Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

An apology for absence was submitted from Councillors Pauline Jorgensen and Norman Jorgensen.

Councillors Michael Firmager and Chris Bowring attened the meeting as substitutes.

Councillor Shirley Boyt attended the meeting virtually, meaning she could participate in the debate but not cast any votes.

To receive any declarations of interest.

There were no declarations of interest.

To answer any public questions relating to items on this agenda.

A period of 30 minutes will be allowed for members of the public to ask questions submitted under notice.

The Council welcomes questions from members of the public about the work of this committee.

Subject to meeting certain timescales, questions can relate to general issues concerned with the work of the Committee or an item which is on the Agenda for this meeting.  For full details of the procedure for submitting questions please contact the Democratic Services Section on the numbers given below or go to www.wokingham.gov.uk/publicquestions

There were no public questions.

To answer any member questions relating to items on this agenda.

There were no Member questions.

To consider the draft Bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP).

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 5 to 90, which set out the draft bus Service Improvement Plan (BSIP) for the Borough.

The report outlined the key objectives of the plan, including to grow passenger numbers to pre-pandemic levels, improvement of bus journey times, and making fares affordable and simpler. A delivery action plan was provided, which gave practical examples of how key objectives might be achieved.

Paul Fishwick (Executive Member for Active Travel, Highways and Transport), Chris Easton (Assistant Director – Highways), and Rebecca Brooks (Community Transport Manager) attended the meeting to answer member queries.

During the ensuing discussion, members raised the following points and queries:

·         Was there a particular timeline for Government funding to be received? Officer response – Very vague timelines were given by Government, with no promise of additional funding. Some Local Authorities had not been able to spend all of their money from the initial rounds of funding, however this did not guarantee any additional funding for Wokingham Borough Council (WBC). The final documented was expected to be presented at the end of January 2023, whilst there was no timeline for an expected announcement from Government;

·         In view of increasing fuel costs and other costs, how were fares proposed to be kept competitive? Executive Member response – Reading Buses purchased their fuel at one point in time for the remainder of the year. Overall, local fares were competitive compared to the rest of England and therefore WBC was in a relatively good position;

·         It was commented that there was a considerable amount of data for members to consider in a relatively short amount of time, which should be a learning point for the future;

·         How were current non-users being attracted to use bus services, and was research being undertaken to understand why people were not taking buses? Executive Member response – Marketing was key, and services were being actively advertised. There was a possible ‘flat fare’ from  January to March 2023 which could attract new users onto services. The point of additional longer term research could be taken away and broached with Reading Buses;

·         In relation to agenda page 16, were the MRT and third Reading bridge aspirations of WBC? Executive Member response – The third Reading bridge was included within the strategic improvement plan for the southeast, however it was still to be determined what would be delivered. The MRT was not thought to be going ahead, however Reading Borough Council were proposing a bus lane from the Reading boundary of the M4 to cemetery junction;

·         A lot of people found crossing busy roads to reach bus stops tricky and off-putting. Could this be factored into surveys? Executive Member and officer response – The survey in the report was undertaken by a third party and was standardised for all authorities. A separate consultation or focus group would be required if this issue was to be further understood. Accessibility was considered, and some issues may be historic which could be reported  ...  view the full minutes text for item 63.

To consider the draft Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 91 to 114, which set out the draft Local Cycling and Walking Infrastructure Plan (LCWIP).

The report outlined that the development of a LCWIP would best place Wokingham Borough Council (WBC) to secure any government funding that became available through a series of bid ready projects prepared for submission in addition to ensuring that necessary funding can be secured via developers and other funding sources.

Paul Fishwick (Executive Member for Active Travel, Highways and Transport), Chris Easton (Assistant Director – Highways), and Robert Curtis (Transport Planning Team Manager) attended the meeting to answer member queries.

