Agenda and minutes

There had been circulated copies of the Minute of 24 March 2016.

DECISION

NOTED for signature by the Chairman.

Roads Re-trunking and Roads Capital Spend

Consider briefing note by Clerk to the Council. (Copy attached).

2.1       ROADS RETRUNKING AND ROADS CAPITAL SPEND

            </AI2>

<AI3>

MATTER ARISINGMWith reference to paragraph 7.4 of the Minute of 24 March 2016, there had been circulated copies of a briefing note providing Members with information relating to the capital costs of works to individual roads in the roads infrastructure.  Mr Colin Ovens, Infrastructure Manager and Mr David Richardson, Asset Manager were in attendance to present the briefing note and provide additional information as required.  The briefing note explained that officers had reviewed the comments from Transport Scotland in relation to a proposal to re-trunk A7 north of Galashiels and A72 Galashiels to Skirling and the position had been clarified that trunk roads were routes that were of strategic national importance and which followed the principles of:- providing the users with a coherent and continuous system of routes, serving destinations of importance to industry, commerce, agriculture and tourism; and defining nationally important routes which would be developed in line with strategic national transport demands.  Mr Ovens emphasised that Transport Scotland would not be reviewing trunk road status on an individual basis and there were no current plans for a review of the strategic network as a whole.  The report also explained that Transport Scotland was clearly of the view that the existing trunk roads through the Borders already met the function detailed above and that the non-trunk sections of A7 and A72 were of more local importance.  Any future consideration by Ministers to trunk the above routes, which were managed locally, would bring with it an expectation that the stretches of road to be trunked would be of, or near to, trunk road standards.

2.2       With regard to the revenue costs of works to individual roads, Members were advised that the budget sat within Neighbourhood Services and that these figures were included in the Block Revenue allocation and were not recorded against specific roads.  A number of questions were raised in terms of specific stretches of road and Mr Ovens and Mr Richardson provided clarification in terms of how the situations would be addressed.  In some situations, the Council would be made aware of problems during routine inspections and in others, through reporting by members of the public.  Action would be taken either directly by SBC or by providing advice to the landowner.  Details of the capital spend on A7, A72 and A697 were provided within the briefing note and comparisons provided for each financial year from 2011/12 through to 2015/16.  The Chairman thanked Mr Ovens and Mr Richardson for their attendance.

            DECISION

            NOTED the report.

Presentation by Service Director Children and Young People.

3.1       With reference to paragraph 8 of the Minute of 24 March 2016, Ms Donna Manson, Service Director Children and Young People was in attendance to provide Members with information on how schools within the Scottish Borders provided support for its young people, and in particular, highly able learners.  Ms Manson introduced Ms Michelle Strong, Chief Officer Education; Ms Jacqueline Wilson, Headteacher at Kingsland Primary School, Peebles; and Mr John Clark, Headteacher at Berwickshire High School; who would provide additional information to Members in respect of how support had been successful in their particular areas.  Ms Manson explained that the rationale Inclusion for All would be presented to the Executive Committee in May 2016 and this would detail how the Council would meet the needs of all learners, taking into account changes in legislation and plans for the provision of enhanced support in areas such as specialist needs and highly able learners.  Ms Manson reported that Scottish Borders Council schools were currently in the top quartile and improving.  SBC was also fully compliant with the National Development Framework.

3.2       Ms Strong explained that terminology used within the education system had changed over the years.  Terms such as marked aptitude, talented, gifted, exceptional etc had been replaced with "highly able learners" as the accepted term.  In order to promote inclusion for all learners, "Getting It Right for Every Child" (GIRFEC) had been implemented in the Scottish Borders in April 2016, developing and adopting a growth mindset for young people.  The term "highly able learner" referred both to pupils who worked or had the potential to work ahead of their age peers and/or to pupils who were highly able across the curriculum as well as in one or more particular areas.  It was emphasised that the Curriculum for Excellence took into consideration the development of the whole young person, including their enjoyment of learning, and support was tailored to suit each individual.  In terms of education beyond school, Ms Manson advised Members that all options were discussed with parents and issues such as readiness to leave home were considered.  Opportunities such as Modern Apprenticeships would be considered along with university, college etc and it was acknowledged that schools were often in the position of knowing the pupil well and therefore being able to tailor their curriculum and Individualised Plan (IEP) according to the ability of each young person.

