Agenda item

Libraries

Councillor Kevin Clarke asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

Will the Leader of the Council join me in congratulating the “Save the Libraries” campaign who, over the past few months, have worked tirelessly to bring to attention the necessity of retaining Nottingham’s local libraries? 

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor.  Can I thank Councillor Clarke for his question.  I would be happy to pay tribute to those involved in the “Save the Libraries” campaign as well as to thank all those who expressed their view on the proposals put forward by the Council as part of our consultation, brought about by the necessary duty to balance our Council budgets. Their efforts helped contribute towards achieving one of the largest consultation responses the Council has received to date on proposals for the transformation of our City’s library service and, in particular, discussion around three potential library closures.  This work complemented the work that the Library Service undertook in partnership with the Research, Engagement and Consultation Team to ensure we received a wide range of engagement from our citizens and key stakeholders.  This work included:

·  creating a dedicated web page on the library for the consultation, that saw over 5,500 visits;

·  undertaking Facebook and Twitter posts about the consultation, which had a reach of 18,709 people;

·  including the consultation in the Libraries ‘Stay Connected News’ emails, that went to over 28,000 subscribers;

·  writing to all schools in the City and holding discussion with youth groups;

·  leaflet drops in local areas where library closures are being proposed; and

·  printing out and having papers copies of the survey and background documents at every library.

The consultation on the proposals for the libraries closed on 24 April.  We received, as Councillor Campbell-Clark has already reported to Council, 2,887 individual submissions, plus responses from five public engagement sessions that saw 220 attend, plus a number of letters from key stakeholders such as Arts Council England, National Save Libraries Campaign and others.  We are now carefully looking at the responses received, and analysing proposals made, prior to bringing a report back to Council later this year before any final decision around changes or closure of any sites will be made.  It is important when we are looking to make key strategic decisions that we do listen and hear a wide range of views and opinions.  This type of engagement is essential for the City and helps us all make better decisions on what is important and prioritise the way we use our public funds and resources to deliver the services that the city needs. Thank you. 

 

Fly-tipping

Councillor Maria Watson asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Highways, Transport and Cleansing Services:

With the introduction of the charge for bulky waste having come into effect at the end of April, we are aware of the fears within the City of a knock-on impact on fly-tipping.

Can the Portfolio Holder provide any information about the number of reports of fly-tipping since the charge was introduced and whether the Council is prepared to commit increased resources to combat fly-tipping if these numbers increase?

 

In Councillor Healy’s absence, Councillor Sally Longford replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor and thank you Councillor Watson for your question. I was responsible as part of my Portfolio duties covering waste for bring forward the plan under the budget to introduce a £20 charge for up to 6 items of bulky waste.  As I have said on numerous occasions, charging for bulky waste is the norm across most of the country and we have reluctantly introduced a charge due to the Conservative Government’s huge level of cuts to our annual budget. However, residents in receipt of Council Tax Support will continue to be eligible for one free bulky waste collection per year, which will hopefully help to alleviate some of the problems. Data across the country shows no apparent pattern between levels of fly tipping and charges for bulky waste and we believe that our citizens will continue to do their best to keep their neighbourhood looking clean and tidy and try to manage their waste responsibly. Indeed, we know that many of our citizens care passionately about tackling mess on their street because our Clean Champions now number 6,000 amazing volunteers.
The changes were introduced on 25 April so it is too early to assess the full impact of their introduction.  However, officers have benchmarked the City’s fly tipping from the start of this paid service compared to previous years and will be reporting to me regularly from now on.  We have been through unusual times, when household waste statistics fluctuated greatly during the pandemic, so comparisons are quite difficult.

