common Seal

To order the affixing of the Common Seal to the various orders, deeds and documents to be made or entered into for carrying into effect the several decisions, matters and things approved by the Council and more particularly set out in the Committees’ Reports adopted at this meeting.

12. Motion to Exclude the Public under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972.

To consider passing the following resolution: -

“under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the ground that they involve the likely disclosure of information defined in paragraphs 2 and 3 of Schedule 12A of the Act and that in all of the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.”

PART 2 – EXEMPT INFORMATION

1. To receive the reports of Cabinet and Committees which have met since the last meeting of the Council and to pass such resolutions and to make such orders thereon as may be necessary:

(a) Cabinet – 30 June 2014

(1) Market Quarter Development – Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council.

2. To receive and consider any reports.

(a) Implementation of Electronic Benefit claims and risk based verification – Sustainable Inclusive Communities Portfolio Holder and Executive Director.

DATED THIS 11th day of July 2014

Executive Director

To: The Mayor and Members of Rugby Borough Council

QUESTIONS AT COUNCIL

A Councillor may ask a Question at the meeting by giving notice in writing of the Question to the Executive Director no later than midday on Wednesday 16 July 2014. The rules relating to Questions are set out in Standing Order 10 of Part 3a of the Constitution.

AGENDA ITEM 7(a)

REPORT OF CABINET

30th June 2014 PRESENT: Councillors Humphrey (Chairman), Mrs Bragg, Poole, Mrs Timms and Dr M Williams.

Councillors Ms Edwards, Ellis, Hazelton, Miss Lawrence, Roodhouse and Sandison were also in attendance.

1. FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE MONITORING 2013/14 – OUTTURN

Cabinet considered a report concerning the Council’s financial and performance position as at the third quarter of 2013/14. Copies of the report were circulated to all Members as part of the Cabinet agenda and they are requested to bring this to the meeting. Recommendation of Cabinet Cabinet decided to recommend to Council that -

1) Supplementary General Fund revenue expenditure budgets totalling £373,660 and income budgets of £67,900 be approved for 2014/15 as a result of budget carry forwards from 2013/14 (see section 2.3); 2) a 2014/15 General Fund revenue budget virement of £50,000 be approved, to transfer funds from the budget for the Contribution to Capital Outlay to the Waste Collection and Recycling Service, in order to fund additional educational and promotional initiatives; 3) the creation of a Budget Stability Reserve and the transfer of £290,320 additional 2013/14 planning application fee income into the reserve be approved; 4) the creation of a Business Rates Equalisation Reserve and the transfer of £613,930 additional 2013/14 business rates income to the reserve, plus a further £380,070 from General Fund balances be approved; 5) amounts totalling £533,670 be transferred from earmarked reserves to General Fund balances, in order to fund a £500,000 Voluntary Revenue Provision (VRP) in 2013/14; 6) a 2013/14 transfer of £110,000 from the New Homes Bonus Reserve be approved, to fund the settlement of the Wolston planning appeal; 7) Supplementary HRA revenue expenditure budgets totalling £75,320 be approved for 2014/15 as a result of budget carry forwards from 2013/14 (see section 3); 8) General Fund capital staffing savings of £92,570 be returned for 2013/14; 9) a supplementary General Fund capital staffing budget of £58,350 for 2013/14 be approved; 10) a supplementary capital budget of £287,700 be approved for Section 106 capital expenditure for 2013/14; and 11) Supplementary capital budgets be approved for 2014/15 as a result of budget carry forwards from 2013/14 as follows: a. General Fund capital £2,258,680 b. Housing Revenue Account capital £2,482,280.

Recommended that – the recommendation of Cabinet be approved.

2. ADOPTION OF THE NEW SPORT AND RECREATION STRATEGY 2014 – 2017

Cabinet considered the following report.

Introduction

The name of Rugby is synonymous with sport. We are proud of our association with the game of rugby and the prestige that it brings to the town. With England hosting both the Rugby Union World Cups 2015 the town of Rugby will once again become a focus for those wishing to visit the birthplace of this international sport. Nationally sport has had a much higher profile since the delivery of the 2012 Olympics to London. And we are still seeing the benefits of increased participation in a number of sports. The previous Sport and Leisure Strategy 2009 – 2012 saw as its major achievement the replacement of the Ken Marriott Leisure Centre. The opening of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Centre in August 2013 marked the beginning of a new era for Rugby’s leisure facilities. The borough now has an impressive sporting infrastructure ensuring that future generations of residents will be able to develop an active and healthy lifestyle, vital in an era of rising levels of obesity and inactivity. As a council Rugby is proactive in its provision of opportunities for people to be physically active at a time when many councils are decreasing their spend on leisure. However, nationally, we have challenges ahead in order to turn the tide of inactivity. The West Midlands has the highest percentage of adults and young people who are physically inactive in England. Supporting people who do little or no activity to become more active is where some of the biggest public health gains could be made. Sports Strategy 2014 - 2017 This strategy has been written in consultation with the Rugby Active Network which is a sports forum consisting of representatives from a number of agencies and sports organisations. A copy of the strategy has been placed in the Members’ Room for information. The strategy outlines the key national and local drivers that influence sport and recreation and provides ten key themes and actions to achieve our vision of an active and healthy community. Success will be measured by collecting and collating data and benchmarking against other local authorities. This strategy is written within the context of national and local priorities in order to set the scene and see how sport can influence and shape policy with particular reference to the council’s corporate priorities. Our vision will only be realised by delivering on three themes:  Active communities and increased participation  Children and young people  Sustainability and Facility Development

Sport England and local authorities share a common purpose – to create opportunities for people of all ages and abilities to play and enjoy sport in every community. Sport has the power to:

 Build strong and sustainable communities  Improve health and tackle inequalities  Improve the life chances of young people  Reduce anti-social behaviour and fear of crime  Increase skills, employment and economic growth

Success will be measured by collecting and collating data and benchmarking against other local authorities. Conclusions To support this Strategy will ensure that the residents of Rugby Borough will benefit from a co-ordinated approach to providing opportunities for people to take part in sport and active recreation throughout the Borough.

Recommendation of Cabinet Cabinet decided to recommend to Council that the sport and recreation strategy for 2014-2017 be adopted. Recommendation The recommendation of Cabinet be approved.

COUNCILLOR C HUMPHREY CHAIRMAN

AGENDA ITEM 7(b)(1)

REPORT OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY MANAGEMENT BOARD

16 June 2014

PRESENT: Councillors Helen Walton (Vice-Chairman in the Chair), Buckley (substitute for Councillor Miss Lawrence), G Francis, Keeling, Mistry (substitute for Councillor Mahoney), Roodhouse and Dr Shera.

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY ANNUAL REPORT 2013/14

The Board considered the following report.

1. BACKGROUND

1.1 The constitution requires scrutiny committees to report annually to full Council on their work. It is in any case good practice for councils to produce an annual report on their overview and scrutiny work.

1.2 The annual report for 2013/14 is available for inspection in the members’ room.

2. PUBLICATION

2.1 The last five annual reports have been economically printed in-house in a compact A5 format. It is suggested that this approach should be repeated with the current report.

2.2 As in the past, the report will be distributed to partners and community groups and made available in public places to promote overview and scrutiny work externally and encourage greater community engagement.

RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD

The Board resolved that the report be submitted to Council.

COUNCILLOR J M SHERA CHAIRMAN

RUGBY BOROUGH COUNCIL

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY ANNUAL REPORT 2013/14

2 CONTENTS

1 Chairman’s foreword 5 2 Scrutiny arrangements 2013/14 7 3 Overview and Scrutiny Management Board 10 4 Corporate Performance Committee 12 5 Crime and Disorder Committee 19 6 Customer and Partnerships Committee 21 7 Review recommendations 27 8 Committee dates 2014/15 27

3 1. CHAIRMAN’S FOREWORD

Cllr James Shera, Chairman, Overview and Scrutiny Management Board

This year, the council has received ringing endorsements from two separate peer reviews: the Local Government Association peer review and the Equality and Diversity peer review. The LGA review described the council as “strong and progressive” and I believe overview and scrutiny has made a significant contribution to the council’s success by maintaining a focus on the achievement of the council’s corporate priorities.

In the Equality Peer Challenge, the council became the first council to achieve the “excellent” standard. The peer challenge report said that outcomes for the community had been enhanced and positive action had been taken as a result of the scrutiny process. On the other hand, the same report pointed out that the quality of our scrutiny would be improved if more members of the public and partners were to attend scrutiny committees and task groups. The involvement of people from outside the council is an important component of successful scrutiny. We have a good record of engaging with people outside the council in our scrutiny review work, but few members of the general public come to our meetings unless they have been invited for a particular reason.

I urge the people of the borough to come and witness scrutiny in action and to see their elected councillors at work. Some of this work takes place at our scrutiny committees, and the dates of their meetings are listed at the end of this report. However, much of our most important work takes place in “task groups”. These are small cross-party groups of councillors which carry out in-depth reviews of particular topics. In 2014/15 the subject of these reviews will include promoting independent living, fees and charges for council services and the siting of taxi ranks, along with continuing the overview of universal credit and welfare reform. Task group meeting dates are not set long in advance but their agendas are published on our committee papers web page www.rugby.gov.uk/meetings.

In the meantime, I commend this annual report to you and look forward to a further year of productive and inclusive scrutiny.

Councillor Dr James Shera MBE Chairman, Overview and Scrutiny Management Board

KEY ACHIEVEMENTS FOR SCRUTINY 2013/14

In-depth exploration of the benefits and risks to the council if it were to introduce fixed- term tenancies for its council homes

Closure of inefficient local recycling centres and diversion of resources to the kerbside collection service

Establishment of a blueprint for household waste collection in new developments

The Housing Income Protection review was chosen to be profiled in the Centre for Public Scrutiny publication The Local Impact of the Introduction of the Universal Credit and The Wider Welfare Reforms. This was submitted to the Department for Work and Pensions as evidence.

Customer and Partnerships Committee worked with the Youth Council to run a successful Local Democracy Week schools event.

Overview and Scrutiny Mission Statement

Overview and scrutiny at Rugby Borough Council aims to enhance the quality of life of all who live and work in the borough by ensuring services are delivered effectively and supporting improvement in the council’s services, policies and performance. Scrutiny aims to be objective, evidence-based, transparent and constructive, and to reflect the interests and concerns of local communities.

2. SCRUTINY ARRANGEMENTS 2013/14

Structure

The overview and scrutiny structure was as follows:

Reporting and call-in Overview and Scrutiny C

Management Board (‘the Board’) A

WORK PROGRAMME I

Call-in and N

submission of E review reports to Cabinet T

Overview and Scrutiny Committees

Corporate Crime and Customer and Performance Disorder Partnerships Committee Committee Committee

Task Groups

The Board, the Customer and Partnerships Committee and the Corporate Performance Committee each comprise nine members. The Crime and Disorder Committee, which had seven members, has been disestablished with effect from 2014/15. Any continuing work that would have been carried out by the committee will for the time being fall within the remit of the Customer and Partnerships Committee.

The committees have full work programmes, with five scheduled business meetings each year. However, most in-depth scrutiny review work is carried out by small task groups of between five and nine members. In the municipal year 2013/14, all but two of the 36 non-executive councillors sat on one or more of the scrutiny committees or task groups.

6 Six task group reviews were in progress during the year and all of them completed their work during the year. The agreement of clear, realistic action plans by Cabinet helps to ensure that overview and scrutiny is making a positive contribution to the council’s decision-making process and making a noticeable impact.

The Council Leader and all of the portfolio holders attended meetings of scrutiny committees or task groups during the course of the year. Dialogue with the Executive is regarded as being important not only to demonstrate real accountability but also to further the common aim of meeting the council’s objectives.

In relation to scrutiny reviews, this report aims to present:

 the objectives of each piece of scrutiny work carried out – to check that the problem was worth looking at and the desired outcomes were clear

 how the task group went about its work – and what it found out

 the conclusions and recommendations arrived at – showing how the evidence was used to address the objectives of the exercise

 an evaluation of the impact of the scrutiny activity – demonstrating the existence of firm approved action plans, together with progress reports on the implementation of the previous year’s action plans.

Full reports of each review may be downloaded from www.rugby.gov.uk/scrutiny.

Involvement of outside organisations in scrutiny

It is important that scrutiny reviews tackle issues that are important to the people of the borough and for which there is potential for making a positive impact. Suggestions for reviews are not only made by councillors and council officers but they are also sought from local organisations and the general public.

During the course of overview and scrutiny work by committees or task groups efforts are made to involve organisations form outside the council.

Scrutiny support

The Democratic and Scrutiny Services Team, which includes two dedicated scrutiny officers (approximately one full time equivalent), supports overview and scrutiny as well as the rest of the democratic process. In its scrutiny work, the team helps non- executive councillors to develop, plan and implement scrutiny work programmes. It conducts research, prepares papers for scrutiny meetings, advises committees, task groups and individual members, monitors outcomes, and continually develops the scrutiny function. Officers across the council provide specialist professional support.

Action plans

Scrutiny must be able to demonstrate that its review work is making an impact. It is important to have clear, agreed actions plans and to monitor them to ensure they are being implemented.

7 Scrutiny action plans are now routinely put on the council’s performance management system, where they form part of the Corporate Change and Improvement Plan. The action plans for reviews completed since 2010/11, with six-monthly progress updates for current action plans, are published at www.rugby.gov.uk/scrutiny.

The committees review action plan progress every six months and the Board receives a report on overdue actions between these reviews.

Scrutiny development

In August 2013, the Overview and Scrutiny Management Board carried out an evaluation of overview and scrutiny. This was based on a limited amount of data from a members survey and a training event, but the indications were that:

 the council’s scrutiny work had evolved and matured, and that task groups had been particularly successful  the Board’s present wide membership was appropriate  the work of the Leisure Centre and Crematorium task groups illustrated scrutiny’s ability to produce original and practical solutions to complex and difficult issues facing the council

The Board felt that council website should be developed to publicise the work of overview and scrutiny and of councillors in general.

8 3. OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY MANAGEMENT BOARD

Board members

Councillors Dr James Shera (Chairman), Helen Walton (Vice-Chairman), Tina Avis, Jim Buckley, Matthew Francis, Kathryn Lawrence, Tom Mahoney, Jerry Roodhouse,

Terms of reference

The Board draws up and manages the overview and scrutiny work programme. In addition, it:

. holds the Leader and the Executive Directors to account . acts as gatekeeper for councillor call for action . coordinates call-ins from Cabinet . deals with motions that Council refers to it . produces an Overview and Scrutiny annual report

Scrutiny review action plans

The Board systematically monitors the progress of task group scrutiny reviews. The Board also maintains an overview of the implementation of scrutiny review action plans by examining a twice-yearly report on actions that are overdue. Midway through the intervening periods, the other committees look at all of the actions arising from the reviews for which they have been responsible. This helps to ensure that overview and scrutiny has a real impact and that this is recognised.

