11

RBWM Councillors: Mrs Bateson (Chairman), Brimacombe, Coppinger, Mrs Jones and Kellaway.

RBWM Officers: Sandy Arpino, Sarah Ball, Nigel Davis, Chris Donnelly, Wendy Esling, Harjit Hunjan, Sarah Rayner, Ian Trenholm, and Karen Williams.

Parish and Town Councils:

Bisham: Councillors Cooper and Robson-Brown
Bray: Councillor Graham
Cookham: Councillor M-L Kellaway
Datchet: Councillor L O’Flynn
Horton: Councillor Davies
Hurley: Councillor Burfitt, Cherry Woodley (clerk)
Old Windsor: Councillor Dawson
Shottesbrooke: Councillor Warren
Sunningdale: Councillor Gadd
Sunninghill & Ascot: Councillor Story
Waltham St Lawrence: Councillor Birkett
White Waltham: Councillors Brett, McDonald, Mrs Scott and Doug Stuart (clerk)
Wraysbury: Councillor Hughes

Also present: Supt de Meyer, Thames Valley Police

WELCOME

The Chairman of the Conference, Councillor Mrs Bateson, welcomed everyone to the meeting.

APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

Apologies for absence were received from Sandra Baker (Hurley), Mandy Brar and Derek Fry (Cookham), and Anne Martin (Sunningdale).

MINUTES

The minutes of the last meeting held on 23 February 2010 were approved.

IMPACT OF BUDGET CUTS

The Royal Borough’s Chief Executive, Ian Trenholm, addressed the Conference in relation to the Council’s budget for 2011-12. He explained that the main challenge facing local authorities was to provide the services covered by the welfare state, as set up 50 years ago, in light of 21^st century demographics. When the welfare state was established, it was based on the principle that the tax paid during adult working life covered the services required, as the average life expectancy was approximately 67 years. In 2011, the life expectancy was much higher and the taxes paid did not cover all services. Councils were also faced with dealing with more complex issues such as crime and drug abuse. The pace of healthcare reform had also not kept up with longevity. An 80 year old today had a one in three chance of requiring social care. Therefore, the proportion of a council’s budget spent on adult social care had risen significantly.

The Chief Executive explained that the recent recession had enabled discussions to take place on issues such as pension reform and the affordability of long term social care. The Conference noted the approach the Royal Borough was taking to address these issues in terms of managing demand:

Ø Increasing self-service / online transactions
Ø Assessing eligibility criteria and introducing fairer charging polices
Ø Incentives such as Recyclebank
Ø Early intervention

The Conference also noted the proposals to reduce cost to service the remaining demand:

Ø Lean processes
Ø Restructuring, including a significant restructure to take place over the coming year
Ø Promotion of the Big Society and volunteering
Ø Shared services, for example a shared legal service with Wokingham
Ø Renegotiating contracts, including no inflationary rises
Ø Outsourcing, for example home care services

The Conference noted that residents in the Royal Borough in Band D properties paid £207 Council tax per year less than the average UK household. Operating revenue had been reduced from £91.2m to £88.1m this year, with savings of £8.3m identified.

The Chairman highlighted that the more appropriate word was ‘efficiencies’ rather than ‘cuts,’ as there had been no impact on front-line services.

The Chairman thanked the Chief Executive for his presentation.

IMPACT OF BUDGET CUTS ON LOCAL POLICING

Superintendent Tim De Meyer addressed the conference in relation to the impact of budget cuts on local policing. He explained that community concerns had aligned with police targets recently in relation to vehicle crime. This had resulted in a number of media enquiries. Supt de Meyer had been able to confirm that thefts from vehicles had reduced from 15 per day a year ago to 2-3 per day in the last few months. Street robbery and other crime had also reduced. This was a result of a return to high-visibility policing along with clinical targeting of known criminals in the area. Supt de Meyer highlighted the contribution of partners such as the Drug and Alcohol Action Team (DAAT) in achieving the reductions.

Supt de Meyer recognised that the Borough had a problem with violent crime, although this was far less than in London where he had worked previously. Measures such as taxi marshalling and road closures had helped to reduce the crime figures, along with evidence provided to the Council’s Licensing Panel Sub Committees in relation to public nuisance. Supt de Meyer highlighted the time taken to investigate domestic abuse cases, including victim support. Statistics showed that victims did not report domestic violence to the police until after the 36^th incident.

