Agenda and minutes

To approve and sign the minutes of the Strategic Scrutiny Committee held on 23 January 2025.

The minutes of the meeting held on 23 January 2025 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 democratic.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 31 March 2025.

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/

There were no questions submitted by the public.

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

Councillor Bialyk -       Leader

Councillor Vizard -      Portfolio Holder Climate and Ecological Change and Communities

Councillor Wood -       Portfolio Holder Leisure Services and Physical Activity

Councillor Wright -      Portfolio Holder Culture and City Centre Strategy

Councillor Foale -       Portfolio Holder Arts, Culture and Tourism

Advance questions from Members relating to the Portfolio Holders above should be notified to Democratic Services.

In accordance with Standing Order No. 20, the following question was submitted by Councillor Wetenhall in relation to the Portfolio of Councillor Wood who attended the meeting. The question was circulated at the meeting to Members of the Committee. The response of the Portfolio Holder for Leisure Service and Healthy Living is set out below:

Question

“Agreeing final measures for Newtown Live and Move project

The report to this committee on the above project states that " The results [of the public consultation] are currently being analysed with a view to sharing with SMB and members before a proposal going to DCC HATOC in July 2025. The scheme is on track for delivery in September. "

But Devon County Council are advertising the draft orders on April 3rd, with public consultation on them running to April 28th. In other words, it appears that decisions have already been taken about the measures ahead of any consideration of the public consultation results or input from SMB or ward Councillors.

Can the Portfolio Holder confirm explain how this has happened and what he suggests happens to reconcile what DCC and ECC are doing?”

Response

Councillor Wood stated that at the joint Devon County Council and Exeter City Council Members Briefing on 15 October it was proposed and agreed that the scheme would progress to consultation and there would be two elements to this, the survey and public engagement events and the formal Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) consultation. It was the understanding at that time that both elements would take place concurrently to form the complete consultation for onward analysis, proposals and decision making.  Operationally, the two elements had to run back-to-back. 

The advertising of the formal TRO consultation did not preclude further advertisements or adjustments but without taking this forward, it would have required a further decision gateway. The TRO consultation was part of the proposal and decision making which was required to be considered for this scheme to be delivered. 

The work was underway to present findings of the public engagement and would also summarise the TRO consultation during May. This would enable decisions to be proposed and made through the ECC SMB and DCC HATOC decision-making processes to enable the scheme to progress to construction in the autumn.

In a supplementary question Councillor Wetenhall asked if the Portfolio Holder could confirm detail of when SMB, ward Members and the Portfolio Holder would see, discuss and approve this.  Councillor Wood responded stating that it would be good to deliver this as there had been previous consultations and that the officer would present to scrutiny today and would likely include an answer.

In accordance with Standing Order No. 20, the following question was submitted by Councillor Moore in relation to the Portfolio of Councillor Wood who attended the meeting. The question was circulated at the meeting to Members of the Committee. The response of the Portfolio Holder for Leisure Services and Healthy Living is set out below:

Question

“Please can the following figures be  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To receive a report from Councillor Wood, Portfolio Holder for Leisure Services and Healthy Living.

Councillor Wood presented his report which was taken as read and highlighted that the dashboard showed key indicators of how the service was performing. 

The Portfolio Holder responded to questions from Members in the following terms:

• the intention was to approach leisure being cost-neutral as it was a discretionary service;
• the enhanced model for Wellbeing Exeter did not necessarily mean additional wards, it could include communities of interest which may not be geographical as was the case with the current enhanced provision;
• the work of the Wellbeing Exeter project was effective with the core model focussed on communities in the greatest need and some not traditionally viewed as in need but disrupted by development. The biggest impact was new communities and those who struggle to engage in a new area. Inclusive Exeter had already carried out some work including with a BAME community in Pinhoe and it may be possible to negotiate with some developers to contribute to Wellbeing Exeter;
• officers were working closely with Sport England with regard to the package of funding required as Sport England were not able to fully fund projects. The process was not one of application and decision-making but rather a negotiated process;
• NHS staff were present during referral sessions and most were paid for by the NHS and evaluation was carried out across the country with the local service almost breaking even.  Anectodal feedback was positive with one volunteer having been through the sessions and reporting that this had helped their recovery, gave them confidence in their body again and so they became a leisure member and volunteer.  Formal evaluation would be undertaken by the NHS;
• governance models for the Wonford centre were being considered and a written answer would be provided outside the committee with regard to how a decision would be made about governance; and
• work was being undertaken with a partner regarding Exeter Arena and this was different to Northbrook pool as the Arena was a Grade B facility of national standard.  How to run the Arena in a more cost-effective way was being investigated with the support of a partner and there was no indication of closure.

Councillor Hughes withdrew their question following comment by the Chair.

To receive the report of Councillor Foale, Portfolio Holder for Arts, Culture and Tourism.

Councillor Foale presented the report on his Portfolio for Arts, Culture and Tourism highlighting the following:

·         it had been a pleasure to have the chance to work with the creative and dynamic people of Exeter and to build positive relationships with over five National Portfolio Organisations (NPO);

·         a celebration had been held at the Barnfield Theatre;

·         there was a plan in conjunction with Exeter Partnership; and

·         there had been a dig event in Princesshay with the RAMM.