In the week commencing 25 April compared to last year I can tell you there was a remarkable 30% reduction in reported fly tipping in Nottingham.  It is not statistically valid to compare the data between this year and two years before in 2020 because we were in lockdown, so if we go back to compare the week commencing 25 April with the same time in 2019, i.e. before the pandemic which is probably the most valid comparison, it’s interesting to note that there was a 2% increase in reported fly tips.  Officers meet regularly to review the fly tipping data and will reallocate capacity within the city where this is required. I will be monitoring both the number of bulky waste collections and the fly tipping data to ensure that we do not suffer increased problems on our streets. I have also asked to be updated on the data by ward and neighbourhood so that we can identify emerging issues at an early stage.
I am glad to report that since the introduction of the paid service the bulky waste provision continues to be very popular with residents who are now paying for this service.  When people are booking bulky waste collections, we are also encouraging alternative options for people to use including free collections by charities such as the British Heart Foundation and Haven Housing Trust, as well as suggesting Freecycle which is a really good place to pass on useable items to other people for reuse. When I was clearing my mother’s home some years ago there were a lot of items which I certainly didn’t want or need but when I put them on Freecycle there were lots of takers and it is a very efficient way of passing on stuff to people who want it and this is obviously important from a carbon reduction point of view because it is less waste and more of a circular economy.
I’d like, finally, to take the chance to thank all the Clean Champions in the city who do a fantastic job picking up waste, sometimes in groups, sometimes individually, and make a huge contribution to keeping our streets tidy, and I hope that we can continue to build on that relationship and that partnership with them in the next few years. Thank you.

 

Victoria Market

Councillor Kirsty Jones asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Skills, Growth and Economic Development:

I’m sure I speak for many here when I say how sad I feel reading the recent reports of the Council weighing up the decision to exit from the lease for the Victoria Market.

Can the Portfolio Holder inform us what plans are being put in place so, were the Victoria Market to close, the traders would not be left out of pocket and alternative trading sites could be provided for them?

 

As Councillor Rebecca Langton was on maternity leave, Councillor Linda Woodings had been leading on this area of work and replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor and thank you Councillor Jones for your question. As you see I have been covering some of the duties of our colleague on maternity leave. The consultation on Victoria Market is still ongoing at the moment and so any representation received during that consultation will be given material consideration by the Council in coming to a final decision.  As you are aware that consultation commenced on Monday 25 April.  We circulated a briefing to all councillors, including yourselves, at the launch of that consultation explaining that the Council leases the market space in the Victoria Centre but has had to provide a significant annual subsidy to keep it afloat since the service charge was increased in 2015 by the former owners INTU.  The Conservative Government’s programme of austerity over the last ten years has meant that Nottingham City has lost £100million per year in government grant, and the subsidy we pay, which is just shy of £500,000 per year, is no longer a viable option for this Council. As you say, it’s very sad because the Victoria Market has been operating from that site since 1971 and, as reported previously to this Council, despite our investment in recent years it hasn’t been performing well and it is now less than half occupied.  The service charges were increased to the same level as other retail units in the Victoria Centre and that has created this financial difficulty. To add to this the market was badly affected, as was the whole of the retail sector, by the Covid pandemic and the loss of footfall generally despite the support provided to traders both from the Council and from Government grants as well. 

Any proposed change to the current arrangement does require the cooperation of traders, in addition to the owners of the shopping centre which is now a company called Global Mutual who are an asset management company.  Any final decision on the future of the market is, as I say, subject to consideration of all of the views and options that might be put forward as part of the six week consultation process.  So if a decision is made at the end to exit from that operation the Council will offer traders a fair financial compensation package. We’ll provide them support to identify alternative vacant units in the city, or we’ll provide them support to wind up their businesses early if, if, that is their preferred option.  We are very conscious that this is these people’s livelihoods and we understand all change is extremely difficult in these circumstances because indoor markets are a very different type of operation to outdoor markets, so we need to put traders at the heart of this decision we are making. Thank you.

 

Financial management

Councillor Kevin Clarke asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

Does the Leader of the Council agree with the Nottingham Post that intervention is necessary to prevent more of the extraordinary financial mismanagement from this authority and that, in light of yet further revelations of unlawfully spent money, historical Portfolio Holders should be offering their resignation?

