Agenda and draft minutes

To approve and sign the minutes of the Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee held on 3 October 2024.

Councillor Read raised the following points with regard to Minute No. 28 (Questions from Members of the Council under Standing Order No. 20):-

·         she disputed the claim made by Councillor Vizard that her question had been submitted late, remarking that there was no deadline for Standing Order No. 20 questions; and

·         she felt that her expression of horror that Exeter City Council had investments in Barclays had not been properly recorded.

The Monitoring Officer clarified that:-

·         on the first point, while it was noted that Councillor Read disagreed with its substance, the comment in question had indeed been made by Councillor Vizard;

·         on the second point, committee minutes were not a verbatim transcript of every comment made; instead, they were meant to capture the sense of the meeting.

The Democratic Officer reminded Members that standard Local Government procedure dictated that the only discussion allowed on the approval of minutes was about their accuracy. However, he confirmed to Councillor Read that her comments would be recorded in the minutes of the present meeting and would therefore constitute a public record.

Subsequently, the minutes of the meeting held on 3 October 2024 were taken as read, approved and signed by the Chair as correct.

Councillors are reminded of the need to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests that relate to business on the agenda and which have not already been included in the register of interests, before any discussion takes place on the item. Unless the interest is sensitive, you must also disclose the nature of the interest. In accordance with the Council's Code of Conduct, you must then leave the room and must not participate in any further discussion of the item. Councillors requiring clarification should seek the advice of the Monitoring Officer prior to the day of the meeting.

No declarations of interest were made by Members.

Details of questions should be notified to the Democratic Services Manager via the committee.services@exeter.gov.uk email by 10.00am at least three working days prior to the meeting. For this meeting any questions must be submitted by 10.00am on Monday 25 November 2024.

For details about how to speak at Committee, please click the following link - https://exeter.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/councillors-and-meetings/public-speaking-at-meetings/overview/

The Chair reported no questions had been received from members of the public under Standing Order No. 19.

The two Citizens Advice Exeter items on the agenda were presented jointly. After the representatives from Citizens Advice Exeter had introduced themselves, the Chair:-

•               encouraged all participants to avoid the divisive language of “sides”;

•               reminded all attendees that this is not a Scrutiny of Council Officers, as the decision to halt the funding of Citizens Advice Exeter was a political one;

•               explained that the Strategic Director – People and Communities was present to provide points of clarity if required; and

•               requested that any Motions that Members wish to propose be formulated after the end of the debate.

She then invited Councillor Vizard, as Portfolio Holder for Communities, and Councillor M Mitchell, as originator of the Scrutiny proposal, to the table.

The Chair announced that the reports and appendices would be taken as read. She asked the originator of the Scrutiny proposal to open the debate. Councillor M Mitchell made the following comments:-

·         it was important to move forward;

·         the easy action for Members would be to take no action;

·         Citizens Advice essentially wanted Exeter City Council to look at the matter again;

·         the remit of this Scrutiny committee was to make a recommendation to the Executive;

·         this issue would be revisited for the 2025-26 Budget;

·         the present meeting did not mark the end of the conversation; and

·         every District Council in Devon contributed financially to Citizens Advice except Exeter City Council.

During debate, Members expressed the following views:-

Councillor Fullam:-

·         reminded Members of his current role working in social housing;

·         noted media reports of rising demand for legal advice;

·         wondered what capacity there was to fulfil such a role in the city; and

·         wondered who people needing immigration advice and/or with a language barrier could turn to.

Councillor Harding:-

·         raised the issue of the knock-on effect on ECC staff if people could no longer turn to Citizens Advice Exeter.

Councillor Moore:-

·         raised the issue of data recording, remarking that Citizens Advice Exeter had sent regular updates to ECC;

·         asked how the referrals had been monitored during the contract period;

·         asked what contract management was in place; and

·         asked if staff had been advised to stop issuing referrals.

Councillor Darling:-

·         sought clarity regarding discrepancies around rent and service charges in the tables submitted by Citizens Advice Exeter; and

·         asked why Citizens Advice Exeter had spent £75,000 on premises when premises had been offered to them by ECC.