Holding the Leader and Executive Directors to account

In January 2014, the Leader and the Executive Directors reported to the Board on the following:

 The present position of the council and the council’s future direction  The council’s relatively healthy financial position  The ability of the council to continue to make major improvements such as the new leisure centre, the crematorium and the Diamond Wood  The good relationship between officers and members  The high performance adaptability of council staff, as highlighted by the Local Government Association peer review  The peers review’s conclusion that the council should: - Articulate a clear ambition and vision for Rugby (as a council and as a place) - Clearly define the council’s culture - Celebrate and communicate successes - Put appropriate succession planning in place

Overview and Scrutiny Evaluation

Following on from the evaluation, the Board looked at ways of publicising overview and scrutiny work and agreed that committees and task groups should take a proactive approach to publicising their work, before during and after. Full use should be made of the website and social media to do this.

9 Motions to Council and call-ins

During the year, no motions to Council were referred to the Board and no Cabinet decisions were called in. Similarly, no councillor calls for action were made.

4. CORPORATE PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE

Cllr Ish Mistry, Chairman, Corporate Performance Committee

Members

Councillors Ish Mistry (Chairman), Kamaljit Kaur (Vice-Chairman), Steve Birkett, Andy Coles, Richard Dodd, Tony Gillias, Ian Lowe, Chris Pacey-Day, Michael Stokes

What did the committee do?

Scrutinised the performance of the benefits service following the end-to-end review. This highlighted the difficulty of recruiting and retaining staff because of the uncertain future of benefits in local government.

Received an update on the Rainsbrook Cemetery and Crematorium project.

Reviewed customer demand in terms of value and failure measures. This struck a chord with an observation by the LGA peer reviewers that the council needs to be sure that it is doing what the customer wants and that it is delivering in response to customer demand. This will form part of the work of the 2014/15 task group review Systems Thinking – what next?

The action plan of the previous year’s review of the localisation of council tax support required the committee to review the use of the discretionary fund within the local council tax reduction scheme. There had been concerns that the fund would be inadequate to meet demand but, in fact, demand turned out to have been fairly low.

Reviewed performance in the implementation of the carbon management plan.

Reviewed the implementation of the corporate strategy.

Finance and performance monitoring

The committee monitors performance at several different levels. Each of four meetings a year focuses on performance within a particular portfolio, and the portfolio holder attends to discuss issues raised. At the same meeting, the committee receives a report on performance in one of the council’s strategic priorities. Between committee meetings, members are able to interrogate the council’s performance management system to view up-to-date information on all portfolios and all priorities. This process

11 increases the accountability of the Executive and puts the scrutiny focus on the achievement of the council’s objectives.

Additionally, the committee receives quarterly finance and performance monitoring data extracted from the reports submitted to the Cabinet.

Task group reviews

Much of the committees’ work is done through task groups, and the work of the task groups reporting to the Corporate Performance Committee is detailed in the following section. During the course of the year, the committee approved ‘one-page strategy’ scoping briefs for reviews, monitored progress and agreed final reports before submitting them to Cabinet. The committee also reviewed progress in the implementation of the action plans of completed scrutiny reviews that had been under the committee’s management.

TASK GROUP REVIEWS MANAGED BY THE CORPORATE PERFORMANCE COMMITTEE

Local recycling centres

Members

Councillors Kathryn Lawrence (Chairman), Andy Coles, Ish Mistry, Noreen New, Maggie O’Rourke, Chris Pacey-Day, Carolyn Robbins, Neil Sandison and Bill Sewell. (Councillor Sewell attended as a substitute for Cllr Matthew Francis, who had originally been selected as a member of the task group but was unable to attend.)

Terms of reference

Since the introduction of the three-bin system, there had been a reduction in the amount collected from the 27 local recycling centres; from 1,400 tonnes (97.4 per cent) to 350 tonnes (3.5 per cent) dry recycling. A growing body of opinion argued that the cost of operating the local centres could no longer be justified, particularly as it duplicated the three-bin kerbside service. If the local centres were closed, the resources used to run them could be redeployed. This would make it possible to postpone buying a new vehicle and setting up a new round to cater for Rugby’s growing population.

The review’s brief was to see whether the facts backed up this opinion, and to challenge the viability of the recycling centres on the basis of:

 the extent of misuse through contaminated waste being left in the recycling bins  the extent of misuse by unlawful commercial and trade waste and recycling  the extent of fly-tipping at the local recycling centres  the impact on RBC’s street cleansing services on managing the sites  the cost of maintaining the sites

12 What did the group do?

The task group had to devise ways to work quickly but at the same time encourage users to have their say and publicise the issue in the local media. It gathered quantitative and qualitative evidence from a range of sources to build up a full picture:

 Background information provided by Environmental Services, establishing the need to create additional capacity.

 Analysis of bin collections from recycling centres, showing the incidence of contamination

 Anecdotal evidence of the relative usage of the centres, derived from observations from the collection crews and councillors

 Data on misuse of sites

 Other councils’ practices

 An online survey of users (publicised at the sites and in the local press) to find out why they used the recycling centres.

 Responses to an invitation to users of the sites to comment on the proposal to close the recycling centres.

 Financial data establishing the business case for closure of the centres.

Misuse of sites

Three broad categories of misuse of sites were identified:

Contamination – the mixing of unpermitted material in the recycling bins.

Business use – using the containers for trade recycling such as glass, packing materials, and papers. This contravened the conditions of use of the sites and diverted income from the trade waste service.

Fly-tipping – householders or businesses leaving non-recyclable materials around the containers. This necessitated the diversion of street cleansing resources to clearing up the sites.

Other issues

Theft – The task group also learned of thefts of metal from the waste electrical equipment banks and of textiles from containers at the recycling centres which were operated by non-council organisations.

Low level of use of the majority of the sites was a further source of inefficiency.

Cost – The need to allocate resources to routinely check the sites and to remove fly- tipped and contaminated waste resulted in a significant difference between the cost of collection from the local recycling centres (£171 per tonne) and the cost of kerbside collection (£76 per tonne). 13 The results of an online survey suggested that users’ visits to the sites were generally infrequent. The consultation revealed dissatisfaction with the operation of the county council recycling facility at Hunters Lane on the grounds of limitations on opening hours, the types of vehicles permitted, and the materials accepted.

Recommendations and outcomes

The review’s principal recommendation was that all of the local recycling centres be phased out by the end of September 2013. An action plan was agreed with the portfolio holder and incorporated in the review’s report.

Cabinet approved the review’s recommendations (which included several subsidiary actions) on 19 August 2013.

The plan was implemented by the end of September 2013 and its effects were monitored by the task group during a second phase of the review on household waste collection in new housing developments.

Household waste services in new developments

Members

Councillors Kathryn Lawrence (Chairman), Ish Mistry, Noreen New, Maggie O’Rourke, Chris Pacey-Day, Carolyn Robbins, and Neil Sandison.

Terms of reference

The review’s aim was to ensure that the council’s policies for waste collection and for the planning of new developments were mutually supportive and environmentally and financially sustainable.

The review also followed up several topics touched on during the review of local recycling centres. These included hours and restrictions at Warwickshire County Council’s Hunters Lane recycling facility, monitoring of the effects of closure of the local recycling centres and the long term strategy for waste disposal sites

What did the group do?

Waste collection in new developments

Given the number of significant new developments in Rugby, it was possible to build a body of qualitative evidence about how well different types of development lend themselves to efficient waste collection. This highlighted problems with communal bin store abuse in flats, bins on footways and problems arising from highway design and management.

The new Refuse and Recycling Design Guide for Developers included a number of requirements for new developments that the task group recognised would help to prevent the observed problems:

 Requirement for hard standing areas for single dwelling operating the three-bin system 14  A preference for underground waste storage for flats and high density housing, including courtyard terraced dwellings, where individual provision is not always practical. Euro bin storage requirements are also specified for cases where this is not viable.  Private roads either to be constructed to highways standard or alternatively for the an accessible bin storage area to be provided  Roads to be wide enough to allow space round the vehicle and space for reversing  A maximum distance of 10 metres from the bin to the vehicle  Design to enable safe manual handling and operation of lifting equipment

The Refuse and Recycling Design Guide for Developers stated a preference for using underground waste storage systems in developments of flats and courtyard terraced housing where individual provision was not practical. The group asked challenging questions about the suitability of underground storage but, after looking at the experience of other councils, the task group was satisfied as to its suitability. The group agreed that the council should not bear the cost and management responsibility for storage systems. Similarly, the provision of kerbside bins should be the responsibility of the developer.

The Waste (England and Wales) (Amendment) Regulations 2012

The task group considered a letter from the responsible Defra minister reminding waste collection authorities that they must comply with regulations requiring collection authorities to collect paper, metal, plastic and glass separately if separate collection:

1. is necessary to provide high quality recyclates, and 2. is technically, environmentally and economically practicable.

The group received evidence that the performance of the materials recovery facility used by the council means that separate collection of recyclable materials is not necessary in order to produce high quality recyclate. It would also not be economically practicable to revert to separate collection.

Effect of closure of local recycling centres

The action plan for the review of local recycling centres required this task group to review the effect of the closure of the local recycling centres, There had been some fly-tipping at sites of the closed recycling centres but this had been minimal in comparison with the amount that regularly occurred before the closures. There was no evidence of any increase in fly-tipping elsewhere associated with the closure of the centres.

Hunters Lane recycling centre

The task group had continuing concerns about the operation of the Hunters Lane recycling centre and its ability to cope with the expanding population of the borough. These concerns, along with matters regarding waste disposal strategy, were discussed at a meeting with the county council portfolio holder and the responsible service manager.

15 Particular concerns highlighted were:

 Residents who wished to use larger vehicles that might be confused with commercial vehicles were often not aware that there was a restriction on the admission of such vehicles to the centre. Those who were aware often did not know they could apply for permits for the use of these restricted vehicles, so long as they were the residents’ only vehicle.  There was a general need for improved quality of information and communication of information in respect of prohibited waste types, restricted vehicles and opening times.  It needed to be made easier for pedestrians and cyclists to use the Hunters Lane facility, particularly in the light of new housing development nearby.  Consideration should be given to finding ways of disposing of paint at Hunters Lane.  The WCC strategy of improving kerbside recycling rates through educating householders is unlikely to result in sufficient reduction in residual waste to counteract the increased demand resulting from urban expansion.  Improvements to signage are required at Hunters Lane, along with improved communication and education.

Waste Disposal Strategy

The task group concluded that the relocation of the main residual waste disposal point from Ling Hall to Whitley has had a detrimental effect on the cost-effectiveness of Rugby Borough Council’s waste collection service. As Rugby’s urban area expands there are fears that this problem will worsen. When future WCC treatment and disposal contracts are being procured, the County Council should consider the following when carrying out any tender evaluation:

 Whole cost to the public purse from collection to treatment and disposal, and not the disposal or treatment cost alone.  Environmental as well as economic factors, providing the ability to reduce the overall carbon footprint associated with both the collection and disposal/treatment elements of waste.

Recommendations and outcomes

The review’s recommendations were as follows:

1. The emphasis in the Refuse and Recycling Design Guide for Developers on streamlining of refuse storage, including underground storage, be supported. 2. At the earliest possible stage in the planning process for each residential development, Planning consult Environmental Services on estate layout and provision for storage of household waste. 3. The cost of providing bins or other receptacles for waste be passed on to developers in the first instance. 4. Warwickshire County Council be encouraged to work in partnership with Rugby Borough Council to continually review opportunities involving waste disposal facilities for residual waste. 5. Warwickshire County Council be encouraged to expand the services, accessibility and information regarding the county council recycling centres in order to meet current and future demands of the borough.

16 6. The Sustainable Environment Portfolio Holder send a letter to Warwickshire County Council, expressing the points of concern raised following the evidence gathering meeting with the county council Portfolio Holder. 7. The kerbside collection of comingled recyclable materials shall continue.

Leisure Centre Task Group

Members

Councillors Ish Mistry (Chairman), Sally Bragg, Richard Dodd, Lisa Parker, Howard Roberts, Jerry Roodhouse

Terms of reference

The task group was originally set up to consider the short to medium term management of the Ken Marriott Leisure Centre (KMLC) and also to consider the longer term provision of leisure facilities to meet the diverse needs of the people of Rugby. Following the decision by the council to build a new leisure centre, the task group’s brief was extended to oversee the project through to its conclusion.

What did the group do?

The task group continued to oversee progress in the project through to the opening of the new Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Centre on 30 August 2013.

The group met with the operator in July 2013 to learn about their activities during the transitional period and preparations for the public opening, and members of the task group visited the centre two days prior to opening. A final meeting of the task group was held in November 2013 to review the opening and initial operation of the new leisure centre and the final budget position, and to review the work of the task group and identify any lessons that could be learnt for similar capital projects. Future monitoring arrangements for the leisure centre were also agreed.

Outcomes

In reviewing their work over the course of the project, the task group and officers recognised the importance of the cross-party support for the project from the very outset, when the original task group identified the need and supported the proposal to build a new leisure centre. The task group had played a significant role, working alongside officers and providing support and challenge, and advocating for the project amongst the wider body of members. The continuity of the membership and chairmanship of the task group was felt to have been a key factor in its success.

17 5. CRIME AND DISORDER COMMITTEE

Cllr Michael Stokes, Chairman, Crime and Disorder Committee

Committee Members

Councillors Michael Stokes (Chairman), Matthew Francis, Kamaljit Kaur, Dale Keeling, Lisa Parker, James Shera and Helen Walton.

Terms of reference

The committee’s terms of reference are defined by the Warwickshire County Council Crime and Disorder Protocol, to which Rugby Borough Council is a party. The council is required to have a committee with power to review and scrutinise, and make reports or recommendations, regarding the functioning of the responsible authorities that comprise the Community Safety Partnership.

The committee met on three occasions during 2013/14.

What did the committee do?

Community Safety Partnership updates

The committee received regular performance updates from the Community Safety Partnership Manager. It also received progress reports from the chairs of the Partnership’s Priority Action Groups.

Received reports or presentations on the following:

The performance of Operation X, the venture whereby different police agencies focused on Priority Policing Areas where most crimes occurred and on those individuals who caused the most harm in these areas.

The use of social media by the police.

The medium-risk domestic abuse project, which fills a gap in service provision left as a result of shortage of resources forcing the countywide multi-agency process to concentrate on high-risk cases.

The work of the Eastern European link worker employed by the Partnership to develop relationships with the Eastern European Communities and promote positive 18 behavioural change, integration into local communities and positive community relations.

The impending changes in community rehabilitation following the abolition of the Warwickshire Probation Board and the division of offender management work between a community rehabilitation company and the National Probation Service.

Priorities and funding bids for 2014/15.

Alcohol Misuse

The committee carried out scoping work on a possible review of alcohol misuse. The committee was already scrutinising aspects of this, such as domestic violence and drinking in public, and it received evidence that the current licensing regime was proving effective in limiting alcohol-related public disorder. In relation to problems associated with drinking in public, the committee considered the provisions of the Anti- social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act (then still going through parliament) to allow the creation of public spaces protection orders where alcohol consumption and other forms of anti-social behaviour would be forbidden. The committee decided to carry out a review of this topic when the regulations were issued.

Neighbourhood Watch

Rugby Neighbourhood Watch gave updates on its work

Future Crime and Disorder Scrutiny

The committee was disestablished with effect from June 2014, when its functions were transferred to the Customer and Partnerships committee.

19 6. CUSTOMER AND PARTNERSHIPS COMMITTEE

Cllr Claire Edwards, Chairman, Customer and Partnerships Committee

Members

Councillors Claire Edwards (Chairman), Mrs Claire Watson (Vice-Chairman), Nigel Allen, Graham Francis, Mrs Belinda Garcia, Robin Hazelton, Mrs Noreen New, Mrs Maggie O’Rourke, Neil Sandison

What did the committee do?

