To approve as a correct record the minutes of Cabinet held on 22 February 2023.

The minutes of the Cabinet meeting held on 22 February 2023 were approved as a true and correct record.

To receive additional items that the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

There were no items of urgent business.

Councillor Abbas explained that, in relation to Item 10: Thameside Centre, he had previously sat on the Board of Governors for Waltham International College, who had submitted a bid for the Thameside Centre, but he had stepped down from this position in 2022. He explained that therefore he did not have an interest to declare, but wanted to ensure Cabinet were aware.

The Leader began his statement by stating that the Council were continuing their road to financial recovery, and much work was being undertaken on these challenges. He explained that the Council had employed new members of the senior management team, and were currently waiting on the publication of directives from the Improvement and Recovery Plan. The Leader stated that the Council had set a balanced budget, with assistance from central government, and had started to roll back the investment strategy. He explained that the process for selling the Toucan asset had begun, and the Council were working closely with administrators on this process. He stated that a new Commissioner Chief Executive would shortly begin work for the Council, and thanked Ian Wake for all his hard work as Acting Chief Executive.

Councillor Jefferies stated that the budget report had included a proposal to close the Household Waste and Recycling Centre for two days per week, which would lead to job losses. He explained that the team had reviewed this proposal and had found a solution to keep the Centre open seven days per week and maintain all jobs, whilst still making the necessary savings.

No petitions had been submitted by members of the public.

The Leader stated that one question from a Non-Executive Member had been received, and this would be heard during Item 14: Blackshots Estate – Demolition and Redevelopment.

Other than those items already contained within the agenda, no items had been referred to the Cabinet for their consideration by an overview and scrutiny committee.

The Leader introduced the report and stated that he would make an ongoing commitment to listen to all parties involved with the Thameside. He explained that £1.2m funding had been allocated from the capital programme for the relocation of the Central Library, and the team were working hard to achieve Accredited Status for the museum. He thanked the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their comments and proposed recommendation amendments, which had been circulated to Cabinet Members and members of the public, and stated that recommendation 3 contained an error which would be amended from “consultation on alternative options for the delivery” to “consultation on all options for the delivery”.

Councillor Arnold felt pleased to see consultation would be undertaken on the relocation of services and sought assurances that there would be enough money to relocate the museum. The Leader confirmed that money had been allocated for the relocation of the museum, and highlighted that concerns had been raised regarding the archiving work regularly undertaken by museum staff and volunteers. He explained that the team would be working to improve and protect the heritage of the borough currently stored in archives. Councillor Spillman echoed Councillor Arnold’s comments and felt pleased to see consultation would be undertaken, whilst discussions continued with TLS/TICC. Councillor Snell thanked the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee for their discussions and suggested amendments, many of which had been taken on board by Cabinet. He stated that any updates on the Thameside would be referred to the Committee before coming to Cabinet. Councillor Maney questioned if the £18-20m of future investment to bring the Thameside Complex back up to standard was accurate. The Leader explained that the £18-20m investment figure had been estimated over a 30-year period, but the Council would endeavour to be open and transparent by outlining how this figure was determined. He stated that he had conversed with the Director of Place regarding this figure, and he would work to ensure it formed part of the consultation. Councillor Arnold sought assurances that the Council would continue to consider all options available for the Thameside. The Leader stated that all options would be considered, including ongoing discussions with the TLS/TICC bidders.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Noted the bids from Thurrock Lifestyle Solutions/Thurrock International Celebration of Culture and Waltham International College and thanked them for their efforts to try and find a financially sustainable alternative for the future of the building.

2. Noted the significant concerns regarding both proposals and that neither is recommended, in its current form, as a financially sustainable alternative for the future of building. Cabinet agrees that negotiations and discussions will continue with TLS/TICC to try and facilitate a financially sustainable bid.

3. Authorised the Director of Place to undertake consultation on all options for the delivery of cultural activities and events in Grays and the wider borough. A report on this recommendation to be brought back to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet on completion of the consultation.