 

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Clarke for his question. Let me make it clear to this Council that we, as Nottingham City Council, are already subject to the intervention of a Government appointed Improvement and Assurance Board.  A Board which challenges us, which holds us to account and which regularly reports to Government on our journey of improvement.  That is in the public arena and people can read those reports. It is disappointing that the local paper does not recognise this.  It’s also disappointing that, while sister papers in the north regularly fight for their cities to receive a fair share of resources, the Nottingham Post seems to delight in talking down our great city.  The money that has been identified in recent reports as being misallocated has been spent on things that are of value to our citizens, things like street lighting and cleaning the public realm, which benefits everyone.  However, the ring-fence of the Housing Revenue Account means that this money can only be spent on Nottingham City Homes tenants and the properties in which they live. We’ve taken action to ensure that in the future the money generated from Council house rents is properly segregated from other Council funds once more and is only used for the benefit of Council tenants. We will put a stop to historical practices, which resulted in some of these funds being allocated to non-council housing spending. We commissioned these recent reports. We identified the misallocated funds and we will repay the Housing Revenue Account so that these funds can be used on the homes occupied by our tenants. 

 

Since 2019, the Council has been determined to tackle difficulties, to improve governance and culture and to do this in a transparent way to the public.  It is because of the changes that we have made that these issues are being brought to light and being put right. Repeatedly, we have taken decisive action to sort these issues out and, following a recent CIPFA review, we acted to begin the process of bringing Nottingham City Homes back under direct control of the Council. As a Labour-led administration, it has been our mission to bring about the needed change to the organisation, strengthening the Council with a new leadership team, setting recently a balanced four year budget and reducing the Council’s debt levels by almost £250million.  Rooting out bad practice and bringing out into the public domain historical issues doesn’t always lead to positive news headlines, I understand that.  However, we are determined to do what is needed and to do what is right. Despite our challenges, the ambition of Nottingham Labour for our great city remains undimmed. We have agreed ambitious plans to deliver over £600million worth of capital projects, including over £200 million on building hundreds of new Council houses that the Nottingham people desperately need. We’ll keep fighting for Nottingham, for services commissioned and delivered here, for democratic oversight and for local accountability. Even if the Post has doesn’t always stand up for Nottingham, we always will. 

 

Health and Wellbeing Strategy

Councillor Angela Kandola asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adults and Health:

What impact will the Health and Wellbeing Strategy for Nottingham have in improving the health and wellbeing and reducing health inequalities in Nottingham?

 

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

Thanks Councillor Kandola for your question. As Portfolio Holder for Adults and Health and Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board, I was really pleased that the Board approved the new Joint Strategy for Health and Wellbeing in Nottingham at its March meeting.  The Strategy sets out its vision and the approach and the priorities for action over the next three years to improve health and wellbeing and reduce health inequalities across the City.  We know that health of people in Nottingham is generally worse than the England average at present and this can be plainly seen when you look at life expectancy in our city.  A female baby born in Nottingham today has a healthy life expectancy on average of 55.6years, which is the 2^nd lowest of any local authority area in England. This means that they are likely to live approximately one third of their life in poor health or disability. We also know that health inequalities exist within Nottingham.  There are avoidable and unfair differences in health and wellbeing between different groups, and this Strategy sets out a clear intention to improve outcomes for people experiencing the worst health outcomes faster, to try and close this gap and this means sometimes we will have to do things very differently. Different things for different people and in different areas and in different circumstances, because equality isn’t just opening a door and saying anyone can come in.  Equality is doing things differently to make sure that people are able to have the best outcomes regardless of their circumstances, regardless of where they are from and this Council is absolutely committed to that.
The Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy has been developed with the intention of making a real and tangible impact on these outcomes. In order to make the change that we really need in the city it has been necessary to just hone it down to a small group of priorities. All of the normal work will continue, but we will focus very hard on those four lead priorities. Looking at the available data, our local and national strategic priorities and, really critically, the views of our community representatives, they represent the areas where we think that with renewed collaborative efforts, we can make the biggest positive difference.  They are:

1)  Smoking and tobacco control - we know that smoking is the single largest cause of preventable death and disease in the city and obviously a key driver of health inequalities.  It links as well into priority four, which I will come to.