Young people

Despite continuing pressures on youth service budgets and reduced support for the Youth Council, its members have continued to play an active role in the work of the committee during the year. Youth council members have attended each committee meeting, participating in discussions and briefing councillors on their activities and campaigns, in particular local transport and young people.

In November 2013 the committee worked in partnership with Rugby Youth Council to organise a Local Democracy Week Schools Event at the Town Hall. Students from four local secondary schools participated in the event, which focused on developing proposals for events that could be held in the borough to mark the occasion of the Rugby World Cup 2015 in England. A report of the outcomes of the event was submitted to the local Rugby World Cup 2015 Steering Group and a number of their proposals are now being actively pursued.

The council’s Children and Young People Member Champion also reported to the committee on her work in this capacity. Her feedback included information on the work of the Warwickshire Children’s Trust Rugby Area Partnership and the Rugby Youth Strategy Board and highlighted concerns about reductions in sexual health services for young people in the borough. This prompted the committee to invite the Warwickshire Sexual Health Commissioning Manager to meet with the committee to address these concerns.

Town Centre

The committee was briefed by officers on the latest proposals for planning policy relating to the town centre and assessed the impact and success of various town 20 centre events held in 2012, further to recommendations made in a scrutiny review of the town centre economy in 2009.

Air quality

The committee has maintained an overview of air quality monitoring and management, including scrutiny of the statutory annual Air Quality Management Area Progress Report.

Health and Wellbeing

The committee continued to meet with senior representatives from a range of health partners, including:  Healthwatch Warwickshire  Coventry and Rugby Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG)  Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Partnership Trust  Warwickshire Sexual Health Commissioning Manager.

The committee also considered the latest health statistics for the borough. The JSNA update report for the borough highlighted concerns about the sexual health of young people and alcohol misuse and this prompted further scrutiny work in these areas.

Discussions with Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Partnership Trust encompassed the restructuring of mental health service provision in the borough as well as specific proposals about the closure of the Admirals Court specialist learning disability respite care facility in Rugby. The committee raised a number of questions and concerns with regard to this proposal, which formed the basis of the council’s response to the communication and involvement exercise.

The committee has received regular feedback from the council’s representative on the county Adult Social Care and Health Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Warwickshire Health and Wellbeing Board and the council formally adopted the Protocol for Health Partnership Scrutiny in Warwickshire in February 2014. The committee chairman and vice chairman have also worked to develop links with Coventry City Council’s Health and Social Care Scrutiny Board, and the chairman attended a meeting of the Board to participate in scrutiny of the work of Coventry and Rugby CCG and commissioning of Patient Transport Services.

One of the issues identified for potential further work in the committee’s discussion with the CCG was the council’s role in supporting timely hospital discharge and prevention. This is likely to form a key element of a review of ‘promoting independent living’ which has been included in the 2014/15 overview and scrutiny work programme.

Play Provision

The committee met with officers to discuss the impact of the Planning for Play review recommendations on play provision in new developments, and the development of the council’s Play Strategy. The committee received evidence that, since the scrutiny review, there has been early consultation of play and parks officers by the Planning department, and that this is having a positive impact on provision in new developments.

21 Rugby World Cup 2015

The committee has received regular briefings from the local Rugby World Cup 2015 Steering Group on their preparations to mark the occasion in the borough and members have repeatedly challenged the group about their plans, to maximise the benefits to the borough in terms of inward investment.

Road and Pavement Surface Maintenance

This topic was included in the overview and scrutiny work programme for 2013/14 but it was subsequently found that a county council overview and scrutiny community was already engaged in scrutiny of the performance of the new Highways Management Contract. The committee received a report detailing the findings of the county council’s scrutiny exercise.

TASK GROUP REVIEWS MANAGED BY THE CUSTOMER AND PARTNERSHIPS COMMITTEE

Alcohol and Health

Members

Councillors Claire Watson (Chairman), Howard Avis, Richard Dodd, Belinda Garcia, Robin Hazelton, Jerry Roodhouse, and Neil Sandison

Terms of reference

The review took the form of a single meeting with officers of the Warwickshire Drug and Alcohol Team and Public Health Warwickshire, followed by a further meeting to draw conclusions and agree a report to the Customer and Partnerships Committee.

The purpose of the review was primarily to look at:

 what action was being taken locally under the Warwickshire Alcohol Implementation Plan (WAIP), and what the priorities were perceived to be  what the effect so far had been  whether there were any gaps becoming apparent that the council might be able to help to fill at local level

What did the group do?

The task group held a meeting to receive evidence and explore options with officers of the Warwickshire Drug and Alcohol Team (DAAT) and Public Health Warwickshire.

The task group learned of DAAT’s integrated approach to drugs and alcohol, commissioning a range of support services for drugs and alcohol from a range of agencies.

The task group learned that a key to success in alcohol treatment was early intervention, and encouraging people with harmful drinking levels to seek help from the commissioned agencies.

The task group explored ways in which Rugby Borough Council would be able to assist in this.

1. Making Every Contact Count (MECC)

An initiative to use front-line staff across a range of public services to deliver consistent brief advice on healthy lifestyle messages, including alcohol, and to signpost people to appropriate services to support behaviour change. This has already been implemented in the Housing Service.

2. Drinking in public

Problem public drinking is known to be prevalent at several locations, and the task group considered ways of dealing with this.

3. Supporting publicity and promotions

The task group identified no obvious gaps in service provision. However, there is potential for the council to make a useful contribution by supporting and participating in publicity and promotions and the raising of awareness, thereby encouraging the all- important early referral.

Additionally, the task group was disappointed to learn that councils had no powers to regulate the amount of alcohol advertising on posters and billboards.

Recommendations and outcomes

The following recommendations were assembled for submission to Cabinet and Customer and Partnerships Committee in 2014/15.

Recommendations to Cabinet

1. The council take an active role in assisting with local promotion and awareness- raising in relation to the Warwickshire Alcohol Improvement Plan.

2. The Local Government Association be asked to consider the scope for legislation to empower councils to regulate street alcohol advertising.

Recommendation to the Customer and Partnerships Committee

3. In conjunction with future work on Public Spaces Protection Orders, consideration be given to adding details of alcohol treatment services to signage in problem public drinking locations.

4. The committee annually review progress in the implementation of the Warwickshire Alcohol Improvement Programme in Rugby, focusing in particular on the borough council’s contribution in promotion and publicity and in giving direct advice on alcohol.

23 Universal Credit and Welfare Reform

Members

Councillors Tom Mahoney (Chairman), Claire Edwards, Belinda Garcia, Noreen New, Jerry Roodhouse, Helen Walton

Terms of reference

The task group has a watching group over the council’s corporate approach to managing the impact of the welfare reforms on the council and the local community. It is also monitoring the effectiveness of the measures put in place by the council and partners to prepare for benefit changes and prevent significant detrimental impacts.

What did the group do?

The task group has agreed a set of performance measures that is being used to monitor the impact of the reforms in the borough on an ongoing basis. These include tracking the number of residents affected by the social housing under-occupation charge and benefits cap, impact on rent arrears and council tax collection and details of discretionary awards. The task group is also tracking a sample of 40 anonymised customers affected by the council tax reduction scheme and 40 council tenants affected by the social housing under-occupation charge.

As well as monitoring this data, the task group has also received regular briefings and policy updates from officers regarding the welfare reforms. The task group hosted a select committee-style meeting with relevant council officers and key partners and agencies to receive evidence of the work being undertaken in the implementation of welfare reform. The group also issued a call for evidence and held a further meeting with voluntary and community sector representatives, taking evidence to provide a reality check on the impact of the reforms on borough residents and the effectiveness of measures being taken by the council and its partners to militate against negative outcomes. Task group members have also worked through a demonstration of an online universal credit application to learn for themselves how the system works.

Recommendations and outcomes

The task group made an interim report of its findings to date to Customer and Partnerships Committee in April 2014. However, as the group is still in the process of gathering evidence and maintaining an overview of the impact of the welfare reforms in the borough, it was not in a position to draw any firm conclusions or make any recommendations at that time.

In March 2014 the task group were invited to submit feedback to inform a review of the Warwickshire Local Welfare Scheme criteria. The task group asked that consideration be given to removing the blanket ineligibility of any applicant subject to benefits sanctions, suggesting that the reasons for the sanction should be considered on a case by case basis.

The interim report consolidated some important information about the impact of the welfare reforms in the borough and was to be presented to the Board of the Local Strategic Partnership (on the request of its chair) and sent to the Warwickshire Financial Inclusion Partnership.

24 Fixed-Term Tenancies

Members

Councillors Belinda Garcia (Chairman), Andy Coles, Robin Hazelton, Tom Mahoney, Lisa Parker, Ms Carolyn Robbins, Councillor Helen Walton Ms Tracey Nuttall (co-opted member from the Tenant Representative Panel)

Terms of reference

The Localism Act 2011 introduced new flexibilities for housing providers to offer new tenants a tenancy for a fixed term. The purpose of the review was to explore the benefits and risks of the council introducing fixed-term tenancies for its council homes and, if appropriate, to consider the detail of how this would be implemented. This included consideration of the potential impact of fixed-term tenancies on community sustainability.

What did the group do?

The task group considered a range of evidence, largely from secondary sources, including:

 Details of the national and local policy context  Statistics on the council’s housing stock, local housing needs and tenant profile  Information about the current housing market in Rugby and likely future trends  Information on the operational management of council housing in Rugby and related costs  Feedback from other local housing providers  Cost estimations provided by housing officers  National research evidence regarding flexible tenancies  Briefing on the proposed ‘Pay to Stay’ policy  Legal advice on the status of a fixed-term tenancy in law.

Original research was undertaken by the scrutiny officer into the housing arrangements and, where relevant, the tenancy policy for each of the local authorities in Rugby BC’s ‘nearest neighbours’ group. Direct verbal evidence was received from one of these authorities, which had reviewed their tenancy policy and decided not to introduce fixed-term tenancies. Another authority was invited to give evidence about their decision to introduce fixed-term tenancies but did not respond.

A member of the Tenant Representative Panel was co-opted to the task group and brought an important insight to the discussions.

Recommendations and outcomes

The task group recommended to Cabinet that:

1 Fixed-term tenancies should not be introduced by the council at this time 2 The council’s tenancy policy should be reviewed again at the end of 2015 3 Housing officers are trained to work more proactively with tenants to discuss alternative housing options with them 4 Further work is undertaken to explore the potential introduction of tenant incentive schemes 5 Councillors are briefed on the national ‘Pay to Stay’ policy when the details are confirmed.

The review report and recommendations were to be submitted for consideration by Cabinet on 9 June 2014.

7. REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS

Most of the review work carried out during 2013/14 did not lead to recommendations to Cabinet during the year. In the case of the Leisure Centre review, this was because the task group was carrying out a monitoring role in relation to the outcomes from past work. In the case of Universal Credit and Welfare Reform, the task group did not reach a position to be able to make recommendations during the year and, in the case of Fixed Term Tenancies, the recommendations were due to be submitted to Cabinet during 2014/15. Similarly the Alcohol and Health task group was due to report to Customer and Partnerships Committee in June 2014.

Recommendations from the reviews of local recycling centres and of household waste services in new developments were submitted to Cabinet in 2013/14 on 19 August and 7 April 2014 respectively.

Action plans are usually managed using the Covalent performance management system, and periodic progress snapshots taken from Covalent are published on the public scrutiny pages of the council’s website.

8. COMMITTEE DATES 2014/15

Members of the public are welcome to attend meetings of overview and scrutiny committees. During the coming year, meetings will be held in Rugby Town Hall at 5.30pm on t5he following dates.

Overview and Scrutiny Management Board

16 June 2014 11 August 2014 13 October 2014 12 January 2015 16 March 2015

Corporate Performance Committee

3 July 2014 17 September 2014 20 November 2014 12 February 2015 16 April 2015

Customer and Partnerships Committee

26 June 2014 11 September 2014 13 November 2014 29 January 2015 26 March 2015

CONTACTS

For further information, please contact:

Debbie Dawson Scrutiny Officer Tel: (01788) 533592 Email: [email protected]

Paul Ansell Scrutiny and Policy Officer Tel: (01788) 533591 Email: [email protected] www.rugby.gov.uk/scrutiny

27 AGENDA ITEM 8(a)

COUNCIL – 22 JULY 2014

REPORT OF THE MONITORING OFFICER

CONSTITUTION UPDATE

1. INTRODUCTION

Since the extensive revision of the constitution in April 2012, it has been normal practice for the need for changes to the constitution to be reported to Council as required, rather than allowing the constitution to become gradually out-of-date and having occasional major reviews. The purpose of this report is to make various recommendations on changes to the constitution.

2. AMENDMENTS

Subject Proposed change 2A 13.1 Delegated authority to New subsections where responsibility Licensing and Safety Committee is currently not specified:

Issue of licences relating to animal welfare: Animal Welfare Act 2006 and any regulations made thereunder.

Appointment of hackney carriage stands under s.63 Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976.

When adding the above delegations, the lettering of part of this section will be corrected. 15 Licensing Sub-Committee In accordance with the recommend- (Hackney Carriage and Private dation of the Licensing and Safety Hire) - renaming and change of Committee on 8 July 2014 (minute 13 terms of reference. – 2014/15 refers) to (1) change the name of the Licensing Sub- Committee (Hackney Carriage and Private Hire) to the Licensing Sub- Committee (General); and (2) extend the sub-committee’s terms of reference to include any of the Licensing and Safety Committee’s licensing functions as may be delegated to the sub-committee other than those relating to alcohol and regulated entertainment.

Subject Proposed change 2B 3.2.1(g) – Delegated authority Move to 2.8 because, under the under Licensing and Safety Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013, this is Committee in relation to the currently an Executive function and is licensing of scrap metal dealers therefore not within the powers of the (officer authority to approve but not Licensing and Safety Committee. refuse applications). On 18 August, Cabinet will decide how to exercise its functions under the Scrap Metal Dealers Act. 3A 10.3 Reduction in notice required Change of the notice referred to in for questions to full Council – In 10.3 to “midday on the working day practice, notices of questions by immediately prior to the three clear members at full Council have working days before the meeting.” always been accepted by midday on the Wednesday before a Tuesday Addition of an illustrative sentence: council meeting. This provides five “Council normally meets on a clear days’ notice. During the Tuesday that does not immediately course of standardising in most follow a public holiday, so this means cases to “clear working days”, this that questions must usually be has been changed to “five clear submitted by midday on the previous working days”, which is clearly Wednesday.” unnecessarily long. However, use of clear working days would still be useful to cater for the possibility of a council meeting being held soon after a public holiday. 23 Recording of meetings – This Remove the standing order. standing order does not comply with the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, which give members of the public the right to record meetings using audio and video equipment. A policy to ensure compliance with the regulations needs to be developed but, in the meantime, this standing order should be removed. 3G 8.3 Preventing fraud and Change 8.3 to: “The Corporate corruption. Currently says: “The Assurance Manager, in consultation Monitoring Officer, in consultation with the Monitoring Officer and the with the Chief Financial Officer, is Chief Financial Officer, is responsible responsible for the development for the development and and maintenance of an anti-fraud maintenance of an anti-fraud and and anti-corruption policy.” This anti-corruption policy.” predates the establishment of the role of the Corporate Assurance Manager.