Councillor Read:-

·         felt that no overall monetary impact assessment on Council finances had been made; and

·         wondered if it was likely to be plausible that there would be no impact.

Councillor Pole:-

·         sought clarity and detail on the income and expenditure summary table submitted by Citizens Advice Exeter and queried why the figures Devon County Council, Exeter City Council and ‘other’ were presented jointly in a single column;

·         raised the issue of performance indicators linked to the contract between ECC and Citizens Advice Exeter; and

·         made reference to the work of the Churches Housing Action Team (CHAT) in Mid-Devon, whose  ...  view the full minutes text for item 38.

The Chair took the report as read and opened the floor to questions.

The Strategic Director – People and Communities responded to questions from Members as follows:-

·         there would be opportunities for Councillors to input into the consultation and engagement strategy to be produced in 2025;

·         results of all consultations are published on the Exeter City Council website;

·         with the recruitment of a Consultation and Engagement Manager there will be staff resources to better analyse consultation feedback and report on the impacts on council decision making and service improvements;

·         it was possible to report on the costs of consultation; as an annual consultation plan was developed, ECC would be able to consolidate some consultation exercises into single processes such as an Annual Residents Survey;

·         if relevant, environmental impact assessments of undertaking consultation exercises could be conducted in a similar way to Equality Impact Assessments; and

·         it was not appropriate for the Council to provide guidance to other organisations on their consultation activity.

Councillor Read wished to formulate a recommendation about ensuring that outcomes and complaints would be published; however, the Monitoring Officer felt that this would not be relevant as it had already been established that publication would take place.

Councillor Moore stressed the importance of the output of any consultation and remarked on a line in the report about the publication of complaints about consultations. The Chief Executive advised that Exeter City Council accepted that it had not been compliant with regard to the publication of complaints about consultations, adding that these would be published.

Members were unanimously satisfied with the report and answers provided by the Strategic Director – People and Communities and the Chief Executive.

The Chair took the report as read and opened the floor to questions.

The Strategic Director – Corporate Resources replied to Members’ questions as follows:-

·       temporary accommodation was an area of significant budgetary pressure;

·       homelessness impacted on several budgets;

·       in terms of income, Q2 was similar to Q1;

·       property income was down, but the new Interim Head of Service would be addressing outstanding debts;

·       funding was now available for debt recovery with the Legal department;

·       a standardised approach was required for debt recovery as there were too many types of property debt;

·       commercial property debt was only a debt once the tenant had moved;

·       the Government had introduced a significant uplift in planning fees in the past year. Consequently the number of planning applications had dropped, although it was important to note that one or two major applications would make a noticeable financial difference;

·       a new interim Head of Culture had been appointed and would be addressing the RAMM underspend and look at a number of ideas;

·       ‘unapportionable overheads’ were pension strain payments and were not budgeted at the start of the year; and

·       setting the budget and reporting on it no carbon impact in itself, it was what was done with the budget that had an impact.

On the subject of General Fund Capital, Councillor Moore called for a more strategic approach to investment. She asked if it was possible to change the reporting format to see what was active and what was possible. The Strategic Director – Corporate Resources explained that all the reports being presented were produced for Members, adding that he was always available to provide clarity if needed and would welcome views on how to make the reports more usable.

On the subject of the Housing Revenue Account, Councillor Moore remarked that she had no seen anything from the Council Housing and Development Advisory Board (CHaDAB) being fed back to the Executive. The Strategic Director – Corporate Resources informed that he would speak to the Monitoring Officer about CHaDAB reporting back.

Responding to final question from Councillor Moore about how Scrutiny could be the most impactful about the Budget, the Strategic Director – Corporate Resources noted that:-

·       this was the first instalment of the budget monitoring exercise; and

·       Democratic Services were working on a new table of meetings and Scrutiny as a whole was being recalibrated.

Members noted the reports from the Strategic Director – Corporate Resources.

The Strategic Director – Corporate Resources gave the following update to Members:-

·       Exeter City Council was currently out to consultation ;

·       officers had identified a range of options totalling £6m for Members to consider;

·       no final decision would be taken until February 2025;

·       no initial decision would be taken until the end of the consultation;

·       the local authority funding settlement was expected the week before Christmas; and

·       a Members Briefing on the Budget would take place in January or February.