4. Authorised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 118.

Councillor Maney introduced the report and felt that it was a difficult decision to make, as the Council had been funding the 11, 265, and 374 bus services for approximately four years, which had served many communities. He explained that previously these services had been funded by one-off government grants, but would cost the Council approximately £785,000 moving forwards, and this could increase to almost £1mn after inflationary costs were considered. He felt that this was unsustainable for the Council in the current financial context, as providing buses was not a statutory service. He added that the services were currently under-used and therefore, the recommendation was to withdraw these buses. Councillor Maney described how a detailed consultation over twelve months had been undertaken, and a twelve-month extension to the services had been granted. He summarised and stated that the team had considered alternative options for the services, but none had been deliverable.

Councillor Arnold thanked Councillor Maney and officers for their hard work on the report, but felt that Fobbing had not been fully represented in the consultation as consultation documents had not been provided in the shops or Village Hall. She felt that Ward Members should have been more included in the consultation, but thanked officers for taking on-board comments from the submitted petition and working to offer an alternative bus service. She stated that she would continue working with officers and bus providers on the future of bus provision to ensure all communities were included. Councillor Johnson stated that he had spoken to residents in his ward who would be impacted by the withdrawal of the bus service, and he understood the upheaval this may cause some residents. He felt that it was a large spend for the Council so agreed with the recommendations, but he would continue to search for a solution to bus provision in Orsett.

Councillor Maney confirmed that lots of work on the consultation had been undertaken, and officers had tried to reach all audiences. He added that consultation documents had been available on the buses themselves and drivers had been instructed to hand these out to service users. He stated that the consultation process would continue to be reviewed to ensure all audiences are reached. Councillor Maney added that Fobbing would have a new bus arrangement as an option to loop other services had been available, but this option was not workable for other communities. He highlighted recommendation 4 which would ensure that Members and officers would continue to review the borough’s transport needs, and seek alternative options for bus services in more rural communities. Councillor Arnold questioned if future planning applications in these areas could contain provision for bus services, and if these could be funded through S106 monies. She felt that bus provision for rural communities linked into adult social care, and other Council directorates. The Leader explained that First Bus had recently taken over from Ensign in the borough, and he would be meeting with the new owner to discuss  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

Councillor Spillman introduced the report and stated that it proposed to demolish the three high-rise towers in Blackshots, decant residents and plan new developments. He felt that the Blackshots towers were not fit for residents to live in, and thanked Councillors Redsell and Maney for their hard work as Ward Members.

Councillor Redsell thanked Cabinet for their report, but felt concerned that the new development would use greenbelt land, that would not be replaced in the Blackshots area. She highlighted that many of the flats in the high-rises were blighted with damp and mould, and felt pleased to see the issue would be dealt with through demolition and development. Councillor Spillman thanked Councillor Worrall for her work on this issue as Shadow Portfolio Holder. He added that a small parcel of greenbelt land may be needed for the new development as it would have a wider footprint than the existing tower blocks, but the design team would be instructed to try and avoid this wherever possible. He explained that input would be needed from residents, Ward Members and the Housing Overview and Scrutiny Committee when the development reached the design stage. He added that it may be a difficult process, as a small number of the flats were leasehold, but this report marked the start of the process towards demolition. He summarised and stated that the commissioners had been included throughout, and although the full sum of money had not yet been agreed, the team would continue to work with commissioners on this project.

Councillor Abbas thanked the Portfolio Holder and officers for the report, and supported the recommendations. He stated that he had received emails from residents within the blocks who also supported the proposed demolition, decant and new development. Councillor Maney agreed with the recommendations and felt it was an ambitious project. He stated that there were ongoing issues with the greenbelt and memorial playing field, but officers were working through these issues. The Leader agreed that it was ambitious, but felt it would provide good value for money and would help residents in the high-rises.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

Approved:

1. The proposed site area for developing proposals for the future of the Blackshots estate.

2. Commencement of decanting residents from these properties and the treatment of these residents in line with the Council’s allocations policy.