At the same time as making the above amendments, changes will be made to several parts of the constitution to reflect: (a) the Council’s decision on 5 June to disestablish the Crime and Disorder Committee; and (b) changes to the designation of statutory officers (see item 9(c) of this meeting’s agenda).

RECOMMENDATION

The constitution be amended as indicated.

AGENDA ITEM 8(b)

COUNCIL – 22 July 2014

REPORT OF THE LEGAL AND ELECTIONS MANAGER AND MONITORING OFFICER

CAWSTON PARISH COMMUNITY GOVERNANCE REVIEW Background

Council, at its meeting held on the 24 September 2013, gave approval for a Corporate Governance Review (CGR) of Cawston parish following receipt of a valid petition from the parish council.

On 26 September 2013, Rugby Borough Council published Terms of Reference under which the review was to be undertaken.

An initial period of consultation was conducted between 26 September and 20 December 2013 in order to seek views on proposals within the Terms of Reference.

Draft recommendations were published on 3 February 2014, beginning a second period of public consultation that ended on 30 April 2014.

Responses were received at both stages and these were used within considerations that led to the production of the final recommendations listed below. Details and maps supporting the recommendations have been placed in the Members’ Room for information and have also been circulated to Members separately.

Financial Implications

Conducting a CGR involves a financial cost to the Council involving officer resources. These are met from existing budgets.

If Councillors approve the final recommendations, a transitional arrangement relating to precept charges will be required in relation to 38 properties – see Recommendation 8

Legal and Policy Implications

The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 sets out the powers associated with Community Governance Reviews and provide the power for the Council to take decisions regarding matters arising from the review, as proposed in the terms of reference. The Council is required by Section 100(4) to have regard to the guidance issued by the Secretary of State relating to Community Governance Reviews. In addition to the 2007 Act, legislation relating to parishes was considered during the review as set out in the Local Government Act 1972 and the Local Government Act 1992.

Quality Impact Needs Assessment

In carrying out this review, the Council was required to consider the requirement to engage with local communities to address their needs and the impact of community cohesion.

Risk Management

Risks have been mitigated by ensuring that the CGR accords with the legislation and guidance given by the Electoral Commission. This included ensuring that the review was carried out within the statutory timescales and that the Terms of Reference were appropriate for the petition.

Conclusion

Subsequent to receiving approval from Council –

a) A re-organisation Order is required to be drawn up to give effect to these recommendations.

The reorganisation order will come into force on the 1 September 2014

b) The order, along with supporting information, will be sent to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) advising them of Council’s decision and requesting implementation of the changes to boundaries resulting from the review.

The LGBCE will then advise on their decision to implement the recommended changes.

c) The following organisations will be informed that the order has been made: The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government The Local Government Boundary Commission for England The Office of National Statistics The Director General of the Ordnance Survey Warwickshire County Council

Consultees

By letter - electorate of Cawston parish and Dunchurch parish directly affected by potential boundary changes ; Rugby Borough councillors for Admirals & Cawston, Dunchurch and Long Lawford ; the parish councils of Cawston, Dunchurch and Long Lawford ; Warwickshire County Council ; the LGBCE.

By public notice, local press and Rugby BC website – any interested parties.

Recommendation

Council approves the final recommendations of the Corporate Governance Review of Cawston parish boundaries :-

1 That the proposed expansion of Cawston parish as described within the petition submitted to the Council on 19 July 2013 is rejected

2 That the parish of Cawston is expanded to accommodate the changes proposed within the petition and incorporate further realignment of boundaries to ensure that the electoral arrangement changes are sustainable and settled for the foreseeable future

3 That the overall boundary of Cawston parish is revised, with associated adjustments made to the boundaries of Dunchurch parish, Long Lawford parish and Rugby Town Admirals ward area

4 That the petitioned northern area of land is included within an extended Cawston parish and thereby removed from the Rugby Town Admirals ward area

5 That the section of Cawston parish boundary beginning immediately north of Bilton High School and running southeast to the B4642 is realigned and the land areas removed from the Rugby Town Admirals ward area

6 That a new Cawston parish boundary line is created along the route of the B4642 from its roundabout junction with the A4071 northward until it meets the existing Cawston parish boundary

7 That properties fronting the northwest side of the B4642 and along to where the disused railway bridge crosses the B4642 are moved from Dunchurch parish and incorporated within the extended Cawston parish

8 That a transitional financial arrangement for the payment of precepts pertaining to the transfer of properties fronting the northwest side of the B4642 is established in order to reflect the inherited responsibilities and liabilities by Cawston parish and also to assist with the initial loss of precept by Dunchurch parish.

9 That the southwest boundary of the extended Cawston parish is aligned along the route of the A4071 from the roundabout junction with the B4642 and northwards to the existing Cawston parish line

10 That the western boundary of the current Cawston parish is realigned to follow the route of the A4071 to the northern extent of the parish. The land to the west of the A4071 thus released should be transferred to Long Lawford parish

11 That the newly-expanded Cawston parish is not warded.

12 That a Reorganisation Order, along with supporting information, is sent to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) advising them of Council’s decision and requesting implementation of the changes to boundaries resulting from the review.

Appendix 1

Rugby Borough Council Community Governance Review of Cawston Parish boundaries

Final recommendations 22 July 2014

Local Government & Public Involvement in Health Act 2007

Contents 1. Background 2. Summary of final recommendations 3. Summarised considerations leading to final recommendations 4. General conclusions Appendix A Feedback from consultation on draft recommendations Appendix B Maps

1. Background

On 19 July 2013, Cawston Parish Council submitted a petition requesting Rugby Borough Council (“the Council”) to carry out a Community Governance Review (“CGR”) of the boundaries of Cawston Parish. Following checks to validate the petition, the Council drafted and then agreed Terms of Reference for a CGR that were published on 26 September 2013.

Notices were issued advising of an initial consultation period and inviting responses by 20 December 2013. Two submissions were received by the Council for consideration.

Subsequent considerations (incorporating the two submissions) were made by the Council within the scope of the Terms of Reference resulting in draft recommendations that were published for comment on 3 February 2014. The consultation period ended on 30 April 2014.

Maps illustrating the boundary changes are included within Appendix B.

Responses were received by the Council that have been included within considerations leading to the final recommendations outlined below. There were six from members of the public and two from the Rugby Borough councillors representing Dunchurch ward. There was also a series of written interchanges with Dunchurch parish council and Cawston parish council. Images of all these items of correspondence are included within Appendix A.

Page 1 of 31

Appendix 1

2. Summary of final recommendations

Recommendation 1 That the proposed expansion of Cawston parish as described within the petition submitted to the Council on 19 July 2013 is rejected

Recommendation 2 That the parish of Cawston is expanded to accommodate the changes proposed within the petition and incorporate further realignment of boundaries to ensure that the electoral arrangement changes are sustainable and settled for the foreseeable future

Recommendation 3 That the overall boundary of Cawston parish is revised, with associated adjustments made to the boundaries of Dunchurch parish, Long Lawford parish and Rugby Town Admirals ward area

Recommendation 4 That the petitioned northern area of land is included within an extended Cawston parish and thereby removed from the Rugby Town Admirals ward area

Recommendation 5 That the section of Cawston parish boundary beginning immediately north of Bilton High School and running southeast to the B4642 is realigned and the land areas removed from the Rugby Town Admirals ward area

Recommendation 7 That properties fronting the northwest side of the B4642 and along to where the disused railway bridge crosses the B4642 are moved from Dunchurch parish and incorporated within the extended Cawston parish

Recommendation 8 That a transitional financial arrangement for the payment of precepts pertaining to the transfer of properties fronting the northwest side of the B4642 is established in order to reflect the inherited responsibilities and liabilities by Cawston parish and also to assist with the initial loss of precept by Dunchurch parish.

Recommendation 9 That the southwest boundary of the extended Cawston parish is aligned along the route of the A4071 from the roundabout junction with the B4642 and northwards to the existing Cawston parish line

Page 2 of 31

Appendix 1

Recommendation 10 That the western boundary of the current Cawston parish is realigned to follow the route of the A4071 to the northern extent of the parish. The land to the west of the A4071 thus released should be transferred to Long Lawford parish

Recommendation 11 That the newly-expanded Cawston parish is not warded

Recommendation 12 That a Reorganisation Order, along with supporting information, is sent to the Local Government Boundary Commission for England (LGBCE) advising them of Council’s decision and requesting implementation of the changes to boundaries resulting from the review

Page 3 of 31

Appendix 1

3. Summarised considerations leading to final recommendations

The CGR Terms of Reference describe the purpose, process and scope of considerations for the review. This section summarises the considerations that support the final recommendations, with links to maps provided in Appendix B.

3.1 Overview The Terms of Reference for the Cawston Parish Community Governance Review outline the purpose of a CGR, its legal basis and the parameters of this particular review process. Whilst ensuring consideration of local views submitted during the initial consultation period, the Council’s deliberations, comments and findings must remain within the terms established for the review.

CGR processes are designed to encourage local involvement, awareness and transparency. They seek to determine electoral arrangements that reflect known current matters and act as a basis that will embrace future community developments.

One part of the petition from Cawston Parish Council seeks to add a small area of undeveloped land to the north of the parish. However, the main part reflects the planned development area identified as the Cawston Grange extension. The intention of the petition was to incorporate both within an enlarged parish.

Upon first glance, the proposal may appear to be a logical reflection of local community growth. However, now that the formal CGR process has been invoked, Rugby Borough Council has a duty to consider a wide range of matters in order to derive suitable electoral arrangements. The Terms of Reference document explains what must be done, how it will be done and the areas of consideration, such as community identity, infrastructure changes, the views of local residents, parish council governance, boundary sustainability and co- terminocity.

Guidance from the Local Government Boundary Commission of England states - “As far as boundaries between parishes are concerned, these should reflect the “no-man’s land” between communities represented by areas of low population or barriers such as rivers, roads or railways. They need to be and be likely to remain easily identifiable.”

With regard to boundary changes, the LGBCE guidance states - “In many cases a boundary change between existing parishes, or parishes and unparished areas, rather than the creation of an entirely new parish, will be sufficient to ensure that parish arrangements reflect local identities and facilitate effective and convenient local government. This can often lead to existing parish boundaries becoming anomalous as new houses are built across them resulting in people being in different parishes from their neighbours. A review of parish boundaries is an opportunity to put into place strong boundaries, tied to firm ground detail and remove anomalous parish boundaries.”

In reaching recommendations for change, the Council is therefore seeking to achieve electoral arrangements that will be the basis for sustainable parish governance with strong community identity and cohesion both during and beyond many years of considerable local changes and developments.

Page 4 of 31

Appendix 1

3.2 Summarised considerations

Recommendation 1 That the proposed expansion of Cawston parish as described within the petition submitted to the Council on 19 July 2013 is rejected Ref Map 1B

The main reasons for rejection are :- a) The requested southern area expansion does not address the anomaly that will be created by the Cawston Grange extension development that forms the major part of petitioned area. It does not provide sufficient parish community cohesion or parish representation for existing residents whose properties front the B4642. b) The requested southern area expansion does not consider the primary influence of the A4071 as a major factor for establishing a parish boundary. c) There are anomalies to the northern and western boundaries of the current Cawston parish that are not addressed by the petition proposals. d) Overall, there are boundary issues that should be resolved in order to create sustainable parish boundaries and governance that reflect recent and foreseeable changes in infrastructure plans.

The Community Governance Review process allows Rugby Borough Council to make alternative and additional recommendations and these are listed as follows :-

Recommendation 3 That the overall boundary of Cawston parish is revised, with associated adjustments made to the boundaries of Dunchurch parish, Long Lawford parish and Rugby Town Admirals ward area Ref Map 5 - see specific recommendations below.

Page 5 of 31

Appendix 1

Recommendation 4 That the petitioned northern area of land is included within an extended Cawston parish and thereby removed from the Rugby Town Admirals ward area Ref Map 4

Housing and infrastructure surrounding three sides of the area of land in question are part of the Cawston Grange development. One side reflects the rear of properties fronting Lawford Lane. It is most likely that primary access to the area would be from Cawston Grange and not from Lawford Lane. Should this area of land ever be developed, it is most likely to be as an extension of the Cawston Grange housing development area.

The change to the parish/ward boundary in this area would require a similar change to the boundary between polling districts AA and AD.

Previous parish reviews related to Cawston in 1999, 2004 and 2006/07 retained a boundary line between the Rugby Town area and Cawston parish adjoining Lawford Lane at Bilton High School that moved progressively southwards until it reached the B4642. The route of the boundary line cuts through buildings on the school site, approaches close to (but not up to) properties fronting onto Lawford Lane then away from them and through the middle of an area of undeveloped land between the existing Cawston parish boundary and the rear of properties fronting the B4642 Main Street, Bilton and Lawford Lane. The petition replicates the present boundary alignment - see map2b

Mindful of future community cohesion and parish governance, it is sensible for this part of the existing Cawston parish / Rugby Town boundary line to be modified to reflect the likelihood of housing or amenity development that would be primarily accessible by extensions to the Cawston Grange housing area. The overall effect of the changes would be to reflect long-standing property and field boundaries along the southern side of Lawford lane and remove the anomalies where the boundary line runs through school buildings and through the middle of fields. It would remove the areas of land and dissected school property from the administrative area of Rugby Town.

Altering the boundary line in this way would make no changes to the electorate of the Rugby Town Admirals ward area as there are no residential properties in the areas affected.

Feedback received from local residents and Cawston Parish Council was supportive of this realignment.

The change to the parish/ward boundary in this area would require a similar change to the adjoining boundary of polling districts AA and AE.

Page 6 of 31

Appendix 1

Recommendation 6 That a new Cawston parish boundary line is created along the route of the B4642 from its roundabout junction with the A4071 northward until it meets the existing Cawston parish boundary Recommendation 7 That properties fronting the northwest side of the B4642 and along to where the disused railway bridge crosses the B4642 are moved from Dunchurch parish and incorporated within the extended Cawston parish

Ref Map 3B.

Plans submitted in 2011 for a new housing development on the land adjoining Cawston Grange would provide up to 600 new dwellings, thus placing a much larger community immediately behind the 38 existing properties fronting the B4642.

These properties are currently well within the boundary of Dunchurch parish and their needs are served by that parish council. However, if Cawston parish is expanded as petitioned, only the area immediately behind the properties fronting the B4642 would come within the electoral governance of Cawston.

This arrangement would offer no opportunity for the existing B4642 residents to be involved in what would realistically be a local community development directly affecting their properties. They would be geographically part of a new overall community but have no electoral voice within that community. While Dunchurch Parish Council could continue to act on their behalf, this arrangement would no longer be representative as a result of such substantially changed circumstances. It is an anomalous situation that should be resolved by the CGR.

The creation of a boundary line along the route of the B4642 would embrace the existing properties within an immediately local parish area and would be consistent with the approach adopted further north, as reflected by the current parish boundary between Cawston and Dunchurch.

Feedback received from Cawston Parish Council was supportive of this change to their current parish boundary. No objections were received from residents within properties along the B4642 Coventry Road.

Page 7 of 31

Appendix 1

It is recognised that the movement of 38 properties to Cawston parish would cause a loss of income to Dunchurch Parish Council. However, it is also recognised that Cawston Parish Council would assume full responsibility for the provision and support of services pertaining to those properties and any adjoining assets thereby transferred with them (eg. 38 properties and 7 street lighting columns).

