There were no declarations of interest intimated prior to the commencement of the meeting.


Prior to the start of the meeting the Convener welcomed A McGregor, Senior Audit Manager, Audit Scotland to the meeting.

The Senior Audit Manager Audit Scotland gave a presentation which indicated that the external auditors for Renfrewshire Council for financial years 2016/17 to 2020/21 were likely to change from Audit Scotland to a private firm.

Audit Scotland teams and private firms followed the same standards and guides namely Audit Scotland’s Code of Audit Practice, International Standards on Auditing and ethical standards.  It was intimated that there would be no change until at least autumn 2016 when the outgoing audit team would meet with the incoming audit team to share information.  It was noted that the appointment of all auditors to public sector bodies was made by the Accounts Commission or the Auditor General for Scotland.  The audit of 2015/16 was the last year of the current audit appointment.  Audit Scotland’s audit strategy team was now arranging auditors for the next five years.  A mixed market of private firms and Audit Scotland staff would still be used in order to ensure continued comparisons on methodologies and cost and to spread the workload during the final audit periods.  The Council was currently due to be audited by a private firm as it had been audited by Audit Scotland for the previous three audit appointments.

The presentation outlined the appointment process, the procurement timeline whereby the appointments would be confirmed in May 2016, and handover arrangements. It was noted that the audit of financial year 2015 would be undertaken before any changes took place and that members would be kept up to date on progress.

It was noted that, in due course, the new auditors would be invited to a meeting of the Board.

DECIDED:    That the presentation be noted.

There was submitted a report by the Chief Officer Renfrewshire Health and Social Care Partnership relative to the Audit Scotland report outlining progress towards the integration of health and social care in Scotland.

The report focused on the transition year and auditors had highlighted a number of risks and issues that integration authorities should be aware of as they moved towards full delegation of functions from 2016/17.  The report made recommendations for the Scottish Government, for integration authorities and jointly for integration authorities, councils and health boards.  The report detailed the main findings from the Audit Scotland report and outlined some areas of local progress which showed how work in Renfrewshire was addressing national issues raised by Audit Scotland.

DECIDED:

(a) That the Audit Scotland report be noted;

(b) That the progress to date to establish the Renfrewshire Health and Social Care Partnership be noted; and


(c) That the contents of future Audit Scotland reports and Health and Social Care integration would be brought to the Board for consideration.


SEDERUNT

Councillor Perrie entered the meeting during discussion of the following item.


Prior to consideration of the following item, the Convener welcomed Mr Hunter, petitioner, to the meeting.

There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources relative to a petition which had been received from Leslie Hunter in the following terms:

“I would like Renfrew District Council to remove the safety hazard caused by the position of parking bays outside my house at 86A Renfrew Road. I would like a health and safety assessment of the risk and I would like the pavement to be reinstated and metal bollards on the pavement to prevent on-pavement parking”.

The report advised that the Head of Amenity Services had intimated that the lay-bys should remain.  They performed the function for which they had been created in 2006, which was to provide a location in the local area that made up for the shortfall in residential and visitor parking while maintaining two free running lanes and a right turn filter lane to West College Scotland.  A clear passage was particularly relevant to ensure buses into Paisley along the inside lane of this route were not delayed.  Prior to the construction of the lay-bys, residents and visitors would park either on the footway creating a danger and obstruction to pedestrians or on the carriageway which created congestion on this main approach into Paisley.  The report also advised that a traffic regulation order (TRO) had been considered.  However, as this would have required agreement through the statutory TRO process from those residents along this route who would be displaced and had no feasible alternative parking location it was not considered viable at this time.

The Head of Amenity Services advised that the design of the lay-bys and associated private access visibility splays (2m by 20m for a 30mph restricted road) accorded with Section 5.4.2 of the former Strathclyde Region Roads Development Guide,  there being no relevant Renfrewshire Council guidance available.

The Board heard from Mr Hunter in support of his petition and from the Transporatation Manager.

It was proposed that it be recommended to the Director of Community Resources that further investigation be undertaken relative to (a) the date and time of recent health and safety inspections; (b) evidence of the identified need for parking bays in the area; (c) ownership of the pavement; (d) shortening the overall length of parking bays; and (e) road traffic accident statistics for Renfrew Road and that the outcome be reported to a future meeting of the Board at which consideration of the petition would be resumed. This was agreed.


DECIDED:  That it be recommended to the Director of Community Resources that further investigation be undertaken relative to (a) the date and time of recent health and safety inspections; (b) evidence of the identified need for parking bays in the area; (c) ownership of the pavement; (d) shortening the overall length of parking bays; and (e) road traffic accident statistics for Renfrew Road, and that the outcome be reported to a future meeting of the Board at which consideration of the petition would be resumed.


Prior to consideration of the following item, the Convener welcomed Mr Rollo, petitioner, to the meeting.

There was submitted a report by the Director of Finance & Resources relative to a petition received from Martin Rollo, Secretary, Inchinnan Community Council, in the following terms:

“To reduce the speed limit at Inchinnan Junction A8 Greenock Road, currently 50mph.  ICC are promoting a petition to reduce the speed limit on approximately 500 metres of two carriageways of the Greenock Road A8 Inchinnan Junction at Old Greenock Road.  This is a dangerous and badly sited intersection with massive traffic at peak times displaying complicated and confusing rights of way and is an area of frequent accidents.  The road is bounded by a very busy bus depot, a Post Office/
supermarket and a public house which have non-controlled exits joining on to a 50mph A road. Vehicle parking also contributes to the overall confusion of lane use.  A junction improvement plan promised by Renfrewshire Council this year has again been delayed for budgetary reasons leaving the public and the village with no near-term safety improvement for users.  We consider that the speed limit of this road is too fast and would like to have it lowered and by doing so would help alleviate accidents.

