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 Allcock - Portfolio Holder City Development
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 the Democratic Services Manager.
Minutes:
In accordance with Standing Order No. 20, the following question was submitted by Councillor Banyard 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 is set out below:
Question: According to the Financial Conduct Authority, “Access to cash and banking services remain vital for many consumers and businesses” Not being able to pay for a swim or a gym session with cash at St Sidwell’s point, and other Exeter Leisure locations, is a barrier to access for at least the 10% of the population who use cash for most or all of their transactions, according to the FCA. https://www.fca.org.uk/publications/research/uks-cash-infrastructure-consumer-research
This barrier disproportionately affects elderly individuals, disabled people, refugees, undocumented migrants, and the homeless, many of whom may lack access to technology or the skills needed to navigate online systems. For these groups, the inability to engage with services that should be universally accessible exacerbates marginalisation and isolation.
The Council hasn’t completed an EQIA on the use of cashless payment systems since cash was removed as a payment option during Covid.
When will all customers be able to pay for Exeter Leisure facilities with cash?
Response:
The Leisure service went cashless in 2020 - at the time due to Covid restrictions. The concept proved popular with our customers. Following the pandemic we analysed our data and concluded that the benefits of a cashless service far outweighed our previous model. From a security point of view it is a safer environment for our staff as well as saving on staff costs due to the reduction in administration associated with cash transaction, including third party collection/deposit service.
We prioritise the data of all customers in our building as a H&S duty of care, taking their name and next of kin in case of emergency. This allows us to ensure we have data should an incident occur, which is industry best practice.
Since we introduced a cashless service, we have had a small handful of customer impacted, our team work with these customers and have managed to find solutions. A number of residents do use cash and we are looking at workable solutions and balancing the risk for staff.
Supplementary Question and Response
Councillor Banyard recognised that a small number of people would be affected but questioned why no formal EQIA had been carried out to assess impact of policies on all?
Councillor Wood responded stating that an EQIA relates to when a decision was made and that the leisure service was brought in-house during COVID when there was no choice but to be cashless and that there was no facility for cash at St Sidwell’s Point.
Councillor Knott stated that cashless is often preferred in his trade, hospitality as cash is twice as expensive to process. Was there a study of how much it would cost to introduce the facility to accept cash in leisure facilities? Councillor Wood responded that the cost would be greater than to a retail organisation who would handle large amounts of cash but be able to spread that cost wider. There would be a significant cost to introduce cash handling in car parks, leisure and RAMM shop.
Questions to the Portfolio Holder for Leisure Services and Healthy Living, Councillor Wood:
Councillor Moore asked why Live and Move consultations were not on the Charter page. Councillor Wood agreed to answer outside the meeting as he was not aware that this hadn’t been placed on the website.
Councillor Palmer stated that there was also a wider cost in tackling health inequality.
Councillor Moore asked the Leader, Councillor Bialyk if following the Executive decision last week to publish the local plan, could he be sure that enough brownfield sites were being built on? Councillor Bialyk responded making the following points:
· commitment remained to 15% brownfield sites;
· the Plan was evidence-based not political;
· there was a need to balance what they would like, what was needed and reality and that the local plan brought these together;
· social and affordable housing was important to this council;
· 35% hadn’t been achieved; and
· there was more good in the Plan than may be evident.