The CGR is aware of the forthcoming housing development off Cawston Lane that is expected to see 250 dwellings being constructed from 2016/17 onwards. This development will fall wholly within Dunchurch parish. It can therefore be reasonably expected for Dunchurch parish to have increased precept receipts in due course that would mitigate the loss of income caused by the Cawston CGR.

A transitional agreement by which Dunchurch retains 75% of precept for properties no longer within its area of responsibility is considered to be a reasonable accommodation of the financial concerns raised by Dunchurch Parish Council. At the same time, it provides a modest increase in income to enable Cawston Parish Council to meet its new obligations (ie to extend its ability to maintain the street lighting, to accumulate the potential replacement cost of a street light (at an asset value already established by Dunchurch) and to provide local services to its additional residents.

Nevertheless, Cawston Parish Council cannot be expected to accommodate their new expanded obligations in this way indefinitely. If the anticipated construction plan for the Cawston Lane development is achieved, the transitional agreement for precept income could be for no more than 2015/16 and 2016/17. However, the CGR considers that this should reflect real development progress and so the transitional financial arrangement should remain until the end of the financial year in which the construction of the first 38 dwellings within the Cawston Lane development is achieved. Thereafter, Cawston Parish Council will receive 100% of the precept related to the 38 properties along Coventry Road.

Page 8 of 31

Appendix 1

Parish boundaries should follow geographic or infrastructure features that support community identities and allow electoral governance. This approach was applied when Cawston parish was created by the adoption of historic geographical features such as field boundaries and streams. In such a rural and uninhabited area near to Cawston, they were the primary considerations for establishing a parish boundary. They also reflected continued use of a section of the pre-existing Dunchurch parish boundary.

The A4071 western relief road was newly built within fields and opened in 2010. It is a major thoroughfare from the roundabout junction with the B4642 northwards towards Rugby. Although the fields and stream still exist, the advent of the new A4071 means those historic features are no longer so significant when considering a local boundary. Therefore, now that a review of an extension to Cawston parish is under review, it must be considered as a primary feature.

The Cawston parish expansion proposed by the petition, together with the advent of the A4071 western bypass are substantial changes that affect the relevance of the historic geographical boundary between the parishes of Dunchurch and Long Lawford. Both changes present major permanent landscape and infrastructure features that should be recognised in the interests of community cohesion and the provision of parish services.

In the area west of the southern extension, the existing parish boundary between Dunchurch and Long Lawford to the west of the A4071 should remain.

Page 9 of 31

Appendix 1

Following the route of the A4071 for the purposes of the proposed Cawston parish expansion may be valid for the boundary line northwards from the roundabout junction with the B4642. However, it conflicts when it meets the current Cawston parish boundary. Given the existence and primacy of the A4071, it is appropriate to reconsider the continued alignment of the western section of the current Cawston parish boundary.

As with the more southerly expansion section, the land to the west of the A4071 is designated greenbelt and is therefore unlikely to gain approval for housing or industrial development. Currently, there are no buildings within the area between the current Cawston parish boundary and the A4071.

In order to properly reflect recent infrastructure changes and to ensure alignment with the necessary approach to be taken for the boundary of the parish extension, the western boundary of Cawston parish should be realigned to follow the route of the A4071 to the northern extent of the parish.

Feedback received from Cawston Parish Council was supportive of this change to their current parish boundary. No objection to this change of boundary was received from Long Lawford Parish Council.

Page 10 of 31

Appendix 1

Recommendation 11 That the newly-expanded Cawston parish is not warded.

Throughout the CGR process, effort has been made to ensure that changes made to Cawston parish supported enhanced community cohesion and identity. This is the basis that provides the opportunity for strong corporate governance by the parish council which will enable overall representation of the widening local community. It will provide the single community identity for inclusion of the new residents that will arrive as part of the new housing developments and join them with the existing parish residents.

It therefore makes little sense to split the existing and new communities by creating wards within the parish. Indeed, unlike a situation where two or more disparate villages were being joined into one expanded parish, the situation within Cawston strongly indicates that time will see the growth of one conjoined community. Feedback received from Cawston residents supported this intention.

The overall revised extent of Cawston parish governance should be representative of the whole electorate within the parish and be administered by all its parish councillors.

This is a requirement of the 2007 Act.

Page 11 of 31

Appendix 1

4. General conclusions

Feedback received from residents and from Cawston Parish Council supported the draft recommendations, in particular the recognition of the A4071 and B4642 as primary boundaries and the corrective realignment to the north of the parish.

Use of these major local routes ensures that a sustainable and easily-recognisable parish community can be established that embraces all known and envisaged housing developments during the next 10-20 years. Corporate governance within the highly defined parish of Cawston would be strong as a result.

Feedback received from Dunchurch Parish Council was primarily concerned with the loss of precept that would entail as a result of the transfer of 38 properties to Cawston parish. Consideration has been made towards this matter and a transitional arrangement is recommended.

No written representations were received from parish councils, councillors, residents, businesses or local government bodies other than those included within this document.

The recommended changes to the western and southern boundaries of Cawston parish will affect the alignment with Warwickshire County Council electoral divisions in the locality insofar as they represent changes to the existing parish boundaries of Cawston, Dunchurch and Long Lawford.

The recommended changes to the existing Cawston parish boundaries will cause changes to the current boundaries of the following polling districts1 : AA Rugby AD Rugby AE Rugby KP1 Dunchurch (District 1) KX2 Long Lawford (District 2)

1 Polling district references are as those used during 2014 elections

Page 12 of 31

Appendix 1

APPENDIX A

Feedback from consultation on draft recommendations

A1 The Council received the following responses from councillors and members of the public :

Mr Michael Dobson 6/2/2014

I believe the proposed changes do make an improvement.

the only possible change i would recommend is consideration of the cawston lane development of housing (approved 250 houses) is also put in the cawston boundary as the families that live there are likely to access cawton resources more than likely

Jon Marlow 24/3/2014

Dear sir/madam

I support the proposal to redefine the parish boundaries so that the planned Cawston Extension forms part of Cawston parish and not Dunchurch. It would be somewhat perverse for additional funding to be diverted to Dunchurch when properties that will be built will use and benefit from Cawston’s existing facilities.

Many thanks,

Jon Marlow

Page 13 of 31

Appendix 1

Simon Enticott 24/3/2014

Hi, I have lived on the Cawston Grange estate for nearly 8 years. I signed the petition asking for the review, and this evening I have read the CGR recommendations and strongly believe it is the right thing to do.

I’d like to say that my family and I very rarely go in to, or even travel through Dunchurch, there isn’t anything there that I can’t find locally or travel into Rugby for. I wasn’t even aware that Dunchurch had any sports facilities or a library!

The Dunchurch parish council claim that they should be compensated in some way, or the implication that Cawston residents have some kind of obligation to contribute towards their parish upkeep is absolutely ridiculous. I’m sure they are upset that they will lose the precept that would come from the new houses, but the reality is the new houses will be an extension of Cawston Grange. The new residents will be part of Cawston, will use the existing facilities and hopefully the development will add more to the parish for the benefit of the new and existing residents. We’re all very proud of where we live.

Aside from a line on an historical map, I cannot see how the new housing could be considered to be part of Dunchurch which is several fields away along a thin windy road.

I really hope you recommendations are followed, they are very sensible and draw a clear line.

Regards,

Simon Enticott

Page 14 of 31

Appendix 1

Pete Venner 25/3/2014

To whom it may concern

I wish to express my support for the Cawston Parish Boundary Review. As a resident of Cawston Parish it seems entirely logical that the boundary of the Parish should be amended to include the new 'Cawston Extension' as these new properties will be clearly within the Cawston Grange estate. I also recognise the logic of aligning the new boundaries with newer man made features that were never there when the original boundaries were drawn and as such understand the alignment with roads on both sides of the estate . However the biggest reason for wishing to agree with the proposals is that resident's of the new extension will be using all of the local facilities of Cawston Parish and will want to be immersed in the local community of Cawston. For this reason I believe it is right to do this now so that the new residents of the Cawston Extension know right from the outset that they are part of this community.

Regards

Pete Venner

Matt Emery 25/3/2014

Sirs

I wish to express my support for the Parish boundary review and the recommendations made within it. As a resident of Cawston Parish it seems entirely logical that the boundary of the parish should be amended to include the new “Cawston Extension” as these new properties will be clearly within the Cawston grange estate and as such be using it’s facilities.

I would also like to express my concern regarding the language used in the letter of objection posted by Dunchurch Parish it seems most defamatory.

Regards

Matt Emery

Page 15 of 31

Appendix 1

Doug Keill 28/3/2014

CGR Team With reference to the Cawston Parish Council 's request to the RBC for a review of parish boundaries, and RBC's consequent recommendations regarding the Cawston Extension and houses facing onto the Coventry Road, I submit my support for these recommendations. In addition, it would seem logical to utilise the "natural" boundary of the relief road to include those houses the other side of the relief road with Long Lawford Parish. I do so acknowledge that the opinions of those residents on the Coventry Road should indeed be taken into full consideration. However, there is a great deal of sense in utilising a "bird's eye view" of these logical and "natural" boundaries to agreeably define the parish boundaries.

Regards Doug Keill

Cllr Howard Roberts 22/4/2014

Dear Mr Aughton,

RE:CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REVIEW OF CAWSTON PARISH BOUNDARIES

RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION ON DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS - PUBLISHED 3rd FEBRUARY 2014

I accept the need to update parish boundaries in order to reflect contemporary community affinities. However the proposed draft recommendation, although logical, do financially disadvantage the Parish of Dunchurch due to the loss of precept income.

As a Borough Councillor I fully support Dunchurch Parish Council’s response to the consultation and reject any boundary changes that financially disadvantage the residents we represent.

Yours sincerely

Cllr Howard Roberts

Page 16 of 31

Appendix 1

Dunchurch ward councillors to CGR 22/4/2014

Page 17 of 31

Appendix 1

A2 The following interchanges occurred between Rugby Borough Council and the parish councils of Dunchurch and Cawston :

Cawston Parish Council to CGR 1/4/2014

Page 18 of 31

Appendix 1

Dunchurch Parish Council to CGR 2/4/2014

DUNCHURCH PARISH COUNCIL CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REVIEW OF CAWSTON PARISH BOUNDARIES RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION ON DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS - PUBLISHED 3 FEBRUARY 2014

It is all very well to consider parish boundaries in terms of local geography and electoral equivalence but the big omission from these draft proposals concerns financing of Parish Councils. In the current climate Dunchurch Parish Council has been placed in the position of having to take on greater responsibilities for its local services particularly provision of its library and a youth service. The pressure continues for Parish Councils to take on even more responsibilities driven by the constraints placed on the budgets of both the higher local authorities. Dunchurch's local services are used by many from outside the immediate parish boundary, particularly by residents of areas which have little in terms of local services. This situation will be increased by the additional house building comprising the Cawston Extension, for which Dunchurch, under these proposals, will receive no contribution to its precept requirements.

More specifically “Recommendation 7, That properties fronting the north-west side of the B4642 and along to where the disused railway bridge crosses the B4642 are moved from Dunchurch parish and incorporated within the extended Cawston parish” will cause an immediate loss of precept to Dunchurch which they cannot afford. A conservative estimate of the lost precept income from the 38 properties fronting the B4642 is that it will amount to more than £2,500 per annum approximately 3.5% of Dunchurch PC's total precept. Dunchurch cannot accommodate this loss of income and maintain services; if the proposal were to go ahead then compensation for the full amount, sine die is required.

3. The Southern Area - Reflecting local communities “Within overall considerations pertaining to Recommendations 6 and 7, the CGR reflected upon feedback received from Dunchurch Parish Council, namely that a change to the Cawston parish boundary in the southern area would adversely affect the upkeep of facilities and services provided within Dunchurch. This suggests that economic growth for Dunchurch businesses caused through their use by additional neighbouring residents would not provide sufficient funds through precept and taxes. The CGR considers that benefits from increased trade and social activity within Dunchurch from additional Cawston Grange residents would support the local economy and make local businesses more robust. Social and charitable organisations would also benefit via increased membership contributions and fees, thus supporting their continuity and development. It may also be reasonably anticipated that new local facilities within Cawston Grange and its extension would develop for the benefit of its local community, enhancing local affinities within Cawston parish.”

The above statement displays a lamentable ignorance within CGR of the responsibilities of a Parish Council, the services that it finances, and the mechanism by which the council's finances are raised. Dunchurch Parish Council is not talking in any way about the strength and viability of its local businesses which undoubtedly will gain from additional population. CGR seems to believe that Dunchurch PC obtains funding from commercial business rates; it receives not a penny, those monies all being paid to Rugby Borough Council. To say that social and charitable organisations will benefit from increased membership contributions is naïve in the extreme. All the services provided by Dunchurch PC are paid for from precept which can only be raised from householders within the Parish boundary.

Page 19 of 31

Appendix 1

By these proposed boundary changes Dunchurch will loose both the growing precept income from the housing development as it is built and the existing precept income from the dwellings on the west side of Coventry Road Cawston. In summary the PC will have to attempt to maintain the services it presently provides and the demand from additional population without the ability to raise the necessary funding.

Additional considerations Dunchurch Parish Council presently owns, maintains and powers 259 street lighting columns within its parish, 7 of which are on Coventry Road, Cawston. If the proposals are validated then Dunchurch will have no responsibility for providing this service outside its boundary. The columns are of significant capital value and it would demand that a suitable asset transfer payment be made along with the abrogation of its responsibilities for their operation and maintenance.

Robin Aird Chairman Dunchurch Parish Council Tel.: 01788 816340 Email: [email protected]

Page 20 of 31

Appendix 1

CGR to Dunchurch Parish Council 2/4/2014

Hello Mrs Knowles.

Further to the Dunchurch PC reply received today and in anticipation of considerations to come, can you please send me the following information ?

- Your capital asset valuation of street lights within the parish – with background information explaining how the valuation was derived - The current number of households within the parish

Please can you send the information before the close of the CGR consultation period ? (30 April 2014)

Many thanks, Peter Aughton

Dunchurch Parish Council to CGR 15/4/2014

DUNCHURCH PARISH COUNCIL CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REVIEW OF CAWSTON PARISH BOUNDARIES FURTHER RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION ON DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS - PUBLISHED 3 FEBRUARY 2014 15 April 2014

Dear Mr Aughton In response to your recent request, following Dunchurch Parish Council's submission in relation to the above referenced consultation, please consider the following:

The seven lighting columns in Coventry Road, Cawston are part of a batch of 206 similar columns which appear in Dunchurch Parish Council's Fixed Asset register, published with the council's annual accounts. The value shown is £53,160, a figure which has been maintained in the register for a very long time. Its origins are however obscure and we can only assume that it is an historical cost of some description.

Apportioning the value to seven column produces a combined value of £1,806.41. However this would not reflect the true value at today's replacement costs. The most recent figure we have for a realistic replacement cost is in relation to a column replaced following destruction in a road traffic accident elsewhere in the village and that now appears on the asset register with a value of £1,400.

We believe that the current number of households within the village, including Coventry Road, Cawston is 1,333 however a more sensible and accurate consideration would probably be the the tax base figure for 2014-15, provided by Rugby Borough Council, which is 1,277.26.

