Agenda and minutes

To approve and sign as a correct record the minutes of the meetings held on 31 January 2013 and 28 February 2013 and to deal with any matters arising, attached.

RESOLVED  that :-

1. the minutes of the meeting held on 31 January 2013 be approved, subject to the following amendments:-

  Staffing.   Penultimate sentence to read “The use of agency staff was

   also discussed including the costs”.

  Future Inspections – the following wording to be added “….had not

  been made aware of the inspection   and had learned of it directly from the CQC via officers ”.

Matters Arising

·  Minute 36 – Resolution  - reassurance that action was being taken at Southampton General Hospital, in relation to future CQC inspections.

  ii  the minutes of the meeting held on 28^th February 2013 be approved, subject to

  the following amendments:-

·  Page 28 – Anita Beer – University Hospital Southampton

the following comments to be added :-

Ø  “The Panel expressed concern about the University Hospital’s lack of accountability relating to transport”;  and

Ø  “The Panel expressed concern that the University Hospital was not able to provide a clear commitment to exactly what support the hospital could provide”.

·  Page 29 – Ian Taylor and Paul Coyne - Bluestar and Uni-link – 2^nd bullet point

the following comment to be added:-

Ø  “The Panel expressed concern that Southampton Councillors had not been involved in these groups”.

  Page 29 – Dervla McKay – First South Coast – 5^th bullet point

   the following comment to be added:-

Ø  “The Panel expressed concern  that the public would not be consulted prior to making changes to the bus service”.

·  Page 30 – Resolutions – duplicate iii to be removed.

Matters Arising

·  Page 30 – Resolutions – i - Further information to be obtained from James Smith, Unison, Anita Beer, University Hospital and Dervla Mckay, First South Coast.

NOTE:  Information relating to Park and Ride was included within Appendix 3 to the minutes from Anne Meader and therefore it was not necessary to amend the minutes.

Report of the Director of Public Heath for the Panel to note the progress being made towards the relevant public health functions being transferred to the local authority, attached.

The Panel received and noted the report of the Director of Public Health detailing information on progress being made towards  public health functions being transferred to the local authority.  (Copy of the report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes). 

Andrew Mortimore, Director of Public Health and Councillor Rayment, Cabinet Member for Communities, were present and provided an overview and answered questions from the Panel.

The following was noted:-

• Political leadership for public health in Southampton would be with the Cabinet Member for Communities reflecting the cross-Council nature of public health.
• The Department of Health published the 2013/14 and 2014/15 budget allocations to fulfill the public health function on 10^th January 2013 and the budget allocation for Southampton was £14.313m for 2013/14 and £15.050m for 2014/15.
• The role of the Health and Wellbeing Board, which was non-political, was critical as it was an opportunity to bring health partners together to discuss areas of conflict and new ideas and to work together to the deliver targets and outcomes of  the Health and  Wellbeing Strategy. 
• The Local Authority would be responsible for commissioning all the services listed and all targets had been costed and were achievable.

Report of the Joint Director of Strategic Commissioning for the Panel to note the progress towards securing local Healthwatch for Southampton, attached.

The Panel received and noted the report of the Joint Associate Director of Strategic Commissioning for the Panel to note the progress towards securing local Healthwatch for Southampton.  (Copy of the report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes).

Councillor Stevens, Cabinet Member for Adult Services, and Harry Dymond, LINk were present and addressed the Panel.

The following was noted:-

• All upper-tier local authorities were required to secure a local Healthwatch in their area by 1^st April 2013.
• Southampton would not be able to achieve this deadline as there had been a number of delays due to the  Department of Health publishing the final regulations and in the Council determining the final budget for local Healthwatch, following delays in the final grant settlement being announced by Central Government.
• The tender process had commenced and  the tender period had been extended.
• Discussions had been held with Southampton Voluntary Services who currently acted as host to the LINk and it had been agreed that Southampton Link would be been asked to continue to their existing role  until Healthwatch was in place. The NHS complaints advocacy service would be provided in the interim period by the organisation currently supplying the independent Complaints Advocacy Service (SEAP).
• All bidders, whether local or outside would be measured against the same criteria.

Report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships, providing the Panel with the background to The National Health Service (Procurement, Patient Choice And Competition) (No.2) Regulations 2013 and the opportunity to comment on the regulations, attached.