The Portfolio Holder and Strategic Director for Place responded to questions from Members in the following terms:

·         different models of governance would be investigated by the consultant;

·         it would be an excellent idea for other service areas to replicate the supported placements scheme which the RAMM had successfully implemented;

·         it was of note that the RAMM reached out to special schools and other vulnerable young people;

·         there was a plan for a review of cultural services and subsequent restructure within which learning would be shared from the leisure review. An example was given of the café from St Sidwell’s Point now being open in the RAMM;

·         the draft cultural strategy had been updated;

·         all five NPO were keen to repeat the celebration evening annually; and

·         ensuring that transport options were clear on the Visit Exeter site could be looked in to.

To receive the report of the Place Partnership (Sport England) Manager.

The Place Partnership Manager presented the report of the Live and Move Programme Update and gave a presentation making the following points:

·         that there was a new element in tracking what facilities were used;

·         residents said that Valley Parks and playing fields were most popular as opposed to indoor activities;

·         it was easier to obtain information from those using indoor facilities; and

·         Newtown update had been added to support.

The Place Partnership Manager and the Strategic Director for Place responded to Members questions in the following terms:

·         he was unsure of the exact questions asked about gender but would investigate and provide details outside the meeting;

·         gender inequality hadn’t been a focus in the past but rather ethnic diversity. He was willing to work with Members and colleagues to gain insight into what could be done in future;

·         Ebrington Road remained a focus along with Merrivale, Redhills and Exwick;

·         It was exciting that This Girl Can campaign had been brought to the city as well as the Women’s Rugby World Cup and the programme would celebrate all that was available in the area;

·         access to Valley Parks was constantly being looked at and there may be opportunities with the Water Lane development.  There was a desire to improve routes and access to get people safely and sustainably into the Valley Park;

·         the dashboard was available publicly and there was a local community of practice held quarterly and shared through Exeter Partnership. The information gathered would be used in future funding bids;

·         Exeter was known nationally for best practice in utilising this data which was also given to Sport England to share and had been featured a number of times in place-based newsletters with case studies and learning also on the website;

·         the language was complicated regarding reduction in inactivity but this was part of a national survey used for benchmarking;

·         there were qualitative reports which could be shared;

·         there was data regarding the barriers to walking and cycling which could be shared;

·         much of the programme’s work with those with disabilities was one-to-one rather than groups. Recommendations from Members of groups to speak to, such as the suggested Pelican Project, would be welcome and it would be possible to investigate what else could be done;

·         individuals could be referred to Wellbeing Exeter; and

·         Sport England did not include heavy housework as activity but people were asked about things which raised their heartrate, so residents may have included this; and

·         the Chief Medical Officer had a view on what was and was not included in the activity list.

Following a vote the report on the Live and Move Programme Update was noted.

Please see for noting a link to the schedule of future business proposed for the Council which can be viewed on the Council's web site. This on-line document is a source for Members to raise issues at Scrutiny on forthcoming Executive agenda items:-

https://exeter.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/councillors-and-meetings/forward-plan-of-executive-decisions/

Also attached is a draft work plan of future scrutiny items.

Should Members wish to raise issues in respect of future business please notify Liz Smith in advance of the meeting.

The Chair stated that there had been one request for scrutiny under Standing Order No. 18 from Councillors Mitchell, Jobson and Moore which had followed a discussion at Chair’s Briefing and the Chair having made contact with the Chief Executive and Leader. There was also one item allocated to the committee via the Scrutiny Programme Board.

Councillor Mitchell presented the request that the Strategic Scrutiny Committee consider in conjunction with the Council Leader and the Chief Executive, an appropriate date for the committee to consider the Final Business Case regarding Exeter City Councils submission to government in respect of Local Government Reorganisation.

Councillor Mitchell explained that they understood that there was a lot of work to be done and they did not wish to hinder that but wanted to ensure that all parties remained involved and supported the case when it came to Executive and Council in a united fashion.

Councillor Moore seconded the proposal.

Members spoke in favour making the following points:

·         that the Leader and Chief Executive could expand on their work and seek the support of the committee;

·         Devon County Council and other leaders could be invited to hear the Council’s thinking;

·         this would be a formal process to reassure residents;

·         scrutiny was an important element;

·         it was unknown how many other submissions would include Exeter and whether they would have been scrutinised therefore scrutiny could strengthen the Council’s case;

·         it was important to note that scrutiny in public would show accountability and residents would be pleased that Members were talking to one another and in agreement; and

·         there was concern that the county council proposal may be successful.

Members spoke against the proposal making the following points:

·         they were not sure that value could be added or what could be achieved as they would work with their group leader; and

·         report deadlines for scrutiny could potentially hinder progress.

The Strategic Director for Place made the following points:

·         the Strategic Management Board(SMB) were committed to cross-party engagement as the full business case was developed;

·         there would be detailed discussions between SMB and each group leader forming active work to develop the final case;

·         there would be consultation and engagement with a wide range of stakeholders;

·         there would be a public consultation and engagement process;

·         there were six aspects, to which the Leader had alluded, and a number were beyond the knowledge of the Council therefore specialist consultants would be required to develop the case; and

·         that it could be helpful for scrutiny to look at the proposals of other Councils, especially those which included the city council boundaries.

The Chair invited Councillor Bialyk, the Leader, who was present, to speak on the matter. The Leader made the following points:

·         he understood that this was a major issue and he wanted to get it right;

·         there was an aspiration to be unitary;

·         there was size and geography to work through;

·         there were six areas to be covered;

·         Members would have input into the submission;

·         that he wanted to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 68.