We trust that this helps.

Robin Aird Chairman Dunchurch Parish Council Tel.: 01788 816340 Email: [email protected]

Page 21 of 31

Appendix 1

CGR to Dunchurch Parish Council and Cawston Parish Council 17/4/14

Dear Cllr Aird,

Thank you for your recent submissions dated 2 April and 15 April on behalf of Dunchurch Parish Council and in connection with the ongoing Cawston parish CGR.

We have noted your remarks concerning the financial aspects of proposed changes and have subsequently derived the following proposal that may be incorporated into our final recommendations.

As the matter has a direct bearing on both Dunchurch and Cawston parish councils, I have copied Cllr Venner(as Chair of Cawston Parish) into this email so that you both have the same details at this time.

Background summary Dunchurch Parish Council presented views concerning B4642 Coventry Road, Cawston, namely – - the transfer of ownership and liability for 7 street lights - the loss of precept for 38 properties

Street lighting Ownership and responsibility for the street lights would be affected by the recommended parish boundary line adjustment to run along the route of the B4642 Coventry Road. It would therefore be appropriate for the property and liability to be transferred from Dunchurch Parish to Cawston Parish. - Dunchurch Parish Council has advised that a recent replacement to a village lighting column cost £1,400 and that this value is reflected in their asset register - Dunchurch Parish Council minutes of meeting 698 held on 4 February 2014 contains details of a recommended maintenance contract for street lighting with an average per-light cost of £7.72

Precept After due consideration, the CGR recognises that the transfer of 38 properties to Cawston Parish Council would cause a loss of precept. However the benefits for local democracy, community cohesion and local governance expressed in the draft recommendations for changing the boundary of Cawston parish are considered primary. Therefore the changes should continue to proceed for inclusion within the final recommendations. Nevertheless, the Cawston CGR must also recognise local factors affecting adjoining parishes and in this regard it is aware of another housing development off Cawston Lane which would adjoin the B4642 Coventry Road and the redrawn parish boundary line. The Cawston Lane development would fall entirely within Dunchurch Parish.

The CGR has reviewed the forecast timescales and anticipated building rates for both the Cawston Grange extension and the Cawston Lane developments. The current details were issued by Rugby Borough Council in December 2013 and show an anticipation of the Cawston Grange extension starting in 2015/16 with an initial 30 houses in year 1, followed by more building up to the end of the development. Similarly, the Cawston Lane development is anticipated to start in 2016/17 with an initial 30 houses, followed by more building up to the end of the development. Thus, there is a reasonable basis to expect increased in precept income for both parishes as these developments progress through to occupation by householders.

Page 22 of 31

Appendix 1

Conclusion The CGR regards the change of street lighting ownership and the two housing developments are key factors that influence consideration of the financial issue raised by Dunchurch Parish Council in respect of the loss of precept for the 38 properties along the B4642 Coventry Road. Therefore it has reached the following conclusions :- a) That the boundary of Cawston parish is revised as outlined in the draft recommendations and that the aforementioned 38 properties are thereby transferred to the jurisdiction of Cawston Parish Council. b) That the change of street lighting ownership would introduce a new expense and risk to Cawston Parish Council while reducing expense and risk to Dunchurch Parish Council. It agrees with the replacement valuation of £1,400 per lighting column for Cawston Parish Council to incorporate within its asset register and accepted as a new additional risk. It also recognises that maintenance of the lighting columns would be a new cost to Cawston Parish Council of approximately £60-£100pa. Such new and extra costs should be covered from precept income from the 38 properties transferred from Dunchurch parish. Whilst annual maintenance costs are certain to be incurred, replacement costs for lighting columns are unpredictable but some provision should be made. c) That the current timescales for anticipated housing development at Cawston Grange extension and at Cawston Lane are accepted. As a consequence, it is recognised that Dunchurch Parish Council would be unlikely to see a related increase in parish precept receipts until 2016/17 at the earliest. d) That it is also considered reasonable to allow for a 12 month delay to the predicted developments timescale. Therefore, for the financial years 2015/16 and 2016/17 only, the precept receipts for the aforementioned 38 properties should be divided between Cawston Parish Council and Dunchurch Parish Council 25% / 75% respectively. Thereafter, all precept income from these properties should be retained by Cawston Parish Council.

This interim financial arrangement allows an accommodation of new costs and risks for Cawston Parish from precept that it would be entitled to receive because of the transfer of 38 properties, whilst recognising reduced liabilities and costs for Dunchurch Parish Council. However, it also seeks to reduce the impact of lost precept income to Dunchurch Parish Council until increases begin to be realised from the Cawston Lane housing development.

To both Councillors - Given that the consultation period on the Cawston CGR draft recommendations still has a little time left before it ends on 30 April, I would please ask for your replies (should you wish to make any) by then so they can be included in our considerations to inform final recommendations. As before, please make your replies to [email protected]

Regards, Peter Aughton

Page 23 of 31

Appendix 1

Dunchurch Parish Council to CGR 23/4/2014

DUNCHURCH PARISH COUNCIL CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REVIEW OF CAWSTON PARISH BOUNDARIES FURTHER RESPONSE TO CONSULTATION ON DRAFT RECOMMENDATIONS - PUBLISHED 3 FEBRUARY 2014

23 April 2014

Dear Mr Aughton

In response to your emailed response dated 17 April, 2014 we have the following additional comments:

Assuming that the proposed boundary change takes place we do not think that your suggestion of a 75%/25% split in the precept income from the Coventry Road properties is acceptable. You seem to concentrate too much on the lighting column issue in terms of any justification for compensation, whereas Dunchurch Parish Council's forward and budgeted commitments are about much more than than- as has been explained in our previous responses.

You state that you would anticipate that maintenance of the columns would cost £60-100 per annum although our present contract would indicate £54.04. If you factor in inflation at 3% per annum it takes 3 years to reach a £60 charge; yet you are suggesting a 25% precept to Cawston PC amounting to approximately £625 per annum- hardly equitable.

Furthermore Dunchurch PC would seek assurance that the total precept that would be raised by Cawston PC on the Coventry Road properties, throughout the period of compensation, was at least equal to that raised by Dunchuch as this would affect any calculation of compensation. I know Cawston's total council tax is currently less than Dunchurch's, but I do not have the figures of their band breakdown of precept.

Additionally, although you state, what at present appear to be reasonable time-scales for the commencement of building on the Cawston Extension and the Cawston Lane developments, there is no guarantee that they will happen as predicted. Rather than suggest financial actions based upon a supposition it would be better to do so in terms of the reality. I would like to suggest the following:

Take the reduced tax base figure for Dunchurch Parish Council that will be created by the transfer of the Coventry Road to Cawston Parish as a datum. Continue whatever compensation arrangement is agreed for loss of precept, until the tax base figure for Dunchurch Parish increases, due to new developments, to equal the present tax base figure. In that way any delay in the development will be taken into account and no arbitrary cessation date will be necessary.

We look forward to your response indicating a revised scheme. greater in its compensatory nature.

Robin Aird

Chairman Dunchurch Parish Council Tel.: 01788 816340 Email: [email protected]

Page 24 of 31

Appendix 1

Cawston Parish Council to CGR 29/4/14

Peter,

Tonight we were able to briefly discuss the recommendations you outlined below. Whilst the Councillors in attendance could not make any decisions this evening (as our next full council meeting is not until the middle of May) I have been asked to say that we are happy to agree in principle with the points that you have made. We would like to mention that as the lighting columns on the Cawston estate are in the process of being adopted by WCC, it would seem nonsensicle for Cawston to own just seven in the future, and therefore we will be looking to negotiate with WCC as to them taking on the ownership of the seven. This will have to be negotiated and agreed with WCC.

Please do not hesitate to contact me should you need anything further.

Regards

Cllr Peter Venner Chair Cawston Parish Council

Page 25 of 31

Appendix 1

MAP 1B – Requested changes within petition from Cawston Parish Council CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 1

Page 26 of 31

Appendix 1

MAP 2B – current alignment of northeast section of Cawston parish boundary CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 5

Page 27 of 31

Appendix 1

MAP 3B – Recommended alignment of new southern area boundaries along A4071 and B4642 CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 6 CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 9

Page 28 of 31

Appendix 1

MAP 3E - Recommended realignment of western boundary of current Cawston parish CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 10

Page 29 of 31

Appendix 1

MAP 4 – Recommended changes to the northern boundary of Cawston parish CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 4 CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 5

Page 30 of 31

Appendix 1

MAP 5 – Overall view of recommended boundaries for expanded Cawston parish CLICK HERE to return to Recommendation 3

Page 31 of 31

Agenda Item 8(c)

Council - 22nd July 2014

Report of the Leader of the Council

Senior Management Structure of the Council

1. Introduction

On 10th December 2013 I reported to the Council on the future senior management structure of the Council in the light of Andrew Gabbitas’ retiring from his position as Executive Director in September this year. The Council accepted the proposals I put forward and following a rigorous selection process Adam Norburn was selected as Andrew’s successor. Adam took up his position on 9th June and has been progressively taking over Andrew’s role since that time.

2. Statutory Roles

In December 2013 Council decided that Ian Davis should succeed to Andrew as Head of Paid Service. Andrew’s other roles as Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer were left to be decided in the light of the outcome of the selection of his successor. Mark Neale, who is currently Deputy Returning Officer and also the Council’s Monitoring Officer, has recently been successful in obtaining a post with Bedford Council. He will, therefore, also be leaving the Council in September. Successors, therefore, need to be appointed to all these positions.

3. Proposals

I recommend to Council that Adam Norburn be appointed Returning Officer and Electoral Registration Officer and that Steve Garrison be appointed as his Deputy and also as Monitoring Officer. Both these officers have wide ranging experience of the subject matter of these roles and will be undertaking the appropriate training and development to build on and enhance that experience. Because of Council’s timely decision on future management structure there is also a good opportunity for Andrew and Mark to assist with the necessary hand-over and succession arrangements. Deborah Tyrrell will remain in her current role as Deputy Monitoring Officer.

4. Further Arrangements

There will be other changes to our structure which are necessary as a result of Adam’s succession and Mark’s departure. These are under active consideration and will be reported to Cabinet in due course.

5. Recommendation

The appointments outlined in this report be approved with immediate effect. AGENDA ITEM 8(d)

COUNCIL – 22 JULY 2014

REPORT OF THE LEADER AND DEPUTY LEADER OF THE COUNCIL

DEMENTIA ACTION ALLIANCE – ACTION PLAN

1. INTRODUCTION Alzheimer's disease is the most common cause of dementia, affecting around 496,000 people in the UK. The term 'dementia' describes a set of symptoms which can include loss of memory, mood changes, and problems with communication and reasoning. These symptoms occur when the brain is damaged by certain diseases and conditions, including Alzheimer's disease. The Equality and Diversity Steering Group recently requested that the council signs up to the Dementia Action Alliance. The Alliance encourages and supports communities and organisations across England to take practical actions to help people living with dementia, and their carers. It is also focused on helping people to live longer in their own homes, avoiding the need for residential care or hospital treatment whenever possible. This report seeks the Council’s endorsement of our membership of the Alliance. 2. THE DEMENTIA ACTION ALLIANCE By signing the National Dementia Declaration, Rugby Borough Council is committing to create an environment where people with dementia will be able to say:

 I have personal choice and control or influence over decisions about me  I know that services are designed around me and my needs  I have support that helps me live my life  I have the knowledge and know-how to get what I need  I live in an enabling and supportive environment where I feel valued and understood  I have a sense of belonging and of being a valued part of family, community and civic life  I know there is research going on which delivers a better life for me now and hope for the future. The council has already started the process of signing up to the Dementia Action Alliance, but now needs to submit an outline action plan supporting its commitment. 3. DEMENTIA ACTION ALLIANCE ACTION PLAN The draft action plan attached at Appendix 1 to the report highlights three principal ways that the council will respond to challenges in providing support to dementia sufferers and their carers. It uses the Dementia Action Alliance templates and the level of detail outlined is consistent with that provided by other organisations. It is recognised that there are many activities that the council could undertake to meet the needs of dementia sufferers and their carers. These will be looked at by individual services as they arise and do not need to form part of our specific action plan. The Equality and Diversity Steering Group will be pleased to consider other actions should Members wish to suggest any. The actions carried out in support of the plan will be reviewed and monitored by the Equality and Diversity Steering Group.

4. RECOMMENDATION The Council submits the action plan at Appendix 1 and joins the Dementia Action Alliance. Appendix 1

National Dementia Declaration Action Plan

Part 1 of 2: Information about you and your organisation

The organisation listed below agrees to sign up to the Declaration and commits to delivering it through the actions listed below: Please tick [ YES ] Fill in your contact details

Contact Matthew Deaves, Communications and Community Engagement Name: Manager Work Town Hall, Evreux Way, Rugby CV21 2RR Address: Phone: 01788 533562 Email: [email protected] Website: www.rugby.gov.uk

Are you willing for us to share your contact details with fellow Dementia Action Alliance members: Yes [ YES ] No [ ]

Organisation Logo Please attach your organisation’s logo in jpeg format when returning this Action Plan via email to: [email protected] ‐ it will be displayed on the Dementia Action Alliance website alongside your Action Plan. . Fill in your organisation details

Organisation name Rugby Borough Council

Organisation summary (max 150 words)

Rugby Borough Council is the primary local authority serving the borough of Rugby. The borough council is a customer‐focused organisation with an established track record of understanding the needs of its customers and tailoring its services to suit.

Please select your region(s)

National London South East East of England North East South West East Midlands North West X West Midlands Yorkshire and Humber

Appendix 1

Area covered Please make clear what area your organisation operates in. At the moment this is on the basis of local authority boundaries. For example an organisation may say they work in Birmingham, Sandwell, Solihull and Walsall; another may say Staffordshire and Stoke‐on‐ Trent. If you are not sure, be as descriptive as possible.

The borough of Rugby.

Select your organisation type:

Commercial X Public Sector Third Sector

What sectors does your organisation work in?

Care Hospital Trusts Pharmaceutical Commissioners Hospitality X Recreation X Communication X Housing Research Education X Local authorities Retail Emergency services Membership Transport Faith groups organisation Utility Finance Other Health

Part 2 of 2: Completing your Action Plan

1. The National Dementia Declaration lists seven outcomes that the DAA are seeking to achieve for people with dementia and their carers. How would you describe your organisation’s role in delivering better outcomes for people with dementia and their carers? Your response could include a national AND local role. Consider your organisation’s role in influencing and supporting the work of other organisations as well as the projects you deliver. (200 words)

Rugby Borough Council has adopted a Systems Thinking approach to service design, which has helped it to design services around every individual’s needs. The council now believes that it has a leadership role in helping partner organisations to understand how to improve services and reduce costs, while simultaneously designing them around user needs.

Rugby Borough Council also has a responsibility to help its members, staff and citizens to understand and act on the individual needs of all of its communities, including dementia sufferers and their carers. By doing this we will be able to provide tailored support that will help individuals to live independent lives.

Appendix 1

2. What are the challenges to delivering these outcomes from the perspective of your organisation? Your response could include your members’ understanding of dementia. A training body might say there is no agreement on appropriate core curricula. (150 words)

The council believes that a need for a diagnosis and ‘label’ can be a barrier to supporting dementia sufferers and their carers. We try to understand an individual’s needs and respond to them regardless of whether or not they have an official diagnosis. We will encourage our partner organisations to adopt a similar approach, where the focus is on individual needs and not on an individual’s medical record.

