Agenda item - Public Involvement

To consider the following matters raised by members of the public:

(a)      Petitions: to receive any petitions presented by members of the public to the full Council or as notified for presentation at the meeting by the due of 4 January 2017;

Memorial for the Battle of Boards Head – Petition referred from Council on 15 December 2016 (copy attached)

(b)      Written Questions: to receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 11 January 2017;

Youth Collective – Elijah Peart

Voluntary Youth Services – Max Coles-Morley

Youth Services – Seb Royle

Youth Services Provision – Boudicca Pepper

(copy attached).

(c)      Deputations: to receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 11 January 2017.

a)       Petitions

101.1    The Chair noted there was one petition referred from Council on 15 December 2016 in relation to Memorial for the Battle of Boar’s Head. The Chair read the following response:

“Following the petition presented by Ms A. Scales presented at full Council on 15 December 2016, which received unanimous backing from all parties, I am proposing that we take the action requested in the petition. Having spoken to the petitioner I have established that she has an agreed design and an estimate of £2500 for the supply and manufacture of the memorial by a local artist.

I believe it is right that the city recognises the sacrifice of those men from Brighton & Hove who gave their lives in this action a hundred years ago, the day before the Battle of the Somme. Therefore I propose we give Officers delegated authority to proceed with this project, with a contribution of up to £2000, with a contribution from fundraising organised by the petitioner of at least £500.

101.2    RESOLVED – That the Committee authorise Officers to proceed with the project, and a contribution of up to £2000 be made, on the basis that the petitioner fundraise at least £500.

b)      Public Questions

101.3    The Chair noted there were four public questions; he asked Elijah Peart to put her question to the Committee.

101.4    Elijah Peart asked: “The proposed cuts to the youth collective target specialised services which exist for young people who may have more complicated or demanding needs than others. The help and understanding provided by these specialist youth workers is often vital in preparing these young people for adult life, with many young people quoting the Youth Collective as invaluable in their efforts to find work. How will you reconcile the fact that many young people cannot find work without the help of these professionals with Labour’s manifesto pledge to eradicate youth unemployment in the city?”

101.5    The Chair replied: ““The services provided by the Youth Collective and by the more targeted in-house youth service have been much valued and given the options of not having to reduce our spending by £23 million in the coming year we would not have proposed the funding reductions to these services. This is a consequence of large cuts to our central government grants. There are a large number of services that we have to provide according to rules set out by government. There are also huge demands on our budget for example children and adult social care and temporary housing that we have to meet. Much of the youth service is not statutory and we find ourselves in the unfortunate position of not being able to afford to run such a wide ranging service anymore. There will however continue to be a number of services still available for young people who have additional needs. You ask in particular about our pledge to eradicate youth unemployment. You may not be aware that the staff who provide employment service at youth centres are part of the Youth Employability Service and there are no proposed reductions to this service which has been very successful in tackling youth unemployment. The latest data for November 2016 showed that in Brighton & Hove that just 3.6% of young people were not in education or employment compared to a South East average of 8% and a West Sussex average of 11%. In addition the most recent data for apprenticeships shows that we have had an increase in 20% in apprenticeships and there is lots of work taking place at the moment to support the city pledge of 1000 apprenticeships in 1000 days. Finally I am very pleased that the East Sussex Learning Network  has just secured funding from the HEFCE to support young people from the most disadvantaged areas city get into higher education and training and they’ll be looking to us and to voluntary sector to co create programmes and opportunities.”

101.6    By way of a supplementary question Elijah Peart asked: “You mentioned that there are other services that will be able to pick up the slack left by the reduction to services. Youth Employability Services sees about 300 young people currently and the services being cut see up to 3000 people. If even 10% of that user base ends up going to the Youth Employability Service that is already double the number of young people who are using those services. That’s unsustainable and with future cuts more than likely to come from central government how is the increased demand going to be mitigated?”

101.7    The Chair replied: “As I say we are not proposing any cuts to the Youth Employability Service but obviously we are facing cuts to our youth service as a whole which are not ones we would have chosen. The blame does lie with central government we would be investing in those youth services not cutting them if the Government were not taking tens of millions of pounds out of our funding each year. As I have said before the budget is always changing and we will always continue to work on how we can continue to fund and support youth services in the short and medium term with the aim of them becoming self-sustaining. The consultation launched this week will help us do that and I hope that you and the other young people present and elsewhere will contribute to that. We don’t fund services as a council that don’t have value, that don’t deliver some long term benefit or offset future costs as you say. I’d say that the Government do need to listen not just to politicians like me but to young people like you who are going to be effected by the cuts they are passing down to us. So today I’m inviting you and the other young people here today to come with me and Peter Kyle MP to 10 Downing Street in early February to deliver that message direct to government.”

101.8    The Chair asked Max Cole-Morley to put his question to the Committee.

101.9    Max Cole-Morley asked: “Research has suggested that the voluntary youth services which will lose 80% of their funding actually save the council £5.56 for every £1 spent by the council. If there isn't enough money available for preventative youth work, where will the money be coming from for the necessary crisis management after services are cut?”