3.3       Ms Wilson advised Members that there were in the region of 600 pupils attending Kingsland Primary School and just over 60 children in nursery education.  There was obviously a wide range of abilities within the school and in terms of how each individual developed throughout their primary school years.  In order to provide support for highly able learners in this environment, a number of activities were in place to encourage these young people.  Activities included participation in master classes for those identified with particular skills; opportunities to work in different classes, accelerated work such as the Scottish Mathematical Council and additional support from  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

Presentation by Service Director Children and Young People.

4.1       With reference to paragraph 8 of the Minute of 24 March 2016, there had been circulated copies of a briefing note providing information on the existing practice for school transport.   Ms Manson and Mr John Dellow, Team Leader Transport Services presented a summary of the provision within Scottish Borders Council.  The Policy was scheduled for review within the next two years and would take account of the financial challenges in place at the time.  Ms Manson explained that there was a statutory obligation to provide transport for all children who lived two or more miles from the catchment school and who were under 8 years of age; in the case of any other child, the distance was set at three miles from the school.  Within the Scottish Borders, this transport was provided free of charge.  Pupils enrolled at a Roman Catholic school were offered transport under the same restrictions where they lived within the designated catchment area of that school and transport was also provided for pupils with additional support needs.  Figures provided detailed that there were 178 contracts in place to provide 3,426 mainstream pupils with transport; a further 112 contracts existed for transport for pupils with additional support needs; 123 pupils required escort provision and 42 currently received a privilege lift (as defined in paragraph 4.2 of the briefing note).  Within the primary and secondary school areas, the percentage of the school roll receiving school transport ranged from 40% in Berwickshire, 38% in Earlston, 18% in Eyemouth, 10% in Hawick to 8% in Galashiels.  The Service was flexible and responsive and was delivered using Best Value principles.  The Passenger Transport section managed all aspects of school transport provision and utilised a range of vehicles which were verified as meeting required legislation.  The budget for school transport for 2015/16 was £5,016,300 and Ms Manson explained some of the issues facing the service e.g. increasing operator costs; supply in the market meeting the demand; and the number of licenced operators, drivers, vehicles and availability.  There were examples of exceptional partnership working such as when bus operators were able to continue services during challenging weather conditions with the help of local people; the implementation of additional vehicles at short notice when a primary school was relocated; and when a bus driver ensured the safety of pupils alighting from the bus on which they were travelling.

4.2       Following discussion, a number of questions were raised.  In terms of entitlement to free school transport being transferred along with a pupil when s/he moved to a different school, Ms Manson advised that a planned review of the existing Policy would address this issue, and emphasised that pupil safety was paramount at all times.  Ms Manson advised that using the Borders Railway as part of school transport provision would present risk assessment challenges and suggested that train travel might be considered only in specific circumstances.  Further discussion took place in respect of utilising unused seats on buses.  Ms Manson explained that under the statutory  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Update on subjects included in the future Scrutiny Review Programme. (Copy attached).

5.1       With reference to paragraph 4 of the Minute of 18 February 2016, there had been circulated an updated list of subjects which Scrutiny Committee had been asked to review and which included the source of the request, the stage the process had reached and the date, if identified, of the Scrutiny meeting at which the information would be presented.  In addition, Members were also asked to consider further subjects for inclusion on this list for presentation at future meetings of the Committee.  When deciding whether subjects would be reviewed by the Scrutiny Committee, Members required a clear indication from the initiator of the request as to which aspects of the subject they wished to be reviewed.  This would enable the Committee to determine whether the subject was appropriate for consideration.

5.2       Discussion took place on the inclusion and timing of a review on Artificial Pitches and the Clerk to the Council was asked to explore the possibility of this subject being brought forward to the June meeting.  With regard to Home Schooling, it was reported that no further action had been taken at this time to write to the Minister with a view to considering a change in legislation affecting home schooled children and young people.  The Council's Legal Services was currently looking into what could be included in such a letter and a private update would be given to the Scrutiny Committee at its next meeting.

DECISION

NOTED the proposed list of subjects for review by Scrutiny Committee as amended on 28 April 2016 and appended to this Minute.

The next meeting is scheduled to be held on Thursday, 9 June 2016.

The next meeting of the Scrutiny Committee would take place on Thursday, 9 June 2016.

            DECISION

            NOTED.

Private section of the Minute of the meeting of 24 March 2016 to be approved and signed by the Chairman. (Copy attached).

SUMMARY OF PRIVATE BUSINESS

7.         MINUTE

The Committee approved the private section of the Minute of 24 March 2016.