Supt de Meyer explained that huge strides had been made in terms of neighbourhood policing in recent years. Instead of set-pieces in village halls, a door to door approach was being adopted over the next few years. Locally elected police commissioners were proposed by the coalition government and would likely be in place during 2012.

The coalition government had agreed cuts of 20% to police budgets over the next five years. The force had been radically restructured in the last year, including the removal of the Berkshire Command Unit level of reporting, and the post of Chief Superintendent. HR and finance services had been centralised and performance management staffing had been halved. None of these changes had affected front-line services. Supt de Meyer now reported directly to Headquarters which he had found liberating. The Conference noted that the Chief Constable’s three year strategy focussed on visibility, rural crime and business crime. Her view was that whatever efficiency savings were made, these areas should not be affected. Following a review of demand, Supt de Meyer had been allowed a further 20 officers to distribute across his teams. He was now able to properly staff CID, patrol and neighbourhood teams.

Supt de Meyer commented that he had previously not fully appreciated the importance of police-community relations and neighbourhood policing. He now valued the importance of building trust and gaining information through co-operation. This has been a key factor in the arson and murder case in Moor Lane last year. The One Borough project had built up good relations with the Muslim community which meant individuals were more willing to come forward with information.

In conclusion, Supt de Meyer commented that car crime and burglary were on the way down, the police were getting a grip on violent crime and good links had been forged at the neighbourhood level. He was hopeful that savings could be achieved without drastic front line cuts.

In response to questions, Supt de Meyer explained that the police were aware of crimes such as burglary from public reporting. Issues such as anti-social behaviour and domestic violence often went unreported and it was this sort of issues that the police learnt about through set-piece consultations.

Councillor Coppinger commented that he had viewed the new forms for Bray and although the same issues were prevalent, they could now be sorted by postcode.

In relation to metal theft, Supt de Meyer explained that a team of detectives across neighbouring boroughs had been set up to focus on the issue.

In relation to door-to-door policing he commented that in a couple of hours an officer could see more people than usually turned up to a consultation event. He appreciated that if a police vehicle was seen it could raise concern in an area, however the majority of door-to-door visits were done on foot.

Supt de Meyer recognised that the police had not been good in the past at providing feedback, but they were trying to improve. In some circumstances information could not be provided because it remained sub judice. He confirmed that victim and witness care was now covered in his daily morning meetings.

Parish Councillor M-L Kellaway commented that NAGs were a good link. Posters had been provided in relation to metal theft. She raised a concern that Maidenhead police station was seen as inaccessible by members of the public not involved in a NAG. Supt de Meyer confirmed that visitor and disabled parking had been improved at the station, and highlighted that the majority of people contacted the police via telephone rather than in person.

Supt de Meyer explained he had been sceptical of the value of PCSOs when they had been first introduced as they lacked powers. However, they had proved invaluable in areas such as working with and getting information from the community, victim care and the Safer Houses project.

The Chairman thanked Supt de Meyer for his presentation.

BIG SOCIETY

Harjit Hunjan, the Borough’s Community and Business Partnerships Manager, provided an update on the Borough’s Big Society projects. He explained that a second open space event had been held in March 2011 at the Windsor Girl’s School. The event had followed a similar theme to the one held in December 2010 but had progressed to the next level by focussing on getting more people involved.

Feedback on the devolution to parishes project had been generally positive. Some concerns had been raised in terms of economies of scale and parish capacity to deal with some services. He assured the Conference that the Borough would provide support. A member of his team had contacted all parishes by email or telephone the previous week to highlight the publication of the offer menu for devolution. He highlighted that this was not a definitive list and would evolve following discussions. All lead officers named on the menu were willing to discuss how proposals could be taken forward.

The Conference noted the 11 offers contained within the menu. In response to questions, it was confirmed that the figures included in the menu were an estimate of the current cost of a service to the Borough, and all figures were up for discussion. All Council spending above £100 was detailed on the Borough website. The funding devolved from the Borough to the parish would not form part of the precept. There was no specific timeframe for take up of offers and services could be taken back by the Borough if requested by the parishes. Parishes would need to ensure they had insurance cover for all services taken on but it was expected that their current liability insurance would be of a sufficient level.

The Chief Executive re-affirmed that there was no requirement on any parish to take over any of the services. The menu was simply a list of offers for discussion. If a parish felt they could add value or do something more efficiently, the Borough would work with the parish to ensure it happened.

