Agendas, reports and minutes

Minutes of Meeting of the Community Planning Board held in the St Kilda Room, SNH Headquarters, Great Glen House, Leachkin Road, Inverness on Tuesday 19 December 2017 at 10.30 am.

Present:    
    
Representing the Cairngorms National Park Authority (CNPA):
Mrs C Caddick (Substitute)

Representing the Highland Council (HC):
Mr A Christie
Mr B Lobban
Mr S Barron
Ms A Clark
Mr P Mascarenhas
Ms E Johnston
Mr I Kyle (Substitute)
Ms M Roberts

Representing Highlands and Islands Enterprise (HIE):
Mr D Oxley
Mr J Gibbs

Representing the Highland Third Sector Interface (HTSI):
Ms M Wylie

Representing High Life Highland (HLH):
Mr J Martin (Substitute)

Representing NHS Highland (NHSH):
Dr D Alston
Ms E Mead
Mrs J Baird
Ms C Steer

Representing Police Scotland (PS):
Ch Supt G Macdonald

Representing the Scottish Fire and Rescue Service (SFRS):
Dr M Foxley (also representing Lochaber Community Partnership)
Mr R Middlemiss

Representing the Scottish Government (SG):
Dr D Mackinnon

Representing Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH):
Mr G Hogg

Representing the University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI):
Dr D Rawlinson

Community Partnership Chairs:
Mr R Kirk, Caithness
Ch Insp I Maclelland, Sutherland
Mr M Loynd, East Ross
Mr S MacPherson, Skye, Lochalsh and West Ross (Acting Chair)
Dr M Foxley, Lochaber (also representing SFRS)
Mr G Ross, Inverness

In attendance:

Ms R Daly, Board Secretary, NHS Highland
Miss M Murray, Committee Administrator, Highland Council

Dr D Alston in the Chair

Business

1.    Apologies for Absence

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr P Argyle, Mr G Moir, Mrs M Davidson, Mr A Mackinnon, Ms M Smith, Mr D Yule, Mr B Alexander, Mr S Black, Mr W Gilfillan, Ms I Grigor, Mr I Murray, Prof H van Woerden, Mr R Iffla, Ms A Clark, Mr R Muir and Mr F Nixon.

2.    Minutes of Meetings

The Board:

i.    APPROVED the Minutes of the Community Planning Board – 4 October 2017; and
ii.    NOTED the draft Note of the Chief Officers’ Group – 7 November 2017.

3.    Commission on Highland Democracy

The Chair explained that Mr R Mair, Chair of the Commission on Highland Democracy, was unable to attend due to ill-health and it was therefore proposed that this item be deferred to the next meeting of the Board.  It was highlighted that the Commission’s final report was now available online and steps would be taken to publicise it.

The Board AGREED that the item be deferred to the next meeting of the Board.

4.    Developing Community Partnerships

i.    Updates from Chairs

Verbal updates were provided on behalf of the nine Community Partnerships, covering issues such as frequency and format of meetings, communication, public attendance, establishment of subgroups, local workstreams, community engagement, and the status of children’s, adult and locality plans.

Amongst the issues raised were the following:

• given the significant community interest in the Partnership, and in the interests of transparency, Sutherland Community Partnership had agreed to establish a decision-making log, details of which could be shared with interested parties;
• reference was made to the success of an employment services pilot in Sutherland and thanks were expressed to High Life Highland, who would continue to coordinate the initiative going forward;
• Mid Ross Community Partnership had continued its dialogue with Inclusion Scotland and a meeting had been held at the Muir of Ord Hub to discuss the idea of a disability champion/advocate attending Partnership meetings.  Having heard views on priority issues for people with disabilities in the local area, the idea of participating in a national internship scheme for graduates with a disability had emerged and High Life Highland would be exploring this further with Inclusion Scotland to identify a piece of work that could be of benefit to all Community Partnerships, not just Mid Ross;
• resources to sustain partnerships and action issues continued to be one of the main challenges;
• Third Sector groups such as Caithness Voluntary Group had been helpful in encouraging public engagement;
• both the public and Community Partnerships were keen to see the aims in the various plans translated into action;
• some themes, such as transport, were cross-area and, whilst some solutions were local, it was suggested that consideration be given to some pan-Highland initiatives;
• there was a need to recognise organisational strategic plans across partner organisations, and the bottom-up approach of Community Partnerships, and it was suggested that individual agencies should discuss with their local representatives how local actions were going to be implemented;
• concern having been expressed regarding the lack of economic input to Lochaber Community Partnership, it was confirmed that HIE representatives would be in attendance at the next meeting; and
• attention was drawn to the youth engagement work taking place in some Community Partnerships, and it was suggested that all Partnerships should follow suit.

During further discussion, the following issues were raised:

• the importance of enabling hard to reach groups to participate in Community Partnerships was emphasised and it was suggested that Chairs should liaise regarding the work taking place by Mid Ross Community Partnership to improve engagement with people with disabilities.  In addition, it was suggested that the learning from the work taking place with Inclusion Scotland be shared at a future meeting of the Board;
• 2018 was the Year of Young People and it was suggested that a presentation in that regard be made to the Board early in the new year;
• appropriate lead-in time was key to enabling partner organisations to include issues arising from Community Partnerships in their organisational plans.  Equally, Community Partnerships should be sighted on partner organisations’ objectives.  The best chance of success was when community aspirations and organisational objectives aligned;
• it having been questioned whether the comparatively high number of locality plans in Highland was appropriate, the importance of a bottom-up approach and of localities being defined by local communities was emphasised.  Whilst recognising the resourcing issues, it was suggested that attempting to merge localities would lead to risks and communication issues.  Over time, as common themes emerged, there might be opportunities for localities to work together but at present it was necessary to work with what people perceived to be their local area and manage expectations;
• NHS Highland had now appointed a Non-Executive Board Member to each Community Partnership;
• Community Partnerships were the key forum at a local level and it was essential to make them work;
• in relation to the CPP website, it was explained that each Community Partnership should be populating its own pages.  However, further development work was required in that regard and this would be picked up at a separate meeting; and
• whilst the verbal updates were helpful, it would be useful for the Board to have prior notice of any particular issues and it was suggested that Community Partnership Chairs identify the most effective means - eg a brief written update that could be circulated with the Board papers.