3. Payment of home loss and disturbance payments as appropriate.

4. Commencement of negotiation with leaseholders for the repurchase of properties with approval to complete purchase delegated to the Corporate Director Adults, Housing and Health and Chief Financial Officer, in consultation with the Director of Place and the Portfolio Holders for Finance, Housing and Growth.

5. Subject to further Cabinet approval the use of Compulsory Purchase Powers under s26 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 should this become necessary.

6. In view of the decant and leasehold repurchase decisions, no dwellings within these three blocks shall be re-let.

7. Service of a demolition notice under Section 138B and Schedule 5A of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 120.

Councillor Snell introduced the report and stated it showed a slight financial improvement from the Quarter 2 2022/23 report, as finances had moved positively by approximately £28,000. He stated that there remained a deficit of approximately £469m which was set out at the table within the Executive Summary. He added that page 265 of the agenda highlighted the additional risks and uncertainties regarding the Council’s finances including additional pressures linked to the pay award and service provisions. He added that asset sales also posed an uncertainty to the Council as it could not be accurately determined when these assets would be sold. He summarised and stated that updates on major projects would be fed through the relevant overview and scrutiny committee.

The Leader expressed concern regarding the sale of assets but felt hopeful that these could begin at pace and would be delivered on time. Councillor Snell confirmed that the team were hoping to have assets sold by the end of the year, including the £750m sale of the Toucan asset. He explained that a report would be brought back on this sale when it occurred. The Leader thanked the commissioners for their continued hard work and support in financial decisions. Councillor Abbas felt the sale of the Toucan asset would be positive for the Council, and questioned if there was a plan for projected investment divestment. Councillor Snell confirmed there was a divestment plan, and this would help to reduce the Council’s debt once the assets had been released.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Noted the 2022/23 forecast gross funding gap of £469.553, noted the mitigation proposed locally and the wider need for exceptional financial support to mitigate the net funding gap.

2. Noted the position set out in respect of the capital programme in section 4 and that a further review of the programme will be undertaken in Q1 of 2023/24.

3. Noted the fragility of the financial situation and in particular the reliance upon asset sales to deliver the above position.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

The Leader introduced the report and stated that it had been presented to the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee last week who had agreed to begin a dialogue with government on Greater Essex Devolution. He stated that a similar report had already been agreed by Essex County Council and Southend-on-Sea City Council, and the report did not present a decision, but an Expression of Interest to continue conversations with government on devolution. He summarised and stated that devolution would not move forward unless it presented benefits to Thurrock residents.

Councillor Abbas felt that the report listed many benefits for Thurrock residents, but did not include potential issues such as an additional council tax precept or impact on services. He also questioned if the devolution proposal was linked to the intervention. The Leader commented that devolution could potentially bring £1bn into Greater Essex over many years, but could also lead to a council tax precept if a mayor was introduced. He explained that the report only outlined the Expression of Interest, but Thurrock needed to be part of the conversation to understand the advantages and disadvantages of devolution. He commented that the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee had also highlighted some concerns and risks, but had agreed to move forward with the Expression of Interest. The Leader confirmed that the conversation regarding devolution had begun before intervention, and was separate to the intervention and commissioner’s process. He confirmed commissioners would not be involved in any devolution decision for Thurrock. Councillor Snell highlighted the minutes from the Corporate Overview and Scrutiny Committee that had been circulated to Cabinet Members, and shared some of their concerns, but felt that the Council needed to be involved in the conversations and would therefore be supporting the recommendations. The Leader also shared some concerns regarding the competing interests of two airports and two Freeports in Greater Essex devolution, but felt there could also be advantages.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Considered the Expression of Interest and agreed to support a submission to Government to begin a dialogue for a Greater Essex Devolution deal and understand the benefits it might bring to residents or Thurrock.

