Cardiff Partnership Leadership Group

Minutes of the meeting held at 2.00pm on Tuesday, 18th September 2012

Leader’s Conference Room, County Hall

Members of the Group:
Cllr Heather Joyce (HJ) / Leader of the Council
Cllr Lynda Thorne (LT) / Cabinet Member for Communities, Housing and Social Justice
Cllr Richard Cook (RC) / Cabinet Member for Social Care, Health and Well Being – Children’s Services
Jon House (JH) / Chief Executive, Cardiff Council
Judith Marsh (JM) / Community Council interim representative (observer)
Mutale Merrill (MM) / Vice Chair of Cardiff University Health Board (representing Maria Battle)
Cllr Gretta Marshall (GM) / Police Authority Representative
Sarah McGill (SM) / Corporate Chief Officer - Communities, Cardiff Council
David Price (DP) / Director of Strategy Development, Cardiff Metropolitan University
Adrian Clark (AC) / Chair, Cardiff and Co
John Harrison (JHa) / Environment Manager, Environment Agency Wales
In attendance:
Rachel Jones (RJ) / Operational Manager - Partnerships and Citizen Focus, Cardiff Council
Catryn Holzinger (CH) / Policy and Development Officer (Public Services and Third Sector), Cardiff Council
Jane Thomas (JT) / Operational Manager - Benefits, Finance & Tenants Services, Cardiff Council
Apologies:
Cllr Luke Holland / Cabinet Member for Social Care, Health and Well Being - Adult Services
Maria Battle / Chair of Cardiff and Vale UHB
Richard Edwards / Chair of Cardiff Third Sector Council
Professor Hywel Thomas / Pro Vice Chancellor (Engagement and International), Cardiff University
Sue Mabberley / Regional Manager, Countryside Council for Wales
Simon Harris / Wales Director, Business in the Community
Part 1: Cardiff Partnership Leadership Group
1). Welcome and Introductions / ACTION
HJ welcomed everyone to the meeting, noting that this was the first occasion the group had been convened with the new membership. Apologies were received from Cllr Luke Holland, Maria Battle, Richard Edwards, Professor Hywel Thomas, Sue Mabberley and Simon Harris. Before inviting members to introduce themselves, HJ reminded the group of the importance of partnership working, highlighting the benefits and the important role this group can play in leading the agenda. Members of the group then introduced themselves.
2). Progress so far
SM then commenced her presentation, covering the statutory requirements of partnership working, other important drivers and some of the key challenges. She reminded the group of the complex arrangements that were in place prior to the partnership review and rationalisation undertaken in Cardiff. There had been separate strategies and arrangements, resulting in duplication and less effective working. The review revealed that there were over 500 objectives across the partnership, people were attending a high number of meetings and there was a lack of accountability and performance management. The new arrangements helped to move towards a more person-centred, rather than strategy-driven way of working and released around £1m of efficiency savings. GM asked if these were all council savings. SM said the majority were, but savings were also made from some grant funding and to other organisations.
SM then highlighted the progress that had been made, specifically the production of a single needs assessment for Cardiff, meaning there was ‘one version of the truth’ and a more comprehensive understanding of need in the city. Other developments include the use of Results Based Accountability (RBA). SM explained that there had initially been some nervousness from WG and the Home Office around the approach being progressed, but Cardiff is now recognised as the leader in developing integrated partnership working and WG’s new statutory guidance has now been issued meaning all areas must follow the approach.
JM then asked how the Community Councils can get involved. SM said they could provide valuable information which should feed into the city-wide programmes as well as the neighbourhood management teams. She also added that there is still work to do to develop the neighbourhood teams.
JHa added that he recognised and valued the efforts that had been made to successfully move partnership working in Cardiff forward. Whilst cost savings would be realised, the additional benefits include better outcomes, more open dialogue and a more empowering environment for professionals to work in.
3). Challenges and solutions
HJ then asked JH to commence his presentation. He began by telling the group about a specific case in Sheffield where the police had worked closely with health and the council to address the long term causes of gang culture. He explained that long term solutions to crime actually lay with the health and education who can prevent the escalation of issues. He emphasised that the ‘power of partnership is incredible’ and urged the group to consider what they would like to see him focus on as chair of CPB. He then commenced his presentation looking at some of the key challenges and how partnership working can meet them.
He explained that demand for services is going up and we need to manage this demand collectively over the long term. In addition to population changes, complex problems, increasing expectations and diminishing budgets are resulting in substantial pressure on services requiring new and collaborative solutions. Other key issues include the city-region and environmental sustainability. JH was also clear that reconfiguration is not a sufficient answer- there are things we won’t be able to do and this group will play an important role in prioritising the key areas of work. The group will be able to take a longer term, strategic view and develop focused and innovative approaches.