We are mindful of the shortage of specialist housing stock available to individuals with complex care needs. We will work with partners to modify appropriate housing to meet the needs of our residents with the aim of enabling them to live at home for as long as they wish to and are able to.

3. What are your plans as an organisation to respond to these challenges between now and 2014? This section is where the actions are. They involve having a short header that summarises the action (ideally no more than 25 words), and the main content where organisations can go into more depth. These need not be too detailed and should aim to give a general overview to casual readers from a range of backgrounds.

Please aim to have a minimum of three action points and a maximum of ten. This template only has space for three actions but add extra as needed.

1. Action Title This is a short sentence summarising the Action (max 25 words) Provide basic training to front‐line staff 3

Appendix 1

Action Description This is where you go into more detail about the Action.

Provide basic training to front‐line staff to help them understand the needs of dementia sufferers and their carers, and how we can adapt our services to meet their needs.

Stage of Action Please select one. For further explanation see Appendix.

Case Study X Initial Scoping Launch event – Delivery Planning advocacy Implementation Uncompleted Other:

Action tags Please select the relevant topics that apply to your Action. This assists with filter searches on the DAA website. For further explanation see Appendix.

Antipsychotics Diagnosis People/skills Assistive technology X Dignity Prime Minister’s X Awareness raising Disseminating best Challenge Care for people with practice Quality Standards dementia End of life Research Care in Hospitals Funding Safeguarding Commissioners X Inclusion Supporting carers Dementia Friendly Information for people communities with dementia and carers Dementia Friends Money

2. Action Title This is a short sentence summarising the Action (max 25 words)

Help people to live in their own homes

Action Description This is where you go into more detail about the Action.

We will encourage partners to redirect spending from acute and long-term sectors into provision of support in people’s own homes.

Appendix 1

Stage of Action Please select one. For further explanation see Appendix.

Case Study Initial Scoping Launch event – Delivery X Planning advocacy Implementation Uncompleted Other:

Action tags Please select the relevant topics that apply to your Action. This assists with filter searches on the DAA website. For further explanation see Appendix.

Antipsychotics Diagnosis Money X Assistive technology X Dignity People/skills Awareness raising Disseminating best Prime Minister’s X Care for people with practice Challenge dementia X End of life Quality Standards Care in Hospitals Funding Research Commissioners Inclusion Safeguarding Dementia Friendly X Information for Supporting carers communities people with dementia Dementia Friends and carers

3. Action Title This is a short sentence summarising the Action (max 25 words)

Dementia friendly communities

Action Description This is where you go into more detail about the Action.

We will work with partner organisations and networks to promote dementia friendliness and provide opportunities for people with dementia to get involved in activities near to where they live.

Stage of Action Please select one. For further explanation see Appendix.

Case Study Initial Scoping Launch event – Delivery X Planning advocacy Implementation Uncompleted Other:

Action tags Please select the relevant topics that apply to your Action. This assists with filter searches on the DAA website. For further explanation see Appendix.

Appendix 1

Antipsychotics Diagnosis People/skills Assistive technology X Dignity Prime Minister’s X Awareness raising Disseminating best Challenge Care for people with practice Quality Standards dementia End of life Research Care in Hospitals Funding Safeguarding Commissioners X Inclusion Supporting carers X Dementia Friendly Information for people communities with dementia and carers Dementia Friends Money

Please add additional actions if needed.

Appendix 1

Stage of Action ‐ definitions

Case study (contribute example for Achievement section on DAA website Completed (if time linked) Delivery (conducting research / providing service) Implementation (changing practice to reflect research finding) Initial scoping (deciding what initiative to deliver) Launch event/ Advocacy (research results / campaign) Planning (deciding how to deliver initiative) Uncompleted (if something haven’t worked, we are keen to know why)

Appendix 2

Action tags – definitions

Antipsychotics (reducing the use of / developing alternatives to) Assistive technology (using technology to support people with dementia and those that care for them) Awareness raising ‐ (public awareness and understanding) Care for people with dementia (care homes, care for people at home, extra care, care pathways, access) Care in Hospitals (acute / community and mental health) Commissioners (Support to / influencing commissioners / CCGs) Dementia friendly communities (engaging organisations outside health and social care) Dementia Friends ‐(prescribed programme) Diagnosis (memory clinics / work to boost diagnosis) Dignity (respect / personalisation) Disseminating best practice (organisations and for person) End of life (palliative care / planning / campaigning) Funding (sources of / applications to ‐ from perspective of organisations) Inclusion (BME / equality / sexuality / young people with dementia, working to promote support for lonely people) Information for people with dementia and carers ‐(advice and guidance on living with the condition) Money (personalisation / personal financial management – from perspective of people with dementia and carers)

Appendix 1

People / skills ‐ (workforce development / leadership development / professional education, Specialist Roles) Prime Minister’s Challenge Quality Standards (Reporting / Accredit Memory Clinics) Research (medical / economic and social research, Evidence Base) Safeguarding (protecting people with dementia) Supporting carers (respite care / peer support)

Appendix 1

Agenda Item 8(e)

Council – 22nd July 2014

Equality and Diversity Excellence Peer Challenge

Report of the Deputy Leader of the Council and the Head of Customer and Information Services

1. INTRODUCTION

At the Council meeting of 21 October 2013, Councillors approved the decision to invite a local government external peer challenge assessment for the ‘Excellent’ standard of the Equality Framework for Local Government. The basis for the Peer Challenge was a benchmark against the following five areas of performance:.

 Knowing your communities and equality mapping  Place shaping, leadership, partnership and organisational commitment  Community engagement and satisfaction  Responsive services and Customer Care  Modern and diverse workforce

The Council was successful in achieving the excellent standard and is proud to announce that Rugby Borough Council is the first district/borough council to have achieved the standard.

The Peer Assessors said, “The award is a testament to the commitment of its senior leaders in providing the leadership and resources and to its staff for their enthusiasm and hard work”.

2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The Council welcomed the opportunity to be the first Borough/District Council to undertake an Equality and Diversity peer challenge, and be assessed at the ‘Excellent’ level of the Equality Framework for Local Government. The 5 key areas of performance that were assessed during the peer challenge certainly facilitated the chance to demonstrate, and describe the council’s on going journey of improvement since achieving Level 3 of the previous framework in 2009. During this time the council used the framework as one of the ways of working to help improve in many areas.

The excellence peer review recognised the council had a clear agenda for ensuring equality and diversity was embedded across the organisation, and continued to be led from the highest level of the organisation by the Deputy Leader and Senior Officers. The council is proud of the work it has done to support the communities of Rugby which demonstrates a commitment to making a real difference. Achieving excellence has further reinforced the organisations role as community leader and local partner whilst providing continued confidence

to customers that the council is delivering the best services it can, with the limited resources it has available. The excellence peer challenge focuses on outcomes for customers, communities and staff, rather than processes put in place to simply gather information. Numerous case studies were provided during the review to clearly show how the Council has made a difference and had a positive impact. For Rugby Borough Council some of the recommendations made from the peer review will only further enhance the ongoing journey for continuous improvement.

3. DETAIL

Appendix 1 – attached full report – Diversity Peer Challenge

4. PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT

The purpose of this report is to provide a copy of the full report to Council. The report contains sections under each assessed criteria for areas of improvement. It is the view of members of the Equality and Diversity Steering Group that not all of the areas of improvement are relevant to this Council. Therefore, it is recommended that the improvement action plan be formulated accordingly to ensure the areas for improvement included in the action plan align with the Council’s direction of travel and Systems Thinking culture.

Members of Equality and Diversity Steering Group: Councillor Poole (Deputy Leader) – Chairman Councillor Garcia – Vice Chair Councillor Pacey-Day Councillor Shera Councillor Hunt – (LSP link) optional depending on agenda Executive Director – Andrew Gabbitas/ Adam Norburn Head of Customer and Information Services – Raj Chand: Equalities Strategic Lead WCC Officer - Minakshee Patel – Equalities Specialist Communications Manager – Matthew Deaves – Equalities Operational lead Head of Business Transformation – Doug Jones

5. CONCLUSIONS

The Council is proud of its achievements and resulting improvement made in Rugby to make it an exciting place to live, work and visit. Whilst the Council builds its services around its customers there is always room for improvement. Following achievement of the excellent standard for Equalities the Council will:

 Develop an ‘areas for improvement’ action plan incorporating the relevant areas for consideration from the peer review report, and ensure equalities continue to be embedded across all areas.  Continue to build on successes and focus on what works for the customer.  Ensure we maintain our approach to embedding equalities.  Continue to monitor and review our processes and carrying out impact analyses.

The Council has come a long way in the journey to excellence, and it is critical that this does not slip or be taken as a given. Continuous training and raising awareness of equalities needs to be ongoing across the whole organisation internally and externally.

While there may be more challenges ahead, Rugby Borough Council is in the enviable position of having the highest level of support. With Members and senior officers all championing their cause, it is certain that our diverse communities will continue to be at the centre of everything we do.

Recommendation

1. Authority be delegated to the Council’s Equality and Diversity Steering Group to formulate the action plan for Rugby Borough Council, taking into consideration the ‘relevant’ recommended areas of improvement of the Peer Challenge report;

2. the Equality and Diversity Steering Group be tasked with the management and ongoing monitoring of the action plan; and

3. authority be delegated to the Equality and Diversity Steering Group to undertake the self-assessment required by February 2016 in order to retain the excellent standard and bring a report back to Council in 2016.

3 Appendix 1

Diversity Peer Challenge

Rugby Borough Council

Report

24-27 February 2014

Appendix 1

1. Background

Rugby Borough Council (RBC) asked the Local Government Association to conduct an Equality Peer Challenge to see if the Council satisfies the requirements of the Equality Framework for Local Government for an external assessment at the Excellent level. This report is a summary of the findings of that Peer Challenge carried out by trained peers. The Peer Challenge is designed to validate a council’s own self-assessment at the Excellent Level by considering documentary evidence and by carrying out a series of interviews and focus groups with employees and other stakeholders.

The basis for the Peer Challenge is a benchmark against five areas of performance. They are:

 Knowing your communities  Leadership, partnership and organisational commitment  Community engagement and satisfaction  Responsive services and customer care  A skilled and committed workforce

The Peer Challenge is not an inspection, rather it offers an external assessment of a council’s own judgement of itself against the Equality Framework benchmark, by critical friends who have experience of delivering an equality/diversity agenda in their own councils.

Peers were: Councillor Pauline Helliar-Symons – Wokingham Borough Council Louise Sboui – Huntingdonshire District Council Sharon Allman – Mansfield District Council Diane Weston- Berneslai Homes Gill Elliott – Local Government Association Liam Paul – Local Government Association

The team appreciates the welcome and hospitality provided by the Council and would like to thank everybody that they met during the process for their time and contributions.

Following this Equality Peer Challenge, we have reached the following conclusion:

Rugby Borough Council has completed a satisfactory self-assessment against the criteria for the Excellent level of the Equality Framework.

RBC is the first district council to achieve the Excellent level of the Equality Framework and it is to be congratulated on this. The award is a testament to the Appendix 1

commitment of its senior leaders in providing the leadership and resources and to its staff for their enthusiasm and hard work.

The Council knows its communities and it works hard with its partners to keep that knowledge up to date. It has clear equality priorities and uses equality impact assessments effectively to plan and review its services. The scrutiny of equalities related issues is impressive resulting in good action plans and outcomes.

The Council is committed to maintaining its funding of voluntary and community groups and it has delivered some excellent projects with its partners and the community and voluntary sector. Community cohesion within the borough is good. There is effective and wide ranging engagement and involvement with the community including those who are vulnerable.

The Council has a “can do” reputation amongst its community partners. Some said that they would like the Council to involve them more pro-actively and at a more strategic level, for example around Welfare Reform.

The Council’s Systems Thinking approach and the end to end service reviews are delivering good service outcomes and considerable efficiencies. Peers felt that the Council could do more to evidence that all parts of the community are able to access its services and have high satisfaction with those services.

There are high levels of staff satisfaction and staff view RBC as a good place to work. The Council has started to tackle the under-representativeness of its workforce. In terms of young people, its apprenticeship scheme has been very successful and is a source of pride for the organisation. However, going forward it also needs to address its workforce profile in terms of Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) and other protected characteristics.

2. The Council made the following observations on the impact of the peer challenge:

The Council welcomed the opportunity to be the first Borough/District Council to undertake an Equality and Diversity peer challenge, and be assessed at the ‘Excellent’ level of the Equality Framework for Local Government. The 5 key areas of performance that were assessed during the peer challenge certainly facilitated the chance to demonstrate, and describe the council’s on going journey of improvement since achieving Level 3 of the previous framework in 2009. During this time the council used the framework as one of the ways of working to help improve in many areas.

The excellence peer review recognised the council had a clear agenda for ensuring equality and diversity was embedded across the organisation, and Appendix 1

continued to be led from the highest level of the organisation by the Deputy Leader and Senior Officers.

The council is proud of the work it has done to support the communities of Rugby which demonstrates a commitment to making a real difference. Achieving excellence has further reinforced the organisations role as community leader and local partner whilst providing continued confidence to customers that the council is delivering the best services it can, with the limited resources it has available. The excellence peer challenge focuses on outcomes for customers, communities and staff, rather than processes put in place to simply gather information. Numerous case studies were provided during the review to clearly show how the Council has made a difference and had a positive impact. For Rugby Borough Council the recommendations made from the peer review will only further enhance the ongoing journey for continuous improvement.

The work done so far has strengthened and prepared the organisation for the way it will continue to consider equalities as part of any future changes. The Council is committed to being ‘Excellent’ and plans to continue to see the importance of equality and ensuring it is embedded, as well as backing this up with the resources needed to meet the diverse needs of our communities wherever possible longer term.

3. Detailed findings

3.1 Knowing your communities

Strengths:  Good knowledge of the equality profile of the community that is regularly updated  Council gathers information from a wide range of sources  Partners contribute to RBC’s knowledge of its community  Strong evidence that staff and councillors know their communities  Some good examples of how data has improved services for the community

RBC has good quality information about the make-up of its community and its minority groups which is regularly updated. Data on the equality profile of the borough is used to inform planning and monitor outcomes. Gaps in information are addressed, e.g. Targeted interviews with tenants provided detailed information on the likely impact of welfare reform and showed how many tenants would require ICT support to make online claims.

The Council gathers information from a range of sources. It is a partner of the Warwickshire Observatory which provides information and intelligence about the county and its people. In 2011, the Observatory was commissioned to produce equality and diversity profiles for all the districts and boroughs in the county. Appendix 1

These provide good quality information on the equality profile of its communities and their changing needs. The profiles were updated in late 2013 to incorporate 2011 Census data. The Council also uses Mosaic as well as localities data across the borough to help identify key equality gaps. A Quality of Life Report is produced annually as well as the Joint Strategic Needs Analysis. The Regeneration Strategy 2014-15 is a good example of how the Council has used information on the equality profile of its communities and its changing needs. The Strategy sets out the strategic priorities for the Council and partners on the Rugby Local Strategic Partnership. Progress is reviewed regularly and culminates in sharing information at the Compact event.