2. Delegated authority to the Director of Strategy, Engagement and Growth, in consultation with the Leader, to make or agree amendments to the annexed Expression of Interest prior to its submission to government.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

Councillor Johnson introduced the report and stated that it proposed expanding a school, the need of which had been derived from the Pupil Place Plan. He stated that £3mn would be given from the Department of Education capital needs grant, and this would include monies for architect fees and disbursements.

Councillor Carter stated that the report had been presented to the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee yesterday, who had agreed that the school expansion would be good for the borough. He explained that the Committee had requested regular update reports go back through the Overview and Scrutiny Committee as the design and procurement process continued. Councillor Johnson expressed his support for regular update reports at overview and scrutiny. Councillor Arnold questioned if the Department for Education grant would be ringfenced and protected. Councillor Johnson confirmed that the grant would be ringfenced, and there would be no scope for overspend.

Cabinet Members agreed a new recommendation 5, which would ensure update reports would be presented to the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Approved a £3.0m budget for the expansion of Tilbury Pioneer Academy to be funded from the School’s Basic Need capital funding 2022/23.

2. Approved the commencement of the procurement process in accordance with Council and UK procurement procedures to appoint 1. A Design and multi discipline project team, for the Tilbury Pioneer aspect of the School Capital Programme and 2. Following planning approval and the production of a full technical specification, undertake a further procurement exercise to appoint a Principal Contractor to take forward the proposed Tilbury Pioneer scheme.

3. Delegated authority to the Director of Children’s Services, in consultation with the relevant Portfolio Holder, to enter into any form of agreement following the award of the agreements arising from 1.2 above in compliance with the Council’s procurement regulations.

4. Noted the recent in-year accommodation works that have been commenced in order to ensure sufficient pupil places for 2022/23 in-year applications.

5. A report on these recommendations be brought back to the Children’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and Cabinet, on completion of contract negotiations.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

Councillor Johnson introduced the report and stated that as part of ongoing service transformation, the team were considering all options and therefore the children’s transport service required an extension. He described the complexity of the service as it was demand-led and ran a complex schedule. He stated that the Council needed to ensure the best outcome for the service and residents, which was why an extension to the current framework was being proposed.

Councillor Carter thanked Councillor Johnson for attending the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee last night, and felt that a good conversation had been held regarding statutory services and children’s transport. He stated that the Children’s Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee had agreed all recommendations. The Leader stated that this report allowed officers the opportunity to get the service right, and provided a check and challenge process. He thanked Councillor Carter for his attendance at Cabinet. 

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Agreed that the Director of Children’s Services, in consultation with the Education Portfolio Holder, is authorised to extend any transport contracts procured under the current framework, which expire in July 2023 for a one-year period.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

Councillor Maney introduced the report and stated that it proposed £979,000 for the ITB and £1,383,000 for highways maintenance allocation. He stated that the ITB programme helped to deliver the Council’s transport priorities, in line with the Transport Strategy, and the highways maintenance allocation was the system for ensuring roads and pavements were safe. He described how the ITB was more flexible, and this year a decision was proposed to reduce spend on Safer Routes to School and instead fund broader road strategies and road safety approaches. He stated that Safer Routes to Schools remained a Council priority. He added that a proposal for £150,000 on new electric vehicle charging was also included in the report to improve air quality in the borough. He summarised and stated that Appendix A outlined more detailed spend proposals and Appendix B outlined the highways maintenance spend details.

Councillor Abbas felt that road safety around schools was important, and questioned how the team would work to tackle issues around schools near West Thurrock Way and car cruising. Councillor Maney explained that the report proposed funding for a feasibility study on West Thurrock Way, and thanked Councillor Abbas for his support on this campaign. He stated that the feasibility study would inform future options on how to tackle road safety on West Thurrock Way, including tackling car cruising and road safety on London Road. The Leader felt that the lack of electric vehicle charging points remained an issue in Thurrock, and more electric vehicle charging stations needed to be introduced to encourage people to purchase electric vehicles. He urged the Mayor of London to rethink his plans regarding expanding ULEZ, as the facilities were not in place in Greater London and surrounding areas to support these plans. Councillor Maney echoed the Leader’s comments and felt that expanding ULEZ would decrease air quality in Thurrock, and further investment in electric vehicles needed to be undertaken first.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Approved the 2023/24 ITB capital programme allocations, policy and prioritisation direction for the DfT ITB Block funding under the key Policy areas of Road Safety Engineering, Safer Routes to School, Area Intervention Programme, and EV Charging Programme (as detailed in Appendix A).