2)  Eating and moving for good health – recognising how broad and how complex the contributing factors are to that and again, this links to priority four.

3)  Severe multiple deprivation -  looking at how we can work together as a health and care system to get much better outcomes and experiences for people who are experiencing a combination of challenges, such as homelessness, substance abuse and mental health issues.

And the fourth one, which is not just the elephant in the room, it is the room. When you talk about health and wellbeing to people if they are hard up, if they can’t fill their cupboards, if they can’t fill their tank with petrol to get to get to work, it is so difficult for them to make progress. As a Council we have been conscious of that and the approach of Nottingham Labour is to recognise the struggles that people have because we live in our communities, we work with our communities and we understand how things are in reality not on paper. So it is absolutely critical that we use all of our partnerships to move this one forward. That’s thinking about the Nottingham pound - we’ve got a great record in Nottingham City on procuring locally, but we will spread that with our partners. We will look at ways we can support our small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in order to make sure that they can employ local people, thinking of things like job carving.  We’ve got levels of unemployment partly because people are struggling to access those jobs, because of the way those jobs are set up. What can we do as a system to think about the way that people advertise their jobs and frame their jobs; and make sure that everything we do, every pound we spend in the city works hard for Nottingham.  These are big challenges and I was really keen that we had this as a plank in the Strategy because I think it is so foundational.  When we took it round to talk to community groups and the third sector, it really resonated with people because it just represents the reality that people live in.  So it is going to be quite a job of work to get this one motoring but we are absolutely committed to it with our sustained and collective efforts.  No one bit of the system can deliver this alone and in recognition of this, the Strategy will be delivered through the Nottingham City Place-Based Partnership, which brings together all of the core providers and links in with the voluntary sector as well.  This needs to be a team effort. And as I say, a big part of the team will be people out there, it will be our communities, because what we’ve got here, are a set of priorities and the actual delivery of this will need to be shaped with our communities. We are all experts in our own lives, we are all experts in how things feel where we are, so we need to get that and make the change situated in that understanding that comes from people with lived experience themselves.
So I will be working very hard, still as Chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board and in partnership with people across the system, to ensure that those conversations are real and that we act on them.  I’m really excited about the new Strategy, really excited to hear everyone’s thoughts, and particularly doing that engagement with communities. I would encourage everyone to take a look at it, which you can find at www.healthynottingham.co.uk.  There will be lots of opportunities for people to feed in the way that this is delivered and obviously you, as councillors, have all got lots of views on that and understanding of how things are for people. In answer to your question directly, I think we will see a difference and the reason for that will be that its really grounded in the reality of people’s lives and I think we are all committed to making sure that continues as we develop our plans.  Thank you for the question.

Adult Social Care Funding
Councillor Nick Raine asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adults and Health:
Research carried out by the Institute for Fiscal Studies has found that the changes to the way care is to be funded from October 2023 will leave little protection against catastrophic care costs.  What impact will this have on people in Nottingham?