The Panel received and noted the report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships providing  background to the National Health Service (Procurement, Patient Choice and Competition) (No 2) Regulations 2013.

(Copy of the report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes).

Mrs Freeland, Mrs Harding and Mr Hoadley from  Southampton Defend the NHS, addressed the meeting and raised the following concerns and issues:-

• The role of their lobby group  was to put pressure on the Department of Health to rewrite the regulations and to  raise public awareness of the fact that the revised regulations could lead to the fragmentation of the NHS.
• The revised regulations were not significantly different from the original regulations. There was concern they  would promote privatisation and  cause fragmentation within the NHS as the public sector  would not be able to compete against  private companies who would “cherry pick” the more cost effective areas of care.
• The role of monitor was of concern as there was very little to support the CCGs if Monitor was to force the tender of services. Southampton Defend the NHS would be writing to the three Hampshire MP’s expressing their concern with the revised regulations.
• There was concern over the urgency for these revised regulations to come into effect on 1 April 2013 and the lack of debate that had taken place

It was noted that the regulations were being made using  the negative procedure and that there were 40 days within which MPs or Members of the House of Lords could request a debate.

RESOLVED that Southampton Defend the NHS would provide officers with legal advice and documentation in respect of the guidance, which could then be passed onto the Council’s legal department for review. If, following Council legal advice, the concerns raised were considered to be justified the Chair would write to the government to highlight the issues.

Report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships for the Panel to note an update on the Southampton Safeguarding Adults Board, attached.

The Panel received and noted the report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships providing the Panel with an update on the Southampton Adults Safeguarding Board.  (Copy of the report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes).

Carol Tozer, Independent Chair,  Southampton Safeguarding Adults Board (SSAB) and Carol Valentine, Head of Personalisation and Safeguarding were present and detailed the background to the SSAB by way of a presentation.

The SSAB annual report was presented to the Panel for discussion and the following was noted:-

• The SSAB was about to be placed on a statutory footing.
• Safeguarding adults was not a mirror image of safeguarding children as only adults at risk were subject to adult safeguarding arrangements. Children’s safeguarding covered all children aged under 18.
• The SSAB annual business plan would be presented to the HOSP on a bi-annual basis.
• Serious Case Reviews (SCR)  had very clear national criteria and where appropriate panel members could engage with the process, but as MARAC’s dealt with very confidential data it would not be appropriate for them to sit on these panels .

Report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships, seeking the Panel’s agreement of the draft recommendations from the review of public and sustainable transport provision to Southampton General Hospital, attached.

The Panel considered the report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships seeking approval of the draft recommendations in relation to the review of Public and Sustainable Transport Provision to Southampton General Hospital.  (Copy of the report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes).

RESOLVED:-

1. that the recommendations tabled as Appendix 1 would be updated  as per the Panel’s comments and circulated electronically to all members;

2. that authority be delegated to the Head of Communities, Change and Partnership, following consultation with the Chair, to amend the final report, incorporating the comments of the Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel Members;

3. that the Chair presented the final report to the Overview and Scrutiny Management committee on 16^th May.

Report of the Head of  Communities, Change and Partnerships for the Panel to agree the content for the HOSP contribution to the Scrutiny Annual Report and to note the proposed changes to Health Scrutiny for 2013/14, attached.

The Panel considered the report of the Head of Communities, Change and Partnerships updating members on health scrutiny proposals for 2013/14 and seeking agreement on the HOSP contribution to the annual report.  (Copy of report circulated with the agenda and appended to the signed minutes).

The following was noted:-

• That as a result of The Local Authority  (Public Health and Wellbeing Boards and Health Scrutiny Regulations ) 2013,  in order for health scrutiny to continue to be carried out by the existing Health Overview and Scrutiny Panel (HOSP), the Council were required to delegate responsibility to OSMC and subsequently the Panel and a recommendation requesting this was approved at Council on 20^th March 2013;  and

• Further guidance was expected prior to the end of March on whether the power to refer to the Secretary of State could also be delegated to HOSP.

 RESOLVED:-

1. that the content of the HOSP contribution to the Scrutiny Annual Report due to be presented to OSMC on 11^th April and Full Council on 15^th May be agreed;  and

2. that the proposed changes to the Local Authority (Public Health, Health and Wellbeing Boards and Health Scrutiny) Regulations 2013 Scrutiny for 2013/14 be noted.