2. Approved the 2023/24 Highways Maintenance Block Allocation Programme (as detailed in Appendix B).

3. Delegated authority to the Interim Director of Place and Director of Public Realm, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Transport and Public Safety, to make any required changes to the ITB programme and the Maintenance programme for 2023/24, within the overall programme budget, as well as other government funding allocations that may arise within the year to ensure delivery of the programme and to ensure spend of the grant allocations.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

Councillor Arnold introduced the report and stated that it recommended a waiver for competitive tendering. She explained that this was not unusual as Thurrock only had approximately twenty small providers. She stated that the Council had a good relationship with these providers and negotiations would continue, whilst also providing a good service to residents. Councillor Johnson questioned if the Council would need to spend additional monies if the recommendations were not approved.  Councillor Arnold explained that the team would be undertaking a benchmarking exercise against other local authorities and providers. She stated that providers gave good support to residents and provided a quality service, as the majority of providers had been rated as good or excellent. Councillor Abbas queried how confident the team were that the Council were getting the best price and service. Councillor Arnold explained that the benchmarking exercise would show comparable prices. She confirmed that, in terms of service, the small providers had good relationships with services users, and this had been proven during the COVID-19 pandemic when some providers had moved into care homes full time as a support bubble.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Approved a waiver from the constitutional requirement for competitive tendering for the provision of care home services for older people, working age adults, and supported accommodation, and approved a single sourcing arrangement for new contracts for care home and supported accommodation placements commissioned by the Council.

2. Delegated to the S151 officer and Commissioners, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder and Corporate Director Adults, Housing and Health, the authority to award contracts for care home and supported accommodation services to meet the assessed needs and preferences of older people and working age adults.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

Councillor Arnold introduced the report and stated that it proposed a contract extension for two-years, as these were the largest adults social care contracts and COVID had set back data collection for base-line commissioning. She added that these contracts formed part of the Better Care Together Strategy, and therefore needed to be right, and needed to adopt a programme of transformation.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Agreed the proposed two-year extension to the Domiciliary Care Service until 31 March 2025.

2. Agreed the proposed 18-month extension to the Out of Hours Service until 31 March 2025.

3. Agreed the 6-month extension to the Bridging Service until 31 March 2024.

4. Agreed a 20-month extension to the Unpaid Carers Information Advice and Support service until 31 March 2025.

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in

Councillor Arnold introduced the report and stated that it was exempt due to figures relating to the percentage share of contracts which could not be disclosed. She explained that it was a government requirement to submit a Market Sustainability Plan, which outlined future issues and areas of destabilisation for service provision, such as older staff retiring and fewer young people joining adults social care for their careers. She stated that the report also listed potential solutions to these problems such as upskilling and training young staff members. She stated that the report had been presented at the Health and Wellbeing Overview and Scrutiny Committee, and Councillor Pothecary had commented on the information missing at page 466, but the Committee had been happy to agree the recommendations. The Strategic Lead Adults Social Care explained that the figures related to annual uplift, which had not been included in the overview and scrutiny or Cabinet reports, as these could not be communicated until agreed by the S151 officer.

Councillor Johnson questioned if the Market Sustainability Plan would be published on the website, or would remain an exempt document. The Strategic Lead Adults Social Care explained that the document would be submitted to government, but the detail of the uplift would not be published until it had been shared with providers.

RESOLVED: That Cabinet:

1. Agreed the attached Market Sustainability Plan and subsequent submission to the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC).

Reason for decision: as outlined in the report
This decision is subject to call-in