JH then gave details of some of the key trends including the high numbers of young people not in education, employment or training, adult unemployment and the high number of families living in income poverty. He then gave an overview of some of the ways partnership working can address these challenges, such as preventative measures and early interventions, collaborative asset management and business intelligence. Asset management was recognised as a very clear example of where coordinated activity can release huge savings, as well as developing new and improved service delivery through the co-location of staff and services.
MM said that she was fully supportive of the approach but in order to make sustained progress there needed to be commitment from the top and a clear evidence base. JH said the commitment is clear, the challenge is translating it into something different and genuinely effective.
RC then explained to the group that he had been speaking to social workers, who had continually cited alcohol and drugs as key reasons for children being taken into care. AC asked if figures and impacts suggested that this is a critical issue which requires the group’s attention. Other members agreed that this is a key issue that touches a wide range of areas, including crime, antisocial behaviour, educational attainment and absenteeism from work. It was suggested that this could be one of the group’s priorities.
He also suggested the partnership should explore how to maximise the research capacity and expertise of the universities to develop intelligence.
GM asked if all of the relevant partners were in attendance. RJ suggested that whilst this was the core membership, once the key issues had been identified additional partners could be brought in as required.
DP suggested that the group should have a common position on what ‘city-region’ means. He felt it was important that the group had an economic agenda as the city won’t be able to make progress on the social issues without it. He also felt that the universities and further education institutions could make a positive contribution to economic and social progress. / Action: Link with university research to build partnership intelligence
Part 2: Key Challenges: Welfare Reform
4). Welfare Reform: The key issues and what we can do as a partnership / ACTION
HJ welcomed JT to the meeting and invited her to commence her presentation.
JT presented the group with some of the key reforms and their likely impacts, which will include the following changes;
§  Reduction in Benefit Levels for private tenants
§  Introduction of the Benefit Cap
§  Social Housing Size Restrictions
§  Introduction of Universal Credit
§  Changes to Council Tax Support
§  Social Fund reform
§  Changes to disability and other welfare benefits
The presentation drew on the specifics of the changes, how they are likely to impact on citizens in Cardiff and the economic and social consequences of the changes. She highlighted a number of specific concerns, such as the changes to Council Tax Support which are still not finalised. The draft regulations have still not been published and thee is concern over the timescales for issuing and consulting on them. Another key issue is Incapacity Benefit, which is being replaced by Employment Support Allowance and claims reassessed and reduced. Approximately 75% of claimants are being assessed as able to work. Similarly, Disability Living Allowance (DLA) will be replaced by Personal Independence Payments (PIP) from April 2013 for people of working age and every claimant will be reassessed. There are around 13,000 cases in Cardiff and it is estimated there will be a reduction in claims of 20%. These changes will impact on some of the most vulnerable people in society. Even the government’s own impact assessments of the changes suggest there will be an impact on levels of poverty. LT added that this will also affect people’s health and mental health and gave an example of the issues people are bringing to her and the effect it is having on them.
SM informed the group that a multi-agency officer group has been convened to develop responses to Welfare Reform, which she chairs. The group met for the first time on 10th September and it was a good first meeting with high attendance. The group will be developing an action plan and developing ways of sharing information on changes in demand for services. RJ added that the demand for services paper (attached) would be kept as a live document as information was developed and the revised paper would be brought to future leadership group meetings. GM added that it will be important to demonstrate the effectiveness of the interventions that are developed to ensure we are supporting citizens effectively. / Action: Take revised demand for services report to future CPLG.
5). Recap and next meeting
JH then summed up the conversations and identified 5 areas for future work, based on discussions. These were;
1.  Welfare Reform – Action Plan to be taken to future meeting
2.  Alcohol and drugs
3.  NEETs/ unemployment
4.  Asset management
5.  City-region - position paper to be drafted
The group agreed that these were areas reflected the conversations and warrant a focus in future meetings.
LT then suggested that the next meeting be held at the new Community Hub in Loudoun Square, to remind people of how much partnership working can achieve. / Action: Shape future meetings around the 5 areas identified.
Action: Welfare Reform Action Plan to be taken to the next meeting.
Action: Produce a position paper on city-region issues for future CPLG.
Action: Hold next meeting at the Community Hub in Loudoun Square.
6). Next meeting
Next meeting to be held in December. Date TBC. / Action: Meetings to be arranged quarterly for the next 12 months.

2