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor and thank you for your question Councillor Raine.  It is a really interesting one and worth caveating with its relatively new so we don’t yet fully understand statistically the impact on Nottingham, however we understand it broadly and I am afraid it is the same old story. In September 2021, 10 years after the Dilnot Commission recommended a cap on care costs, the Government finally announced with a great hurrah that it would implement a cap from October 2023.  However, just two months later the Government proposed to amend the Care Act so that an individual reached the social care cost cap when the amount they spent themselves, only themselves, reached £86,000.  This would stop any care that has been funded through the means test counting towards the cap.  I would argue that this was made with some sleight of hand, because it was introduced giving MPs just five days to scrutinise and challenge the proposals ahead of a vote with no impact assessment published at the time.  The Government, of course, claim that this change is fair because it means that everyone pays the same amount from their own pocket.  The Kings Fund says that this is not a definition of fairness that many people would recognise.  Then I thought, actually I do recognise that, because it sounds a bit like the Poll Tax, doesn’t it - we all pay the same no matter how much you’ve got in your pocket. I think it is interesting, that it’s an echo from the past.  In Nottingham we know what fairness looks like to this Government: look at the Towns Fund and the Community Renewal Fund - £3.6billion granted with no published criteria for selection, in which the Ministers took a really close interest and remarkably, out of the 45 towns that got funding 40 have got Tory MPs. Cheadle just north of Manchester fulfils nobody’s idea of deprivation, but was on the list so I am sure the people of Cheadle are really pleased, as is the local Tory MP who won the seat with a majority of just over 2,000.  Richmondshire in North Yorkshire is the 256^th most deprived local authority and got money through the grant; yet Hull, the 4^th most deprived place in the country, did not. So of course, it is just a coincidence that Richmondshire happens to be Chancellor Rishi Sunak’s constituency. So this is what fairness looks like, same old story.
Analysis from the Institute of Fiscal Studies, that Councillor Raine refers to, shows that people with the same level of need for care, but different levels of wealth, will reach the cap at different points. So one example – a really wealthy person will reach the cap after three years and four months, but someone with less wealth will take almost twice as long do so, almost double the need for care before getting the same financial support as the wealthy person. So, for many people the latest proposals are considerably less generous than the Care Act would have been, as many people could face losing more than 70% of their assets to pay for care. Those people are not getting any protection from the catastrophic costs and still face the prospect of losing almost everything including the value of their home to pay for care.  Just last week the Alzheimers Society said that the Government has squandered a huge opportunity to protect the poorest from paying catastrophic fees for their care, and just 1 in 5 people living with dementia will reach the cap.  This will save money, but we know where the savings are coming from. They are coming from up here. In reality, the savings come from poorer, older people living in the North East, Yorkshire Humber and the Midlands, and working aged adults who will now be required to pay more than they would have done than under the original proposals that were floated back then.  All of our surrounding Conservative MPs voted for this I think, presumably without knowing, or bothering to find out about the impact it would have on their constituents. The Lords made an amendment that was really positive but unfortunately the local Conservative MPs did nothing to defend their local constituents from these catastrophic care costs.  In 2019, the Government made a cast iron guarantee, that no one needing care would have to sell their home to pay for it.  However, we know that promises from this Government are worthless. The change they proposed to their original plans just a couple of months later will lead to catastrophic care costs actually landing up here, and yet another Tory attack on those who can’t afford it and significantly reducing the benefits to working age adults. My personal view is that if we could build the NHS out of the rubble of the Second World War and spectacular national levels of debt, then we can, to use Boris’ phrase, take ‘a moon shot’ at supporting people to live in dignity as a society rather than it landing catastrophically landing on family. Come on, can’t we do that? Thank you Lord Mayor.

 

Police Resourcing

Councillor Michael Edwards asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Neighbourhoods, Safety and Inclusion:

In the run up to the Police and Crime Commissioner elections last year, Caroline Henry pledged to divert resources away from the City to areas around the county.  Can the Portfolio Holder comment on what impact this is now having in Nottingham?

