Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 21^st February 2008 were taken as read and signed as correct record.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director – Environment seeking authority to proceed with the implementation phase of the City Employment Strategy (CES) through Knowsley Metropolitan Borough Council acting as the accountable body for the CES Partnership.

 

It was advised that the CES concept was that local consortia were formed of public, private and voluntary sectors, which work together to target those wards with the highest levels of worklessness. In Halton, the Department of Work and Pensions had identified Windmill Hill, Castlefields, Riverside, Halton Lea, Grange and Kingsway. The six local authorities in Merseyside had submitted a joint business plan to the Department of Work and Pensions that was successful and the area was now one of the national pilots.

 

Progress to date was outlined for the Board’s information and it was noted that the first meeting of the CES Board had recently taken place. The Halton representative on the Board was the Operational Director – Economic Regeneration. It was advised that the North West Development Agency (NWDA) was formally considering a funding application for £3m made by Knowsley Council on behalf the Partnership. The cash flow had £2.7m in 2008/9 and £700,000 in 2009/10 and the key project within the application was aimed at reducing child poverty by working with both the unemployed and the low paid. A team was to be established to work across all six local authorities to implement the project.

 

Issues and next steps were also outlined for the Board’s consideration. In particular, it was noted that the CES Partnership would be making a number of funding submissions to the NWDA in the future and, as such, there needed to be a formal agreement as to which organisation should be the accountable body. Given that Knowsley was the lead in the Multi Area Agreement (MAA), and was overseeing the management of the CES, it was proposed that it should be designated as the accountable body.

 

RESOLVED: That Knowsley Metroplitan Borough Council be designated as the accountable body for the Liverpool City Region City Employment Strategy.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director – Children and Young People’s Directorate, and the Operational Director – Halton and St. Helens Primary Care Trust (PCT), seeking agreement on the next steps in the integration of services in Halton for children and young people through new working arrangements between Halton and St. Helens PCT and the Children and Young People’s Directorate of Halton Council. Agreement was also sought to place those new arrangements and their governance within the context of Halton’s Children’s Trust Arrangements (Alliance Board).

 

The report outlined how the proposals were intended to improve outcomes for children and young people, seeking to build on the integration of Education and Children’s Social Care Services that formed the Children and Young People’s Directorate in 2006. The proposals focused on the way the Children and Young People’s Directorate and its partners would do business together in future. An integrated approach would enhance the Council and its partner’s ability to deliver the key objectives of the Community Strategy under the umbrella  of the Local Strategic Partnership. All the services within that Partnership would continue to be directly accountable to their parent body for the quality and effectiveness of their services. However, the proposals enhanced the Council’s ability to fully discharge its new statutory duties to children and young people in the Borough.

 

The Health Services referred to were outlined for the Board’s consideration and it was advised that health services for children were focused on three on three principal groupings:

 

• The Sick Child – children who required specific medical interventions due to illness or injury;
• The Vulnerable child – children who had a particular set of circumstances that made their health vulnerable, for example hearing loss, a chronic condition, or their welfare or safety; and
• The Well Child – routine health matters that all children needed.

 

Integration of those services would be complemented by the further alignment of other health-related services and a dialogue would be established with General Practitioners in the Borough on the “best fit” with General Practice. It was advised that Dentistry Services were not part of this arrangement.

 

Members noted that the PCT was moving towards being a commissioning organisation and, in light of this, the PCT would explore a relevant NHS provider to deliver services to the “sick” child, whilst entering into this management arrangement with the Council for health services for the “well” and “vulnerable” child.

 

The proposed structure for the joint new arrangements were attached at Appendix 1 of the report. It was advised that NHS staff would not be subject to TUPE or seconded to the Council and so there would be no change to the terms of employment or conditions of any NHS employee affected by these arrangements. Lines of accountability were outlined for consideration and it was advised that the PCT would identify a named individual (Assistant Director, Children and Family Health, Halton) to become part of the Children and Young People Directorate’s Senior Management Team. This post would have  ...  view the full minutes text for item 100.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director – Environment advising of progress made in respect of the Council’s Expression of Interest for Halton for Growth Point Status since the previous report of 13^th December 2007.

 

It was noted that, following publication of proposals to extend the Government’s Growth Points and Eco Towns Programme to cover the north of England in the Housing Green Paper (July 2007), the Council was invited to submit an Expression of Interest (EoI) to Government Office by 31^st October. The Merseyside Policy Unit (MPU) co-ordinated submission of a joint EoI on behalf of Halton and the other Merseyside authorities, divided into two potential growth areas centred on Liverpool and Wirral Waterfronts, and Halton and St. Helens.

 

Following post submission advice from Government Office North West (GONW), agreement had been reached with Warrington to co-ordinate its proposals with those from Halton/St. Helens under the “Mid Mersey” banner.

 

It was advised that the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) had subsequently requested significant post submission reassurances and information, principally in respect of flood risk, transport, affordable housing and governance. Significant joint working had therefore been undertaken involving colleagues from St. Helens, Warrington, GONW, the Environment Agency, the Highways Agency, Mersey Travel and United Utilities to furnish the additional material requested.

 

Members noted that Halton’s EoI was dependent upon bringing forward sites within the Runcorn and Weston Docklands Regeneration Area (Halton UDP). The landowner, Peel Holdings was intent on bringing this site forward as a matter of urgency and had indicated that they wished to work in partnership with the Council to produce a Masterplan to be incorporated into Planning Policy as a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) in a manner similar to the joint working with English Partnerships on Sandymoor.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1)       the actions taken following the submission of the Growth Point Expression of interest be ratified;

 

(2)    officers be authorised to work with the Council’s partners in the Mid-Mersey area and, where appropriate, private landowners to further work on the successful delivery of the Growth Point agenda;

 

(3)    it be approved that Halton offer to act as “Lead Authority” for the Mid-Mersey Growth Point; and

 

(4)       the intention to work with Peel Holdings to produce a Masterplan and Supplementary Planning Document to inform the development of the Runcorn Docklands site, in advance of the previously proposed date of 2010 for production of this SPD as contained in the 2007 Local Development Scheme, be noted.

            The Board considered:

 

(1)            whether Members of the press and public should be excluded from the meeting of the Board during consideration of the following item of business in accordance with Sub-Section 4 of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 because it was likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be considered, exempt information would be disclosed, being information defined in Section 100 (1) and paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972; and

 

(2)            whether the disclosure of information was in the public interest, whether any relevant exemptions were applicable and whether, when applying the public interest test and exemptions, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed that in disclosing the information.

 

RESOLVED: That as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business in accordance with Sub-Section 4 of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 because it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business, exempt information will be disclosed, being information defined in Section 100 (1) and paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director – Environment regarding land that needed to be acquired in order to complete the Land Assembly Package for the construction of the Mersey Gateway Scheme.

 

RESOLVED: That

 

(1) the Strategic Director – Corporate and Policy, in consultation with the Mersey Gateway Project Director and the Executive Board Member for Corporate Services, be authorised to acquire the former Anglo Blackwell site as detailed in the report; and

 

(2)    the Strategic Director – Corporate and Policy, in consultation with the Mersey Gateway Project Director and the Executive Board Member for Corporate Services, be authorised to acquire other sites required for the implementation of the Mersey Gateway Bridge where such a course of action had been agreed by the Mersey Gateway Project Officers Board and approved by the Operational Director – Finance.   

MINUTES ISSUED: 11^th March 2008

CALL IN: 18^th March 2008

Any matter decided by the Executive Board may be called in no later than 18^th March 2008