Action requested from Council: Renfrewshire Council Roads are requested to pursue the reduction of the petitioned speed, communicate and engage with appropriate government departments to make this change and to install the appropriate signage and structures”.

The report intimated that the Head of Amenity Services had indicated that in line with the guidelines for setting speed limits, and in consultation with the Police, the Council reduced the speed limit to 50mph. Whilst the Council desired a lower limit the guidelines and the position taken by the then Strathclyde Police did not support this.  For the Council to pursue a lower limit it would be necessary to gain the support of Police Scotland and promote a traffic order. The Head of Amenity Services advised that the petitioners meet with Council representatives and Police Scotland to discuss these issues.

The Board heard from Mr Rollo in support of the petition and from the Transportation Manager who intimated that plans for a re-designed junction to include traffic lights at the location had been approved and an application had been made to Strathclyde Partnership for Transport (SPT) for funding of £500,000 to deliver this project. 

As the outcome of the bid for funds from SPT could not be guaranteed, it was proposed that meanwhile, discussions be arranged between the petitioner, Council representatives and Police Scotland to promote the appropriate traffic order to reduce the speed limit in the event that the application was not successful.  This was agreed.

It was further proposed that the outcome of the application to SPT for funding to deliver a re-designed road layout at the junction and the outcome of the discussions to promote a traffic order to reduce the speed limit in the event that the application to SPT was not successful, should be reported to a future meeting of the Board at which consideration of the petition would be resumed.  This was also agreed.

DECIDED:   
 
(a)    That it be noted that an application had been made to SPT for funding of £500,00 to deliver a re-designed road layout, including traffic lights, at the junction;

(b)    That the Director of Community Resources arrange discussions between the petitioner, Council representatives and Police Scotland to promote the appropriate traffic order required to reduce the speed limit in the event that the application to SPT was not successful; and

(c)    That the outcome of both the discussions to promote the traffic order to reduce the speed limit and the application to SPT for funding to deliver the re-designed junction from the A8 Greenock Road to Inchinnan be reported to a future meeting of the Board at which consideration of the petition would be resumed.

Under reference to item 10 of the Minute of the meeting of the Board held on 30 November 2015, there was submitted a report by the Lead Officer relative to progress since that meeting in terms of the Board's review.

Prior to consideration of the report, the Convener introduced two local residents who were members of the Kids Need Our Ward (KNOW) campaign and invited them to address the meeting. Sandra Webster and Karen Meikle advised that they both had children with complex medical needs who were frequent users of the paediatric services provided at Ward 15 (Children's Unit) at the Royal Alexandra Hospital (RAH), Paisley. They detailed the detrimental medical, financial and emotional impact that closure of Ward 15 and the transfer of paediatric services to the newly-opened Royal Hospital for Sick Children, in Glasgow, would have on their lives and the lives of their children.

Thereafter, the Board considered the report which intimated that NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde (NHSGG&C) had indicated that they were happy to be part of the Board’s review process as outlined in the scoping paper agreed at the 30 November 2015 meeting. Their Director of Planning and Policy, Catriona Renfrew, had agreed to be the contact and to share NHSGG&C materials on the proposals around Ward 15. NHSGG&C had also offered the Board the opportunity to visit the newly-opened Royal Hospital for Sick Children in Glasgow. The report advised that the provisional timescales for the review were evolving to reflect progress made to date.



Councillor J Sharkey, seconded by Councillor Caldwell, moved that the information provided by witnesses be noted; that it be noted that the Lead Officer would collect witness statements from interested parties to further inform the review; that progress of the review be noted; that it be noted that the provisional dates outlined in the initial review programme for Ward 15 (Children’s Unit) at the RAH had been and would continue to be subject to change; and that the Lead Officer be authorised to initiate negotiations with NHSGG&C to secure visits to both the RAH and the new Royal Hospital for Sick Children on the preferred date of 10 March 2016.

Councillor M Brown, seconded by Councillor McEwan, moved as an amendment that an additional recommendation be approved, namely; that an invitation be given to Councillor M Macmillan, Leader of Renfrewshire Council and a member of the NHSGG&C Board, to give evidence in respect of providing information regarding the NHSGG&C Board’s view as to the future of Ward 15 at the RAH. This would help in giving a well-informed Council view.

The amendment was accepted by the mover and seconder of the motion and the motion, as amended, was carried unanimously.

DECIDED:

(a)    That the information provided by witnesses be noted;

(b)    That it be noted that the Lead Officer would collect witness statements from interested parties to further inform the review;

(c)    That progress of the review be noted;

(d)    That it be noted that the provisional dates outlined in the initial review programme for Ward 15 (Children's Unit) at the Royal Alexandra Hospital had been and would continue to be subject to change;

(e)    That the Lead Officer be authorised to initiate negotiations with NHSGG&C to secure visits to both the RAH and the new Royal Hospital for Sick Children on the preferred date of 10 March 2016; and

(f)    That an invitation be extended to Councillor M Macmillan, Leader of Renfrewshire Council and a member of the NHSGG&C Board, to give evidence in respect of providing information regarding the NHSGG&C Board's view as to the future of Ward 15 at the RAH. This would help in giving a well-informed Council view. 

Councillors B Brown, M Brown, Caldwell, Grady, Provost Hall and Councillors J MacLaren, McEwan, Perrie and J Sharkey.

Councillor J Sharkey, Convener, presided.

A McMillan, Head of Resources and G Fitzpatrick, Management Information Officer, Lead Officer (both Children's Services); D McNab, Transportation Manager (Community Resources); and A MacArthur, Head of Finance and A McNaughton, Senior Committee Services Officer (both Finance & Resources).

The meeting adjourned at 11.31 am and reconvened at 11.36 am.