He also provided the following points of clarity:-

·       when the Capital Programme came back next year, he would not expect significant changes, but the biggest change would be over the purchase of IT equipment and possibly vehicles;

·       statutory repayment of debt happened the year after and would impact on future years but was factored in nonetheless.

Councillor Moore remarked that the Capital Programme hadn’t been delivered because of lack of capacity and asked for Members to be kept updated on this. She also enquired which Councillors would be considering the range of options for the Budget. The Strategic Director – Corporate Resources replied that the tradition was that the ruling party or group had priority.

To receive questions from Members of the Council to the relevant Portfolio Holders for this Scrutiny Committee. The Portfolio Holders are:-

Councillor Bialyk – Leader of the Council

Councillor Asvachin – Housing, Homelessness Prevention and Customer Services

Councillor Vizard – Climate, Ecological Change and Communities

Councillor Williams – Place and City Management

Councillor Wright – Corporate Services and City Centre

Advance questions from Members relating to the Portfolio Holders should be submitted to Democratic Services at committee.services@exeter.gov.uk.

In accordance with Standing Order No. 20, the following questions were submitted by Members:-

Question from Councillor Read to Councillor Bialyk, Leader of the Council:-

“At the last meeting of this committee the Leader said that in conjunction with the Director of Finance he would “review options for Council investments to identify what alternative products are available in the market” and would consider “non fossil fuel investing alternative providers”. What has been the extent of this review, and what suitable alternatives have been identified and what progress has been made regarding ensuring all Council investments are assigned to such suitable investment vehicles? Which committee will this information be brought to and when?”

Councillor Bialyk responded as follows:-

“The update for Councillors is contained in the Treasury Management Half Year update, which is on next week’s Executive agenda.  We were able to identify 3 products, two of which had a higher minimum deposit than the maximum Council have set as a Counterparty limit, therefore we cannot use them.  We already place deposits in the third.”

Councillor Bialyk also assured Councillor Read that this was a matter of importance for the Executive, adding that the Council did have a duty to the taxpayers.

Question from Councillor Read to Councillor Bialyk, Leader of the Council:-

“Also at the last meeting of this committee we were advised that the Council had sent a notice to Barclays advising them of complete disinvestment from Barclays and requiring the full return of funds from Barclays. This was particularly welcome news as Barclays are notorious for their investments in fossil fuels, which is contrary to the Council’s sustainability agenda. So my question is can we have confirmation that the Council is entirely disinvested from Barclays and that there are no plans for the Council to reinvest in Barclays? Additionally, what progress has the Council made in formulating an ESG policy, when can we expect this to come to Committee?”

Councillor Bialyk responded as follows:-

“The Council no longer has funds placed with Barclays and there is a draft ESG policy appended to the Treasury Management Half Year update, which is on next week’s Executive agenda.  It is recommended to Council for approval and adoption.  If this is adopted by Council then this will drive future strategy, although in extreme circumstances, there may be a need to place funds in institutions that would not meet the criteria set in order to minimise risk to the taxpayer and comply with your legal obligations.  This would be a last resort and only instigated in circumstances where the Council had surplus funds and all eligible products were at the maximum level allowed by the Strategy.”

Councillor Bialyk commented that this was not an issue of importance just for the Green Party but that several Labour Councillors felt strongly about this issue, too. He also reminded Councillor Read of the Council’s fiduciary duty to the taxpayers.

In a supplementary question, Councillor brought up the issue of bundling and asked what the timeframe was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

The Chair proposed, to the approval of the Committee, that:-

·         the item “The Budget Public Consultation Process and Results for 2025/26 Budget Consultation” be put on the January 2025 agenda;

·         the item “Tenants Energy Review of our Passivhaus Council Homes” also be put on the January 2025 agenda; and

·         the item “Performance and Service Provided to Customers and Stakeholders of Stagecoach South West in Exeter” be put on the March 2025 agenda.

It was consequently moved by Councillor Parkhouse and seconded by Councillor Moore that the Customer Focus Scrutiny Committee approve the Work Plan as amended during the meeting. Following a vote, the recommendation was CARRIED unanimously.