101.10  The Chair replied: “As I said to the previous question we very much value the work that the voluntary sector has provided for young people and as a previous long-term trustee of the Crew Club, I’m really aware of the value that those services bring. Although we’re proposing a service cut here we’re anticipating that a substantial amount of the work will continue as the sector receives money from a variety of different sources. There will continue to be preventative work done to support young people who are facing difficulties by schools and colleges and the community and voluntary sector many of whom do this already without financial support from the council and via council services such as the Youth Employability Service, ‘Are You OK’ our substance misuse service, our adolescent service and our youth offending service.”

101.11  By way of a supplementary question Max Cole-Morley asked: “What seems clear is that when it is viewed as necessary the council can find money from somewhere this is illustrated by the fact that Brighton & Hove City Council executive team earn almost £1.5 million/ year. This means that a reduction of approximately 30% in yearly executive wages would create enough money to fund the youth service at risk of an 80% cut. How can it be that our council’s think it’s acceptable to have a Chief Executive who earns more than the Prime Minister while slashing the budgets of services which ensure the wellbeing of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged members of our community?”

101.12  The Chair replied. “Obviously we have a very large budget to manage and our salaries are set very much in-line with other salaries around the country with similar authorities we are not out of step in-fact we’re slightly below. There are always suggestions that we get and if you look at our budget pages there is reasoning behind why we can’t make some savings that people always approach me about. Youth services are not statutory services a lot of authorities have long since stepped out of providing and funding youth services. As I’ve said before we’re committed to continuing to help and provide what transitional funding we can and I know my colleague Councillor Dan Chapman will be talking about that next week. It is very difficult and as I said in response to the previous question we wouldn’t be choosing to make these cuts is we weren’t facing £23 million in savings because cuts from this Government and the huge pressure in social care which we’ve got. It’s a very difficult situation with very difficult choices that we have to make. I would hope that as I said in response to the previous question that you will join us in coming to London to make the case to Government.”

101.13  The Chair asked Seb Royle to put his question to the Committee.

101.14  Seb Royle asked: “Services for young people have already been massively depleted over the past 6 years, with the proposed 80% cut in funding sounding the death knell for voluntary youth work in our city. With £45 million of cuts still to come in the next three years, will there be anything left for young people in 2020?”

101.15  The Chair replied: “As I said in response to the previous question we certainly hope so and other authorities have made sure that youth services do continue even where they’ve reduced or removed their funding altogether. It’s a process which I think we should have started a number of years ago in transitioning more of youth services out to the community and voluntary sector and it’s a great shame that we are at this point where we have to propose these reductions. We are committed to ensuring young people who are facing difficulties are able to receive support to help them. The services that I’ve referred to in my pervious responses will continue to operate across the city and as I say we will continue to work with you and youth organisations across the city to keep as much as we can going.”

101.16  By way of a supplementary question Seb Royle asked: “Statutory services will continue to exist however the cuts proposed to non-statutory services will lead to a vast rise in demand for already underfunded and overwhelmed such as CAMHS and Are You OK as the 100s if not 1000s of young people who rely on youth services search for it elsewhere. There is every possibility that this lack of support will lead to increase suicide attempts by young people as well as rising drug abuse and gang violence. As a politician I think that it’s important that you should seek the support of young people, how can any young people support a party –any party- which has played a part in taking the safety net away from their futures?”

101.17  The Chair replied. “The points you made about suicide prevention and drug misuse, those services are statutory and those service are ones which we are continuing to fund. I absolutely agree with you that these services are of value and we wouldn’t be cutting them if we had the choice and if you’re looking to lay the blame anyway the blame lies in Westminster with the current government and again I’m hoping that you will join me us to taking the protest to the Conservative Government in a couple of weeks’ time and making sure they understand just the impact that their cuts are having.”

101.18  The Chair asked Boudicca Pepper to put her question to the Committee.

101.19  Boudicca asked: “The council seems to expect existing statutory services, such as CAMHS, as well as schools and colleges, to pick up the slack once the youth services are cut. How does the council expect these services to cope with the inevitable rise in demand caused by cuts to youth services without increased funding?”

101.20  The Chair replied: “We are in discussion with our partners about how we can redesign our services in the context of reduced funding in order to continue to provide support for our children and young people and as I say that is an active and ongoing process as we go up to the budget. You mention CAMHS, we’ve been working very closely with health commissioners to make sure we can provide support for young people with emotional and mental health needs. We want to move away from a clinic based service which many people decide to no longer access to early support in schools and in communities. To achieve this last year we started to work in three of our secondary schools with mental health workers being based in schools. This has been successful and has led to a reduction CAMHS referrals so we are at the moment rolling this out across all of our secondary schools. This will not cost more money but it will reach more young people.”

101.21  By way of a supplementary question Boudicca Pepper asked: “What about the young people who have had a referral and who’ve taken the help from the schools and are still on a waiting list. What do you suggest they do in the meantime if there isn’t a parent or a youth worker or somewhere they can go?”  

101.22  The Chair replied. “I’m happy to set up a meeting between yourself and Councillor Caroline Penn who you may know is our lead member for mental health services and who is also now stepping up to become deputy chair of the Children and Young People’s Committee. Councillor Penn can go into this in more detail, explaining exactly what the service is and what we are doing to improve the service.”

101.23  The Chair noted there were no more items listed under Public involvement.