During the ensuing discussions, members raised the following points and queries:

·         It was noted that the consultants commissioned to support the consultation stated that this was a good level of response for an initial consultation, whilst detailed consultation would be undertaken for each scheme as and when they came forwards;

·         There was a concern that the complexity of the consultation and its associated documents had led to additional negative comments for schemes that were otherwise in demand by the community. How would this be improved in future consultations? Executive Member and officer response – A real effort was made to inform residents that these were high level ideas and further consultation on the specifics would be forthcoming. This would be a live document which would be updated on a regular basis;

·         Had allowances been made for people with mobility issues who would require vehicular transport? Executive Member response – There would always be people who needed to travel by private vehicle, and transferring other journeys to modes of travel such as walking and cycling would free up the road for those who needed to use it;

·         With regards to the proposal to remove the roundabouts on nightingale Road, when would the public know a final decision? Executive Member response – These were purely high-level ideas, and the consultation included a free text box which allowed respondents to identify particular issues and concerns. If, after assessment by officers, comments indicated a particular issue for example the removal of the roundabouts, this could be considered in greater detail. The final document would be produced and adopted in February 2023, which would enable bidding to Active Travel England to commence. Detailing of particular priority routes could then be commenced, followed by lesser priority schemes. Routes which were prioritised would have design work undertaken, and those designs would go out for consultation;

·         How might schemes which arose outside of the LCWIP be considered? Executive Member response – If a scheme arose which had not been included currently, this could be considered as part of the ongoing review of the live LCWIP document;

·         Were the proposals ambitious enough, and should more potential schemes have been included within the consultation? Executive Member response – An assessment tool would outline the schemes of most benefit to the community;

·         With regards to the scheme in Earley, it was noted that all of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 64.

To consider the proposed revenue and capital bids for Children’s and Adults Services.

The presentation pack and the Children’s Services bids are to be sent out as “to-follow”.

The Committee considered a report, set out in agenda pages 115 to 142 and supplementary agenda pages 3 to 52, which set out the proposed revenue and capital bids for the Adult’s Services and Children’s Services Directorates.

Imogen Shepherd-DuBey (Executive Member for Finance), David Hare (Executive Member for Health, Wellbeing and Adult Services), Prue Bray (Executive Member for Children’s Services), Graham Ebers (Deputy Chief Executive (Director of Resources and Assets), Matt Pope (Director of Adult’s Services, and Helen Watson (Interim Director of Children’s Services) attended the meeting to answer member queries.

The Executive Member for Finance stated that there was a predicted revenue shortfall of £4m for the next financial year, and a predicted shortfall of £14m in the capital budget.

The Executive Member for Health, Wellbeing and Adult Services stated that there was uncertainty as to whether the service could deliver on proposed bids at predicted spending levels taking into account inflationary pressures, however every effort was being made to help address Wokingham Borough Council’s (WBC’s) overall financial situation. Forty percent of WBC’s revenue budget was spent on adult social care, whilst a two percent increase in adult social care led to an approximate one percent increase in council tax. Growth within the service was continuing, however every effort was being made to keep this under three percent, which was half of the Local Government Association’s inflationary pressure guide. It was excellent that we could pay the living wage to staff as this would reduce loss of staff to other sectors and industries including supermarkets, however this too placed additional financial pressures on the service. Additional pressures had been realised since the pandemic, and people who were not eligible for support were being signposted to appropriate organisations. Some bids would require to be revisited as a result of the recently announced Autumn Budget.

The Executive Member for Children’s Services stated that there were two halves to the overall service, education and children’s social care. There was unprecedented demand for special educational needs (SEN) related services, whilst issues including the war in Ukraine and new arrivals from Hong Kong were placing pressures on school places, which had contributed to 500 in year admissions. Budgeting for Children’s Services had not already been realistic, with regular overspends for example in home to school transport (HTST). There had been an increasing number of applications for Education, Health and Care Plans (EHCPs), which had previously trended at low levels within the borough. There were not enough SEN places within the Borough, which contributed to increased costs in provision of HTST. There were a rising number of complex cases being presented in addition to rising levels of unaccompanied asylum seekers, which was set at 0.7% of the Borough’s child population, which for Wokingham was 28 children. Some school years had no available places within the Borough, and there were 327 more children than there were places for next year. Whilst some children would move out of the Borough or attend independent schools, this was usually  ...  view the full minutes text for item 65.

To consider the Committee’s Work Programme for the remainder of the municipal year.

The Committee considered their work programme, set out in agenda pages 143 to 146.

RESOLVED That:

1)      Callum Wernham be thanked for attending the meeting;

2)      Officers consider if the Violence Against Women and Girl’s strategy would be ready for the March 2023 meeting of the Committee;

3)      A Task and Finish Group be set up to consider the final draft of the LCWIP, with an extraordinary meeting of the Committee to be organised in February 2023 to confirm any recommendations of the Task and Finish Group ahead of submission to the Executive.