Parish Councillor Davies explained that Wraysbury Parish already managed grass-cutting services in the parish, which they had found to be of great benefit. The arrangement allowed flexibility in cutting schedules and also benefitted the local economy as a local contractor was used.

A concern was raised that farmers were being prosecuted by Customs and Exercise for using red diesel for anything other than farm work and would therefore not be able to help with tasks such as snow clearing. The Chief Executive explained the Borough had been asked to provide ministers with examples of such barriers; he would ensure this was added to the list. Parishes were encouraged to highlight similar legal or process barriers to the Council.

The Conference was then addressed by Sandy Arpino, who provided details of the consultation regarding the re-contracting of the Street Cleansing Contract. The Conference noted the wide range of services currently covered by the Council’s contract. It was noted that the current contract with Veolia ended in March 2012 and it would be essential to have new arrangements in place by the end of the year to allow for a transition period. The key drivers were to:

Ø Maintain the current high standards of cleanliness
Ø Make cost savings
Ø Devolve an appropriate level of responsibility and flexibility to parishes, in line with the principles of the Big Society.

Options under consideration were noted as:

Ø Contracting cleaning of Public Conveniences and/or multi-storey car-parks separately, to create a ‘level playing field’ for smaller operators where feasible
Ø Devolving power to Parishes through:
– Letting separate contracts for each Parish or
– Letting a core service contract, with each Parish letting its own supplementary contract or
– Letting a single contract with the Parishes involved in contract management
Ø Contracting suitable elements of the services on a less prescriptive, more ‘performance outcome’ basis

Feedback from a number of parishes so far was that they felt unable to let their own contract because of capacity issues. Therefore an option to provide parishes with flexibility was proposed. The new contract could contain a per metre charge for each EPA cleanliness standard (or RBWM category). Parish streets could be mapped to standards in the new contract (EPA or RBWM) to produce a proposed profile, which would also set a baseline level of expenditure for each Parish. Parishes could then vary the standard of cleansing for each street (or group of streets) within set parameters; this would effectively move streets between cleanliness standards (or categories). Parishes could ‘trade’ within set tolerances without exceeding their capped level of costs (or possibly raise their capping through additional local funding) or generate cost savings

In response to questions, it was confirmed that the current contract was for 7 years, the next one would be for 5 years with the option of a further 2 years. The contract had migrated over time through variations and performance reviews. The Senior Streetcare Officer explained that street cleansing was an all-year round activity with extra cleaning in the autumn to deal with leaf fall. The team considered requested for extra litter bins on a regular basis. The rapid response team dealt with emergency situations such as fly-tipping. If notified of special events where there was likely to be more litter, this could also be taken into account. The team included 2 inspectors to ensure scrutiny of the contractor. Monthly meetings were held between the council and the contractor to iron out any issues.

A cost breakdown of the services by parish was requested. It was agreed that this would be provided, but would take some time to calculate.

The Chairman thanked all involved for their presentations.

LOCALISM – WHAT NEXT?


The Forum welcomed Wendy Esling, Corporate Policy Officer, to present on the implications of the Localism Bill.

The Conference heard that a general power of competence would allow councils to do anything that was not specifically forbidden by law (as opposed to the current system that only allowed councillors to do things specifically allowed by law). It was noted that this could also potentially allow councils to engage in a range of activities that provided a new series of offers to their residents and enable them to charge for a new range of services, for example insurance or banking services, estate agency, or investing in 21^st century infrastructure such as Wifi technology or green technologies. In addition this part of the Bill could act as an incentive for other parts of the public sector to pool budgets. The Act also the proposed abolition of the Standards Board regime and model code of conduct, however it would become a criminal offence for councillors to deliberately withhold or misrepresent a personal interest.

It was noted that the Bill included a provision to give residents the power to instigate local referendums on any particular issue and the power to veto excessive council tax increases. A referendum would be required in a local authority area if 5% of the local citizens signed a petition in favour of a particular referendum within a six month period. The referendum would not be legally binding but the local authority would be required to take the results into account. The centrally imposed cap on Council Tax rises would be abolished.

In relation to planning reform, the Bill would abolish Regional Spatial Strategies and return decision making powers on housing and planning to local councils. A ‘duty to co-operate’ would also be introduced to ensure local authorities planned strategically. Local forums and parish councils would be able to develop neighbourhood plans to shape planning decisions in their localities. The Bill would also create the ability of local housing trusts to plan housing developments if they could show they had the support of their local communities and certain basic planning criteria are met. Any profits generated by these developments would have to be re-invested in the local community.

