Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for absence from those Members who are unable to attend the meeting.

Apologies were received from Councillor Aafaq Butt, Chris Friend (Co-optee) and Jane Emery (Co-optee).

To approve the Minutes of the meeting of the Panel held on 22^nd November 2022.

The Minutes of the meeting held on 22^nd November 2022 were agreed as a correct record.

RESOLVED: Councillor Aafaq Butt’s attendance be added to the minutes.

The Councillors will be asked to say if there are any items on the Agenda in which they have disclosable pecuniary interests, which would prevent them from participating in any discussion of the items or participating in any vote upon the items, or any other interests.

No Interests were declared.

Most debates take place in public. This only changes when there is a need to consider certain issues, for instance, commercially sensitive information or details concerning an individual. You will be told at this point whether there are any items on the Agenda which are to be discussed in private.

All items were considered in the public session.

The Panel will receive any petitions and hear any deputations from members of the public. A deputation is where up to five people can attend the meeting and make a presentation on some particular issue of concern. A member of the public can also hand in a petition at the meeting but that petition should relate to something on which the body has powers and responsibilities.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 10 (2), Members of the Public should provide at least 24 hours’ notice of presenting a deputation.

No deputations or petitions were received.

The Panel will hear any questions from the general public.

No questions were received from the public.

The Panel will consider a report highlighting the work undertaken by the Councils ground maintenance teams.

Contact:

Maryke Woods, Group Leader – Greenspace Operational Delivery

1.    The Panel considered the report, Grounds Maintenance Current Position presented by Maryke Woods, Group Leader, Greenspace Operational Delivery, who provided an update in relations to the Grounds Maintenance Services current position, and advised the Panel that:

·         The service provided grounds maintenance to all parks and recreational grounds and maintained most greenspaces within Kirklees, as well as contract services to a range of clients.

·         The team was small with 70 full time employees and was supported by seasonal staff in the Summer.

·         The service offered a range of roles and an apprenticeship scheme, with 3 apprentices in training.

·         The service cut approximately 4.8km2 of grass, 35km of hedges, managed and maintained sports pitches, maintained 1,100 house gardens on behalf of homes and neighbourhoods, maintained over 5,000 locations across Kirklees and 70,000m2 of shrubbery.

·         The service offered a range of benefits which included:

o   Working with people / local groups to provide people with practical work experiences to help them back into employment.

o   6 green flag awards for primary parks and country parks.

o   Free and open accessible green spaces people could enjoy which supported mental-health and wellbeing.

o   Working closely with partners to support biodiversity and the climate change agenda.

·         Some of the challenges the service faced were in relation to:

o   Recruitment.

o   Budgets (no central budget to support parks / open spaces) the service was income generated through SLA’s and client exposure.

o   Machinery, budgets were stretched and there were delays purchasing new fleets and machinery.

o   The gap between expected services and what resources allowed, which was approximately 33 full time employees between March and October.

o   Service standards, which were categorised into Gold, Silver, Bronze or Natural.

·         New areas to maintain were added regularly, without the revenue or machinery to maintain them, which led to subcontracting the work.

·         The section 106 revenue from planning was decreasing, due to developers choosing to use other management companies.

·         The focus was to look at what services could be provided within the resources available, which included combining the silver and bronze categories and keeping the Gold and Natural as they were.

·         A communications plan would be developed to share information with the public, and the key messages, which were:

o   Take littler home,

o   Clear up after dogs

o   The reasons as to why areas were maintained a certain way.

o   Service Standards, so people know what to expect.

·         Future ambitions were:

o   To improve network mapping and link in with other initiatives to increase biodiversity and habitat creation.

o   To invest in more efficient machinery to carry out a wider variety of maintenance tasks.

o   Improve the back-office systems, to be able to make better decision in the future.

o   Enable and empower communities in sports groups, to take ownership of their spaces and access funding.

o   Re-align service standards and budgets using data and knowledge.

The Panel acknowledged the 50+ years’ service of two Council employees and recommended that their work be recognised and celebrated.

The Panel  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Panel will consider a report giving an update on Trees Team Capacity and Tree Policy Review.

Contact:

Joe Robertson, Woodland Development Manager

The Panel considered the report Trees Team Capacity and Tree Policy Review, presented by Joe Robertson, Woodland Development Manager, who highlighted that:

·         There were several pieces of legislations that placed duties on the Council to manage its tree stock.

·         The Council owned an estimated 190,000 trees that they were responsible for, and that provided multiple benefits in terms of mental health, biodiversity, pollution absorption etc.

·         The Capital Asset Evaluation for Amenity Trees (CAVAT) was used to calculate the monetary value of trees, which totalled around £51m.

·         There was no budget for the trees team, and it was completely reliant on income generation.

·         There were 15 members of staff, which included:

o   8 Arborists (the tree surgeons who carried out the physical work to the trees).

o   4 Inspectors (who carried out safety evaluations).

·         There had been an increased in ad-hoc requests for inspections which were being triaged in terms of safety level and danger.

·         The challenges in the team were in relation to attracting and retaining staff, which had resulted in more engagement with private contractors for routine works. This was via tender which was significantly slower.