 

Councillor Neghat Khan replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Edwards for his question.  This month marks a year since Caroline Henry was elected to the post of Police and Crime Commissioner, having signalled her intent on redistributing resources away from the Nottingham and the City. She said, and I quote: “for years, our forgotten Nottinghamshire towns have been let down when it comes to policing decisions. While crime rises and drugs spiral out of control, money continues to pour in to Nottingham.”  I am not sure on what metric the Commissioner is working to, but money pouring into Nottingham are not words often used when referring to funding and the Conservatives.  History has shown us the opposite, with the Government’s continued politically driven agenda of austerity right across the Midlands, so you can imagine our apprehension when Commissioner Henry took office. Then again, the Commissioner also pledged to crack down on speeding offences, and take a zero tolerance approach to crime prevention.  Perhaps she will need reminding of that now in the light of her inability to stick to her words.
Over the past couple of years, Covid has swept across the world and brought with it unprecedented challenges, both in terms of the health impacts of the virus, but also the social economic consequences required to contain it, some of which will last for many years. Despite these new challenges, partners across the City are committed to delivering successful outcomes for citizens in Nottingham. We are extremely proud that people of different backgrounds get on so well together in Nottingham and this is something we should all be proud of.  We see first-hand the importance of our neighbourhoods, their cultural identities and the people who live and work within them. 
Nottingham has achieved great success over the past decade in reducing crime, antisocial behaviour and the issues that underline them, such as the misuse of drugs and alcohol. Tackling long-term issues for the City saw crime fall by more than half between 2006 and 2015.  Volumes of crime and acquisitive crime have risen again after a long period of decline while the nature of drug use and supply has seen profound changes, particularly with the increase of use of psychoactive substances. Coordinated and proactive partnership working is the best way to deliver successful outcomes for citizens to ensure Nottingham is as safe, clean and healthy as it can be. It is clear that challenges remain across the City, and it is my firm belief that real and sustainable improvements for citizens can only be made by addressing problems locally and by tackling the root causes of crime and antisocial behaviour.  The Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner has historically invested funds into City Council commissioned domestic abuse and criminal justice substance misuse services. This funding has been maintained for 2022/23 and as of yet there are no indications that this will reduced in the coming years. Likewise, the commitment to projects in the City commissioned in whole or in part by the Violence Reduction Unit remains unchanged. This is welcome and a much needed resource that makes significant impact right across Nottingham.  Notwithstanding that, there have been changes to the support provided to the multiagency organisation that’s function it is to reduce crime in Nottingham. The Crime and Drug Partnership has had vital elements of its funding reviewed and withdrawn, particularly around the commissioning of services. Although other elements are being considered and reviewed by the Commissioner, we must do what we can to preserve the integrity and effectiveness of the Crime and Drug Partnership, after all it was established on the understanding that the causes of crime are complex and no single agency holds the key to reducing crime and its  impact on society, thus crime reduction and prevention is not the sole responsibility of the police and the key to achieving long term and sustainable reduction of offending is through multiagency working that addresses not only enforcement but prevention as well.  Thank you.

 

Energy Efficiency

Councillor Jay Hayes asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Energy, Environment and Waste Services:

Could the Portfolio Holder explain what is being done to improve energy efficiency in the City to help reduce residents’ energy bills?  With households seeing a 54% hike in energy costs, what does the Portfolio Holder think of the Chancellor’s comments that it would be ‘silly’ to provide more support to tackle rising energy bills now?

 

Councillor Sally Longford replied as follows:

