Agenda and draft minutes
Health Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday, 7th January, 2020 2.00 pm
Venue: Council Antechamber, Level 2, Town Hall Extension
Contact: Lee Walker
To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2019.
To approve the minutes of the meeting held on 3 December 2019 as a correct record.
Report of the Chief Executive and the Deputy Chief Executive and City Treasurer
This report provides an update on the Council’s overall financial position and sets out the next steps in the budget process, including scrutiny of the draft Budget proposals and Budget report by this Committee. Each Scrutiny Committee will receive a budget report aligned to its remit, showing the main changes proposed to delivery and funding. The services to be considered by each scrutiny committee are shown at table four. The report also outlines the officer proposals for how the Council could deliver a balanced budget for 2020/21, the details of which will be discussed at the relevant scrutiny committees.
The Committee considered a report of the Chief Executive and the Deputy Chief Executive and City Treasurer, which provided an update on the Council’s overall financial position and set out the next steps in the budget process. In doing so, the report outlined Officer proposals for how the Council could deliver a balanced budget for 2020/21.
In conjunction to the above, the Committee also received and considered the draft Council Business Plan for 2020/21 and the Adult Social Care and Population Health Budget 2020/21.
Officers highlighted that the 2020/21 budget would be a one year roll over budget. It would reflect the fact the Council had declared a climate emergency and would also continue to reflect the priorities identified in the previous three-year budget strategy.
Taken together, the reports illustrated how the directorate would work to deliver the Our Corporate Plan and progress towards the vision set out in the Our Manchester Strategy.
Some of the key points that arose from the Committee’s discussions were: -
· A fair financial settlement for Manchester and a commitment for appropriate future levels of funding to deliver social care was required from central government;
· Future reports should include how success was measured to demonstrate how pooled budget arrangements and the integration of health and social care was improving the health outcomes for residents;
· Clarification was sought on how the Transformation Fund awarded to Greater Manchester had been allocated across the authorities;
· Had Learning Disabled citizens, their families and carers been consulted with and involved in the development of the reported Learning Disability Services;
· Further information was sought on the approach to the care market and the reported potential need forcapital investment to allow market intervention; and
· Concern was expressed regarding the move towards technology enabled care, commenting that this should never replace human interactions and emphasised the importance of ensuring that people’s data was protected.
The Executive Member for Adults, Health and Wellbeing commented that despite the failure by central government to adequately fund social care and the pressures experienced in this area as a result of increased demand, Manchester had responded by pioneering the integration of health and social care to protect the most vulnerable people in the city. She stated that the reliance on increased Council Tax to support social care was a political decision imposed by central government and was not fair or sustainable in the long term and she called upon the government to provide a fair, long term financial settlement to deliver social care.
The Executive Member for Adults, Health and Wellbeing responded to the comments regarding technology enabled care by stating that this would be used where appropriate and never be used to replace human interaction. She commented that in an age where technology and apps were more accessible and widely used, citing for example the prevalence of smart watches that already monitored a variety of activities, future generations would be increasingly familiar with this technology and it could be used to monitor people’s health where appropriate. ... view the full minutes text for item 2.
Discussion item: Health improvement interventions for LGBT communities in Manchester
The Committee have invited representatives from the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) Foundation to discuss specific health improvement interventions for LGBT communities in Manchester, including the Greater Manchester Trans Health Service and Pride in Ageing.
The Committee welcomed Laurence Webb, Assistant Director, Inclusion, LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and trans) Foundation who had been invited to discuss with Members specific health improvement interventions for LGBT communities in Manchester.
Mr Webb delivered a presentation to the Committee that provided an overview of the range of initiatives and projects designed to ensure the needs and experiences of the diverse LGBT community were included within the development of wide ranging services in public health and wider society. This included;
· Provided an overview and brief history of the LGBT Foundation;
· Bring Dementia Out, focusing on the needs of LGBT people affected by dementia;
· Macmillan LGBT Cancer Programme, noting that LGBT people had higher risk factors for cancer, were more likely to receive late diagnoses, and were less likely to engage with screening programmes;
· Making Smoking History LGBT Programme, noting that LGBT people were significantly more likely to smoke than the general population. Prides and LGBT spaces and events had been targeted by the tobacco industry, and smoking cessation services were underutilised by LGBT people;
· Pride in Practice, a quality assurance and social prescribing service that strengthened and developed primary care services relationships with their LGBT patients within the local community;
· Trans Programme, noting that Our Trans Programme was the first in the UK and supports upwards of 1,500 trans and non-binary people every year; and
· Demographic and equalities monitoring to be achieved by working with local organisations to ensure their data collection aligned with best practice within LGBT communities.
A Member commented that he welcomed the ‘Bring Dementia Out’ initiative, noting that whilst an individual’s experience of dementia was different, and could affect different age groups it was important to recognise and respond to the needs of older LGBT people. Mr Webb acknowledged this comment and stated that often the perception of the LGBT community was that of young people, however it was important to recognise the needs and offer appropriate support to older people.
In response to a question from a Member regarding the current challenges to the LGBT Foundation, Mr Webb stated that they were increasingly experiencing people approaching them for assistance and advice who had complex needs, including issues around homelessness; substance misuse; domestic violence and mental health. He said that the LGBT Foundation were responding to this by working with a range of partners, including the local Mental Health Trust to provide Improving Access to Psychological Therapies.
Mr Webb further commented that it was important to recognise that despite an increased awareness of, and increased visibility of the LGBT community, it was important to acknowledge that homophobia and transphobia still existed in society and this needed to be challenged. He further commented that the trans and non-binary community experienced difficulties in accessing advice, support and health services. He advised that work was currently ongoing to address this, however due to the current commissioning process he was limited to as to the information he could currently share with the Members.
Mr Webb replied to a question from ... view the full minutes text for item 3.
Report of the Governance and Scrutiny Support Unit
The monthly report includes the recommendations monitor, relevant key decisions, the Committee’s work programme and items for information. The report also contains additional information including details of those organisations that have been inspected by the Care Quality Commission.
A report of the Governance and Scrutiny Support Unit which contained key decisions within the Committee’s remit and responses to previous recommendations was submitted for comment. Members were also invited to agree the Committee’s future work programme.
To note the report and approve the work programme.