There are some good examples of partners working well together to share information and knowledge about communities, e.g. Warwickshire Fire and Rescue Service have trained council staff to identify fire safety concerns and report on to the Fire Service. Service level agreements with community groups enable the Council to gain updated information on changing needs, e.g. community garden project and identification that some householders are facing financial hardship (cutting down on food and heating). The Housing service can demonstrate that it uses information gained with partners to inform service planning and delivery, i.e. anti- social behaviour informing allocations. Analysis of public order offences, domestic violence and anti-social behaviour by the Police and the Rugby Community Safety Partnership has led to an initiative aimed at tackling excessive alcohol consumption amongst the Eastern European migrants. RBC, the County Council, Public Health, GP Commissioning, and the voluntary sector have provided for funding for a fixed term role to raise awareness and improve access to services for this community.

Staff and councillors know their community well and this has led to service improvements. An example of this was a refuse collector who noticed that refuse/recycling bins were being used incorrectly. He identified that this was due to a lack of understanding by a Polish resident. As a result easy read information on how to use bins was provided and the problems were resolved. Another Member recognised that his ward had a number of Polish households and he printed introduction cards in Polish to engage with this community. Members led and supported the new Skate park projects, holding consultations with young groups to determine how they would like to parks to develop.

There are many good examples of how data and information about the community has helped to improve services. These include development of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Leisure Centre which now has excellent facilities for disabled people

Members led through Scrutiny involved Daventry Partners in improving the way cultural needs were able to be met by the new crematorium service. This included a “What you do when someone Dies” leaflet and individual, customised Appendix 1

services to meet diverse cultural needs. Focused work with the Gypsy & Traveller community on redeveloping the Woodside site, identified issues relating to poor health care. The authority worked with partners in Health to enable this community to access wider services, e.g. healthcare. Housing takes a ‘diagnostic’ approach towards tenants’ needs. There is a more in-depth analysis and use of information in the support of tenants and finding solutions that meet the needs of the individual.

Areas for consideration:  Widen access to borough and ward profiles  Consider how best to capture customer profile information during second phase of the CRM  Consider how to make best use of equality profile data  Continue to ensure that Hate Crime reporting remains a priority

Consider improving access to the borough and ward profile information by placing them on the intranet and internet and publicise to staff and Members.

The peer team strongly recommends that the Council considers capturing customer profile information (including access and communication needs) during the second phase of the customer relationship management system. (CRM)

Consider how equality profile data can be captured and analysed and the best use that can be made of this data e.g. measuring levels of satisfaction or participation, to support completion of equality impact assessments (EIAs) and to help with compliance with the Public Sector Equality Duty (PSED).

Continue to ensure that Hate Crime reporting remains a priority. Under reporting has been identified by local groups in particular the Disability Forum and the Warwickshire Race Equality Partnership (WREP).

3.2 Leadership, partnership and organisational commitment

Strengths:  Strong leadership on E&D from Councillors and officers  Clear priorities to address equality and diversity issues  Strong partnership working leading to positive outcomes  Effective scrutiny  Equality criteria in tenders/contracts which are regularly monitored  Commitment to maintain funding for community and voluntary groups where possible  Councillors are broadly representative of the local community  Leadership

Appendix 1

RBC has strong leadership on equality and diversity from its leading members and officers. Commitment and contribution appears to be seamless between them. This joint commitment has clearly influenced the culture of the wider organisation. The shared equality service with Warwickshire County Council (WCC) has also had a positive impact on equality and diversity in RBC. The Council is involved in organising events to benefit the community and celebrate its cultural heritage. The Rugby Festival of Culture was established and financed by the Council and is now in its fourth year and includes art, music, food and heritage from several communities.

RBC has clear priorities to address equality issues in the borough which are agreed and understood by senior officers, politicians and partners, including the community and voluntary sector. A shared vision is delivered through the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) and their action plans, specifically the Stronger Communities Partnership and the Regeneration Strategy.

The Council supports many successful projects resulting from working with partners, e.g. Benn Partnership; initiatives on Hate Crime with the Police and the Edible Borders project in New Bolton that focusses on providing local healthy produce to local residents in deprived areas.

Outcomes for the community have been enhanced and positive action has been taken as a result of the scrutiny process. Task force groups have enabled in- depth examinations on a number of important topics with an equality dimension, e.g. access to countryside for disabled people, employee wellbeing, the impact of budget changes and welfare reform.

The inclusion of equality criteria is standard practice within tenders and contracts and targets. Demonstrating compliance is regularly monitored through Co-valent. There are regular meetings with contractors to discuss progress.

The Council is committed to working with partners in the voluntary sector and recognises that it cannot provide all the services that are needed by itself. Funding for community and voluntary partnerships has been maintained where possible and the grants allocation system has been revamped to make application simpler. Where a service level agreement (SLA) is no longer possible the Council has tried to commission individual projects from associated organisations, e.g. the review of taxi licensing by the WREP.

Councillors are fairly representative of the diversity of the local community, especially in relation to the population in terms of women and BME.

Areas for consideration:  Seek to increase public attendance at scrutiny groups  Share with voluntary sector how their input has informed strategic and proactive planning Appendix 1

 Consider a skills audit for councillors (including E&D issues)

Consider how to encourage members of the public and partners to attend scrutiny committees and or task groups. Strengthen the various ways by which they could be involved in the scrutiny process by identifying needs, monitoring outcomes, and feeding back ideas and about how further improvement can be achieved.

Partners reported that RBC is very good at working with them to respond to problems etc, however they feel that they should be involved at a more strategic and proactive level, e.g. preparing for the full impact of Universal Credit in partnership with statutory partners and the voluntary sector. Some community groups involved in regeneration projects in the area felt that it was not an equal partnership but more of a directive role from the authority.

Consider carrying out a skills audit of all Councillors to ensure their skills, knowledge and experience is being fully utilised. This will increase the council’s knowledge of the community as well as engaging those councillors who currently feel less engaged. Focus councillor training on real situations affecting people who live in the community, with a greater focus on customer service. Consider including case studies of both good and bad practice. Currently some members feel that training tells them only what they already know, so concentrate less on the legal issues and more on the realities of the community.

3.3 Community engagement and satisfaction

Strengths:  Key sections of the community are satisfied that the authority and partners have listened to them and taken their views into account  There are positive outcomes for the community as a result of effective community engagement  Community forums and the Compact events ensure engagement with representatives from marginalised vulnerable groups who are then able to influence decisions  Consultation and engagement with young people

RBC has good working relationships with a wide range of community and voluntary groups who between them work with or represent all the key sections of the community. Independent consultants were engaged to work with the community and voluntary sector and community activists to ensure their voices were heard and helped to shape the Regeneration Strategy. The community development project in Newbold-on-Avon is a another good example of how input from the Council enabled the area’s community groups to join together in a partnership that helped them to engage with the Council and its partners and to access funding for community projects.

Appendix 1

There are many examples that demonstrate positive outcomes as a result of effective community engagement. They include Rugby Museum - The reading collection project to digitise a collection of over 20,000 photographs capturing the history and heritage of the West Indian Community; Daventry Partnership and the Race Equality Partnership were involved in the design of the new Crematorium advising on how to respond to multi faith beliefs and provide ‘tailor made’ services; Community groups including the Rugby Disability Forum were involved in the design of the new Queen’s Diamond Jubilee Leisure Centre to develop a facility that is able to meet the needs of the diverse community.

The authority holds regular Community Forums every quarter. These are at various locations within the district and are an opportunity for the community to engage with the authority, its members, the Police, NHS and local community and voluntary organisations to discuss what is important in their areas. Key themes emerging from these meeting are around antisocial behaviour, road safety, alcohol related crime and domestic abuse. Feedback to the groups is through presentations from the relevant organisations.

RBC is a signatory to the Warwickshire Compact and the Head of Customer and Information Services represents the Council as the Compact Champion. Annual Compact days are an opportunity for community and voluntary groups to contribute to decision making through engaging with the authority so that all involved have a clear understanding of the priorities for the borough and their individual roles in achieving them, e.g. the Comprehensive spending review and grants to the voluntary and community sector. The Council publishes how it awards grants, and asks the voluntary sector to put on workshops to help groups understand the application process.

There is good engagement with young people and different services have worked together to help each other consult and engage with young people. Consultation and engagement with young people in the development of facilities e.g. skate parks and Parcour Park in the district was led and supported by members, Investment on the “On Track” scheme; Youth Council; Rugby Youth Consortium.

Area for consideration:  Ensure that community groups know how the council uses the intelligence they provide

Information is being fed in through community audits and intelligence yet the groups are unsure how it’s being used to address the more strategic activities within the council. There are inconsistencies within the feedback mechanisms to these groups on how this information is used within the authority.

3.4 Responsive services and customer care Appendix 1

Strengths:  Policy and decision making is informed by equality analysis  Cumulative impact of decisions is understood and monitored across the authority and partners  Individual services across the authority can demonstrate that improvements and equality outcomes are being delivered  It appears that satisfaction with services for marginalised and vulnerable people is increasing  Supporting Gypsies and Travellers to access services

Equality impact assessments are well embedded within the Council. They are completed for appropriate service changes and they form part of the Systems Thinking processes and End to End Reviews which are improving services, e.g. Revenues and Benefits where a number of changes were made to the way the service is delivered which have had a positive impact on customers. Committee and council agendas refer to EIAs and they are used as a positive tool to ensure inclusive decisions are made. e.g. taxi driver standards on wheelchairs. The EIA was completed with support of the Disability Forum.

Individual services across the Council were able to demonstrate that improved equality outcomes are being delivered.  Decorating vouchers are saving money and time required to prepare void properties for re-letting.  The Council is building modular housing so tenants won’t need to move in the future. It is also encouraging housing associations to do the same.  The Community Sports and Recreation Department worked with the Disability Forum and diverse community groups to breakdown cultural barriers in designing the new leisure centre. The result is that more customers are using the facilities and they are more culturally inclusive.  Information and data from Community Safety partners on Eastern European migrants led to the establishment of an Eastern European worker funded by the CSP. This has been effective in addressing a number of anti-social behaviour issues such as swimming in a local quarry, unlicensed fishing; addressing domestic abuse and building awareness of cultural differences amongst staff and councillors.

Community wardens were concerned that the deaf community were unable to access services provided by the Environmental Protection Team. Two wardens completed Level One and Level Two of British Sign Language Skills and attended weekly meetings of the Rugby Deaf Club. The outcome has been that the wardens are more confident in communicating with deaf residents and Deaf Club members feel comfortable raising issues with the wardens.

Appendix 1

Services are being designed and tailored to ensure access for vulnerable groups, e.g. design of the new Leisure Centre; play and open spaces. WCAVA provided evidence of greater satisfaction amongst service users through its 2000 groups.

Development of relationships between the Council and the Gypsy and Traveller community has led to mutual trust resulting in more gypsies and travellers accessing services such as health and education. The community now involve the police themselves if there are family disputes and welcome the police and family officers onto the site. Children are attending schools up to age 11.

Areas for consideration:  Consider how knowledge and good practice is shared across the authority to improve services which have not yet been under systems review  Whilst the authority can demonstrate positive outcomes at service level it is not clear if this applies to all protected groups  Equality monitoring of complaints

There have been some really positive outcomes from the end to end service reviews and the Systems Thinking and Customer centric approaches. RBC should consider how the learning from these reviews can be better shared across the authority to improve the services which have not yet been under review. Quarterly lessons learned meetings do take place in Housing with regard to complaints and they do help to develop service improvements. This good practice could be shared more across the organisation.

Although RBC presented some good positive equality outcomes at service level, there appeared to be no corporate approach to equality monitoring, e.g. to determine service user satisfaction by equality group. In terms of customer satisfaction it was difficult to determine if this has been informed by analysis of customer satisfaction data.

RBC should consider how it can equality monitor the complaints it receives about services. Once the new CRM system has captured the customer profile, it could develop reports to ensure that satisfaction rates and complaints can be analysed by equality profile to identify trends and improve service delivery. This will also help to identify those who do not access services.

3.5 A skilled and committed workforce

Strengths:  Commitment to addressing under representation of young people in the workforce  High levels of employee satisfaction  Staff recognise importance of E&D  Training well received and making a positive difference Appendix 1

 Good relationship with Unions

The Council is committed to addressing the under representation of younger people in its workforce and has prioritised this as an equality outcome. It is having some success through its apprenticeship scheme and working with managers to encourage them to consider younger applicants. There was clear pride amongst managers towards the scheme and high levels of achievement amongst apprentices.

The council can demonstrate high levels of employee satisfaction with their working environment and staff say that the council is a good place to work, they feel listened to and that it is friendly and ambitious despite the financial climate. This can be evidenced through low levels of stress related absence and dignity at work cases. Significantly, staff reported that they would challenge inappropriate behaviour themselves. Member commitment around the wellbeing of staff was demonstrated through their involvement in the Employee Wellbeing study.

Peers saw evidence that staff recognise the importance of equality and diversity in the way services are designed and delivered and their customer care role as part of RBC customer focused approach.

Meetings with staff suggest that equality and diversity training is well received and perceived to be making a positive impact in terms of service delivery e.g. safeguarding training for housing staff leading to action being taken in a case of concern.

There is a good relationship between senior management and unions with regular communication between them, e.g. the Joint Union Consultative Forum. The Executive Directors have an open door policy and any reports containing a staff issue are automatically shared with the trade unions.

Areas for consideration:  Tailored training for Members  Consider in-house staff network/forum  Consider how to better match BME profile within the workforce  Better communication and celebration of successes  Ensure all staff are genuinely practising E&D to the benefit of customers, not just following guidelines.

Ensure Member training is tailored to illustrate how equality and diversity is relevant for them in carrying out their duties. Consider focussing training on real life case studies and not just on legal requirements.

Disability disclosure amongst employees is high, yet there are no council employees on the Warwickshire County Council disability employment network. Appendix 1

The staff survey showed that disabled employees’ have concerns about how people are valued/and how well the council manages stress. RBC should consider establishing its own generic staff network and ensure that disability issues and other equality issues are considered and that the forum is representative.

Figures showed that the Council’s workforce is not representative of the Rugby demographic profile. 15.9% of the Borough are from a BME background but only 8.93% of the workforce. No evidence was presented on how these statistics were disaggregated by grade or section. RBC should start to explore its data in more depth and consider how it can start to address the under representativeness of the workforce.

The Council communicates well with its employees but more could be done to communicate successes and maintain the profile of equality and diversity in underpinning all the service achievements and good community relations.

Staff in some areas still need training in understanding the whole nature of equality and diversity (for example inappropriate use of language). Some staff are still ‘going by the book’ rather than being flexible and imaginative in their interpretation of guidelines, in order to give genuine help to customers.

4. Examples of notable initiatives

 The Compact events and Community Forums are good examples of community consultation.

 Refurbishing the Woodside Gypsy and Traveller site demonstrated good practice in developing links with the wider community.

5. Signposting to areas of good practice

 Bristol City Council has had some excellent recruitment and selections practices to address the representativeness of its workforce.

 Review of Hate Crime in Central Bedfordshire.

Contact: Gill Elliott Peer Support Adviser Local Government Association

Appendix 1

Tel No – 07747 753263 E-mail [email protected]

Local Government Group Local Government House Smith Square London SW1P 3HZ Telephone 020 7664 3000 Facsimile 020 764 3030 E-mail [email protected] www.local.gov.uk