The comment made by the super-rich Chancellor Sunak on Mumsnet that it would be silly to provide more funding to support people with their energy bills is frankly insulting to people who are realising how severely the rising cost of energy is going to hit them in their pockets and are having to make really hard choices about how they will manage their budgets. But then how would he understand their anxiety? This Conservative Government is completely out of touch with the day to day experience of our citizens, as demonstrated by the suggestion that buying own brand supermarket products or cancelling annual MOTs could make significant difference.  Contrast our situation with that of France, where they maintained state ownership of the energy sector and have enforced a 4% energy cap, and Spain where they have imposed a windfall tax on energy producers to subsidise lower energy bills. We’re all paying the price for Thatcher’s privatisation of the energy market. With BP and Shell enjoying record profits and no action by the Chancellor to control the situation we will all go on suffering the consequences.
Here in Nottingham meanwhile, we are continuing to invest in energy efficiency and energy production. We are supporting citizens across the City to control their demand for energy and helping them to cut their bills. We know that this is the only sustainable long term solution to the energy crisis and will support us to be the first carbon neutral city in the country. The Council’s Carbon Reduction and Energy Services Team is currently delivering a variety of grant funded programmes to improve the energy efficiency of social, private rented and owner occupied housing across the city and we are very fortunate to have these nationally recognised experts delivering for our city and citizens in the city. There are a wide variety of measures such as deep retrofit, solid wall insulation and solar photo-voltaic installations which reduce energy consumption or generate energy to use in the home and so help to protect residents from rising energy bills in the future.  243 social homes and 531 private homes are due to receive these improvements throughout ongoing programmes this year.  We’ve also recently been awarded grant funding to deliver improvements to a further 298 homes through the Social Housing Decarbonisation Fund Wave 1. So that is many more than 1000 households supported with these practical energy saving measures. We will continue to explore the opportunities to bid for grant funding to enable further energy efficiency improvements to be made in the future. There is information about how to keep your bills down and manage outgoings on the AskLion website and I suggest councillors direct constituents to that site.
However, to be honest this is all a drop in the ocean. Cash strapped local councils can’t save the energy crisis, it is the Government’s duty to protect people from the situation. We need decisive action now, a windfall tax on energy producers, redistributed to subsidise energy bills. For the longer term we must protect people from the future impacts of climate change and to stop this chaos by investing in a massive programme of installation, putting solar panels on every south facing roof. We need to stop the short-term grant bidding process and provide a long term pipeline of works to give confidence to supply chains which were found seriously wanting through the dismal Green Homes Grant Scheme. But that would take a Government that has vision and understanding and we are unfortunately a hell of a long way from that.

 

Covid Testing

Councillor Georgia Power asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Adults and Health:

Could the Portfolio Holder comment on the High Court ruling that the Government acted unlawfully when it sent patients into care homes without Covid testing?

 

Councillor Adele Williams replied as follows:

Thank you Lord Mayor, and thank you Councillor Power for your question. So, just so people are aware the Judgement opens with this: “About 20,000 residents of care homes in England died of Covid-19 during the first wave of the pandemic in 2020. 2 of them were Michael Gibson, father of the first claimant, and Donald Percival Maynard Harris, father of the second claimant. Mr Gibson died in a care home in Oxfordshire on 3 April 2020, Mr Harris on the 1 May 2020.”  The High Court ruling found specifically that the common law claim succeeded against the Secretary of State and Public Health England in respect of both the March Discharge Policy and April’s Admissions Guidance to this extent: “The Policy set out in each document was irrational in failing to advise where an asymptomatic patient other than one who had tested negative was admitted to a care home he or she should as far as practicable be kept apart from other residents for 14 days.”  This High Court ruling process was not an inquest into the tragic deaths of the two claimants’ fathers but it does appear that lives were put at risk as a result of policy and guidance for which the Secretary of State is responsible.  No one would expect that in a rapidly changing understanding of the virus that everything would be optimal from day one but the High Court judgement finds that even in these early weeks there was clear evidence that asymptomatic transmission could happen. So they state that during the three weeks from 25 February to 17 March the scientific picture was rapidly changing.  At a meeting on 6 March Professor Ferguson was pointing to evidence that infectiousness could be detected just before, as well as just after the onset of symptoms and on 8 March 2020 three academic papers were published and they all pointed to the very real possibility of pre-symptomatic transmission of the virus. On 12 March the European Centre for Disease Control and Prevention published a paper confirming the fact that asymptotic people could be infectious.  Matt Hancock said in a press conference in May 2020: “Right from the start we have tried to throw a protective ring around our care homes. We set out the first advice in February and as the virus grew, we strengthened it throughout. We’ve made sure that care homes have the resources they need to control the spread of infection.”  Bereaved families have given their own verdict of how truthful they think that is.  I am not going to make a lot of political points because I think this is just really sad. The underfunding of the health and social care system means that all of us are vulnerable in future waves of future pandemics. I know that the bereaved families are very keen that the Howlett Inquiry results in lessons learned and actions taken that will prevent more people suffering as they have in future waves or future pandemics. I’ll leave my answer there, it’s just really saddening. Thank you.