·         There was an imbalance of expectation and the actual resources available.

·         There was a need to increase repeat inspections due to gaps in not being able to carry out basic safety inspections.

·         Ash Dieback would increase the workload significantly and the team were drafting an action plan in relation to this.

·         One of the main impacts was on the team’s ability to carry out emergency responses as well as its statutory functions.

·         Health and Safety England (HSE) statistics identified 6 deaths a year from falling trees or branches, with half of them being in public spaces.

·         The risk was broadly acceptable, but the team needed to ensure it could deliver services as reasonably practical to ensure people were not exposed to risks.

·         The Policy review was to bring services in line with industry best practise, case law and capacity issues, and would include a New Policy Statement, Risk Framework, Management Standards and Service Standards.

·         Service Standards would include targeted timeframes for work to be completed and target times to meet enquiries through a standard proforma.

The Panel shared that the aims listed within the Policy were good but recommended that a target to increase tree numbers and tree cover be added, which was referenced throughout the policy.

In response to a comment raised by the Panel in relation to the accessibility of the proforma and policy document on the website, Joe Robertson advised that, the proforma would be based online with links to the policy document to make it as accessible as possible.

The Panel noted the response and further suggested that the development of the proforma be carried out in consultation with Councillor Enquiries. 

The Panel queried whether the HSE deaths were in relation to weather incidents recognising that in most cases they would have been difficult to predict, but equally acknowledged that having the right inspection regime in place was important.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

The Panel will consider a report setting out an Overview of Post 16 Skills, Training and Apprenticeships.

Contact:
Gillian Wallace , Head of Employment and Skills

The Panel considered the report ‘Overview of Post 16 Skills, Training and Apprenticeships’ which was introduced by Councillor Graham Turner, Cabinet Member for Regeneration who advised that it was a long-term policy that focused on trying to increase the numbers of people in work and upskilling Kirklees residents.

Gillian Wallace, Head of Employment and Skills, presented an overview of the work taking place in relation to employment and skills, and advised that the report focused heavily of adult provision. Gillian shared that:

·         Many of the challenges were not recent but an accumulation of a lack of investment and activity in the past.

·         There were two work strands identified that would help tackle the challenges:

o   The future workforce – working with school-aged children and people in education.

o   Upskilling and re-skilling adults already in employment.

·         The challenges identified were:

o   Too many jobs in Kirklees paid below the National Living Wage.

o   The local adult population had lower skills levels than the national average.

o   Low skill levels impacted on productivity and in turn wage levels.

·         The Solutions were:

o   Significant investment in skills at all levels and all ages.

o   Collaboration across the public, private and third sectors.

o   National, regional, and local policy responsibility, and funding streams.

·         The Kirklees Employment and Skills Plan was developed in response to the challenges and to make sense of what Kirklees wanted to prioritise and achieve.

·         The Plan needed to define what the Kirklees Ask was, what it’s position was going to be and how it could maximise on the opportunities that had become available to address the challenges.

·         The Plan had been developed over the past year and was in the early delivery stage.

·         The plan did not exist in isolation, it was in line with the Kirklees Economic Strategy and Education Strategy (Kirklees Futures).

·         The plan was developed on data, employer input, and stake holders input to identify the 4 priorities, which were:

o   Empowering Young People.

o   Digital Inclusion.

o   Supporting Communities to Learn and Progress.

o   Skills for the Future.

·         There were measures in the plan to show impact and to help minimise the gap between Kirklees and the National picture.

·         There were a range of Partners involved in the Employment and Skill Partnership.

·         The Employment and Skills Programme included programmes for individuals, programmes for businesses, and pipeline programmes.

·         Statistic in Kirklees regarding apprenticeship were not great due to the reforms in 2019 and the pandemic.

·         Apprenticeships were key and a unique project to support individuals and help businesses.

·         There had been some improvement in apprenticeships, but Kirklees were not where they hope to be.

Gillian Wallace responded to a question from the Panel regarding the plans to improve and expand provision in North Kirklees.  It was advised that Kirklees College had a presence in North Kirklees and that there was a range of independent training providers, who worked remotely and utilised voluntary sector provision. Gillian agreed that there needed to be a breadth of provision across Kirklees.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

The Panel will consider its work programme for 2022/23.

Contacts:
Jodie Harris, Principal Governance and Democratic Engagement Officer

Councillor Hawkins queried the Bereavement Services Offer item and why it had been removed from the work plan for the February meeting.

Jodie Harris, Governance Officer advised that the item had been deferred due to changes to the strategy and that it would be added to the work plan for the 2023/24 municipal year.

Councillor Hawkins queried the Homes and Neighbourhood item and asked what it was in relation to. It was agreed that:

RESOLVED:

1)    The bereavement service office be considered in the next municipal year 2023/24.

2)    An email be sent to the Panel clarifying the Homes and Neighbourhood item scheduled for the February meeting.

3)    A joint discussion with the Children’s Scrutiny Panel be considered in relation to the education landscape.

4)    An update on the White Rose Forest be given to the Panel in the next municipal year.

5)    Information relating to Ash Dieback be presented to the Panel at a future meeting in terms of funding streams and resources.