New powers would be introduced to help save local facilities and services threatened with closure, predominately by giving communities the right to bid to take over these services. At present it was unclear how this right to bid would manifest itself and the legislation would need to be sufficiently flexible to allow a dialogue at local level to take place, should communities exercise this right.

The Conference noted that regional development agencies were being abolished and Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) were expected to take their place in stimulating private sector growth and re-balancing local economies. There was already a Berkshire LEP in place. Tax Increment Financing (TIFs) would allow local authorities to capture the increase in income from business rates that would flow from infrastructure investment, and borrow against this future income. The additional revenue generated would then be used to pay back the loan. Potentially this could provide much needed investment to local infrastructure and therefore corresponding improvements to local areas.

In relation to local financial autonomy, the Bill centred on proposals for business rates. Councils would be given the power to set local discounts on business rates, provided they were funded locally. Supplementary business rates could be introduced, but only when agreed on by the business community. Business rate discounts would be a helpful tool for local authorities as they sought to encourage new business enterprise in their communities.

The Conference noted that the details of the Bill could change as it moved through the parliamentary system. However, it represented a significant opportunity and challenge for local authorities in terms of delivering services to residents and an opportunity for local residents and communities to shape their local areas.

Sarah Ball, Team Manager – Strategy and Plans, then provided the Conference with an update on Neighbourhood Plans. The conference was provided with examples of parishes in the Royal Borough that had already made progress on their Plan. Bray was a front-runner in that it had held a workshop, set up a steering group and obtained grant funding of £20,000. The steering group had already held two meetings to discuss issues such as group structure, branding, communications and an initial consultation.

Ascot and Sunninghill had also held a workshop and held a number of steering group meetings. A consultation was planned for the end of the summer. Cookham and Bisham had agreed in principle to undertake neighbourhood planning. The preparation of a Village Design Statement was being sponsored by Cookham Parish Council and the Cookham Society. Datchet, Horton, Old Windsor and Wraysbury had planned an opening workshop for Monday 27 June. Hurley and the Walthams had held a workshop and the first steering group meeting had been held on 16 June 2011.

The Conference noted a number of recent announcements from the coalition government:

Ø Free advice for communities to support neighbourhood planning. Four organisations with renowned expertise in planning who would share a £3.2m fund to provide assistance to local groups developing neighbourhood plans. (The Prince's Foundation, Locality, The Royal Town Planning Institute, and the National Association of Local Councils in partnership with the Campaign to Protect Rural England.)
Ø Additional ‘Front Runners’ grant funding had made available; applications should be submitted by 8 July 2011.
Ø Local communities would be able to earmark for special consideration local 'green space' land, whether its value was in its natural beauty, its historic resonances, its recreational value, its tranquillity or its importance as wildlife habitat. Little detail had been given so far.
Ø Positive planning: a new focus on driving sustainable development
Ø The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was due to be published shortly, which would identify policy streams and look at replacing Planning Policy Statements.

In response to questions it was confirmed that joint bids for funding had been submitted in February 2011 for Bray and Ascot, Sunninghill and Sunningdale. Although the Borough had already received funding for two areas, others were encouraged to put in a bid. It was confirmed that plans covering a number of parishes (for example Datchet, Horton, Old Windsor and Wraysbury) would recognise the different concerns of individual areas.

The Chairman thanked Ms Esling and Ms Ball for their presentations and requested that the web links detailing the recent announcements be circulated to parish clerks.

CHANGES FOLLOWING LOCAL ELECTIONS MAY 2011

The Conference received the details of the Cabinet portfolios following the recent local elections. It was noted that Councillor Mrs Bateson was now Lead Member for Planning and Partnerships and would hence continue to Chair the Parish Conference.

PRESENTATION AT THE NEXT CONFERENCE

The Conference recalled that, at the Conference meeting in June 2007, it was agreed that there should be an opportunity for Parish and Town Councils to share their experiences and successes in relation to projects and schemes that they may be involved with.

It was agreed that Wraysbury would be asked to present on their grass cutting contract at the next conference scheduled for October 2011.

All Parish Councils were encouraged to submit suggestions to the clerk for future presentations to the Conference.

DATE OF NEXT CONFERENCE

It was noted that the next Parish Conference would take place on 18 October 2011 in Maidenhead.

The Chairman requested that copies of all presentations from the meeting be circulated to parish clerks.

MEETING

The meeting, which began at 7.00pm, ended at 9.15pm.