 

Housing Revenue Account

Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:

The Leader of the Council will recall at the last Executive Board meeting I recommended that following the decision to bring Nottingham City Homes in-house that, in relation to transactions involving the Housing Revenue Account, records should be retained in electronic and hard copy form for a period of six years; and for the foreseeable future the Section 151 Officer should authorise any Housing Revenue Account transactions to ensure proper management oversight.  Can he confirm these recommendations will be implemented?

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:
Thank you Lord Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Rule for his question. All Housing Revenue Account (HRA) transactions are reviewed by the Council’s Senior HRA Accountant who has significant experience in this area.  Any concerns are escalated to the Section 151 Officer. In addition, any new proposals for spending against HRA budgets need the prior approval of the three statutory officers before they can progress to ensure that they meet the strict criteria applied to HRA matters.

Libraries
Councillor Andrew Rule asked the following question of the Leader of the Council:
Can the Leader of the Council provide an undertaking that when the fit out of the Central Library building is eventually completed, it will not be used as an excuse for further reducing neighbourhood libraries following the recent budget proposals to close three neighbourhood libraries in the City?

Councillor David Mellen replied as follows:
Thank you, Lord Mayor, and can I thank Councillor Rule for his question.Firstly, I want to reiterate that the delivery of a new Central Library in Nottingham remains a key priority for the Council and its development remains a key part of the City Council’s Capital Programme.  To this end, I am pleased to announce that I will be bringing a report to Executive Board later this month, following the market testing of construction prices for this scheme to propose the starting of this work to fit out the library building that was recently completed on the corner of Colin Street and Carrington Street.  As I outlined in my response to the Leader of the Opposition in both July 2021 and January of this year, I am committed to the role and work of libraries and it is important to us to ensure that this project is completed.  Provision has already been made within the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan for its cost and it is not anticipated that this will raise any further additional financial pressures for the Library Service. 
Councillor Rule will be aware that we have just completed a comprehensive consultation about our future library provision as has been mentioned in three questions already this afternoon.  The submissions from which are now being reviewed and carefully considered.  A further report will be brought back to the Council’s Executive Board later in the year for decision on any changes that may or may not need to be undertaken on our neighbourhood provision.  I recognise the importance of needing to maintain a strong network of excellent neighbourhood libraries alongside the replacement Central Library and we will be working to ensure that this network remains.  Labour councillors have put forward closure proposals as part of our need to balance our budgets.  Sadly, the proposals for libraries accompany savings to be made amongst our Children’s Centres, our Youth Service and with us charging for services which have previously been free.  Councillor Rule you use the word ‘excuse’, and I believe that is neither appropriate nor fair.  No councillor on this side of the Chamber wants to close libraries or Children’s Centres or to reduce the youth provision, but having to balance a budget is our legal duty, its our responsibility as we take on the leadership of the City. I wonder, Councillor Rule, if you would describe the closing of more than 800 libraries across the country over the last few years by councils run by parties all colours as a result of excuses or rather whether you would admit that cuts in public services are as a result of systematic underfunding of local government by this Conservative Central Government.  This is the reason why decisions are having to be made.  We are having to consult on closures because your Government, Councillor Rule, has not funded services in Nottingham properly.  We will do our bit, we will listen to the consultation responses and seek any alternative ways to make the necessary savings that come forward, but our duty to set the budget remains.  Perhaps Councillor Rule, you might make representations to your Government on behalf of this City to properly fund services for the people of Nottingham.
I remain proud of the commitment we have been able to make over the last decade to improve library provision in Nottingham, with new libraries on Sneinton Dale and Strelley Road, a new library being built in Sherwood and now the start of the final stage of the new Central Library. Our commitment and ambition for libraries remains.