Thereafter, the Board:

i.    NOTED the updates;
ii.    AGREED that Community Partnership Chairs should liaise regarding the work taking place by Mid Ross Community Partnership, in conjunction with Inclusion Scotland, to improve engagement with people with disabilities;
iii.    AGREED, further to ii. above, that the learning from the work taking place with Inclusion Scotland be shared at a future meeting of the Board;
iv.    AGREED that a presentation on the Year of Young People be made to the Board in early 2018; and
v.    AGREED that Community Partnership Chairs identify the most effective means of providing prior notice of particular issues to the Board – eg a brief written update that could be circulated with the Board papers.

ii.    Update from Chief Officers’ Group

There had been circulated Report No CPB/16/17 on behalf of the Chief Officers’ Group.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• in relation to the proposed structure diagrams, the term “developing” was ambiguous and it was suggested that it be expanded to “developing and agreeing";
• it was important to acknowledge that the use of the term “professional” did not refer solely to public sector professionals;
• with regard to locality plans, whilst welcoming the proposals, clarity was sought on the practicalities of how the self-evaluation and peer review processes would be carried out; and
• given the particular sensitivities in some areas, there would be a keen interest in how the adult and children’s plans were performing and it was suggested that an element of community input be incorporated into the evaluation process.  Further discussion ensued, during which the importance of not being too prescriptive was emphasised and it was suggested that the structures be approved as recommended.  However, it was highlighted that Community Partnerships could undertake whatever additional evaluation they saw fit.

Thereafter, the Board AGREED the governance structures proposed for Community Partnership plans as set out in appendices 1, 2 and 3 of the report, subject to the term “developing” being expanded to “developing and agreeing” in the structure diagrams.

5.    Implementation of the HOIP Action Plan

There had been circulated Report No CPB/17/17 on behalf of the Chief Officers’ Group.

The Board NOTED the next steps being taken by the Chief Officers’ Group to deliver the HOIP Action Plan.

6.    Update on Community Justice

There had been circulated Report No CPB/18/17 by the Chair of the Community Justice Partnership.

The Chair having welcomed the clarity in relation to the governance structure, the Board NOTED the work already carried out in relation to community justice and the plans for future progression within Highland.

7.    Participatory Budgeting - Update

There had been circulated Report No CPB/19/17 by the Community and Democratic Engagement Manager, Highland Council.  A short video on a recent participatory budgeting (PB) event in Aird and Loch Ness Ward was presented in amplification of the report.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• SFRS supported the principles of PB and felt it was something it could contribute to.  In terms of venues, whilst not suitable for large events, the 61 community fire stations in Highland could potentially be utilised and staff made available to facilitate PB activities.  Interest was also expressed in using PB events to engage with the public on the forthcoming SFRS transformation proposals;
• it was confirmed that the PB funding distributed to date was non-recurring;
• SNH had some experience of PB but it was national funding and tended to be based on communities of interest rather than communities of place. Although it had some discretionary grant giving powers, the funding was squeezed and much of it was forward-committed to projects for a number of years;
• moving from discretionary grants to mainstream public services was a quantum leap and would be challenging.  It was suggested that it was necessary to take an experimental approach to some of the broad areas outlined in the report;
• public expectations had been raised as a result of locality, adult and children’s plans and PB presented an opportunity to bring programme budgeting and community planning together, change how services were delivered for the better, and potentially free-up resources.  The common themes arising from the various plans were a good starting point and presented an opportunity for some quick wins;
• the Community Justice Partnership had been involved in a PB event, Small Change for Justice, and it was suggested that learning from the event be fed into the ongoing PB discussions;
• the event in Hilton, Inverness, had not generated the anticipated level of interest and activity and it was suggested that further work was required for PB to work successfully in areas of deprivation and to ensure that the inequality gap did not widen;
• it was important to see the breadth of what PB could be about;
• better outcomes came from better decision-making and community input was key;
• the areas where PB had not been successful provided valuable intelligence in terms of public agencies connectedness with those communities;
• PB was not always about putting money out to communities but about communities directing how public funding was spent according to their priorities;
• it was necessary to build capacity in terms of community engagement before moving on to some of the more challenging discussions about disinvestment and sustainability of services;
• PB was a means to an end, the end being the Christie principles of community participation and prevention, and the points raised during discussion should encourage partners to consider how they might begin to implement it.  The Chair suggested that partners commit to doing so and that an update be provided at a future meeting.

Thereafter, the Board:

i.    NOTED the update on the development of participatory budgeting and the opportunities for enhanced partnership approaches; and
ii.    AGREED that partners consider how they might begin to implement participatory budgeting and that an update be provided to a future meeting of the Board.

8.    Proposed New Breakthrough Achievement

Ch Supt Macdonald, Police Scotland, referred to discussions at the previous meeting of the Chief Officers’ Group, during which suicide prevention had been identified as a potential area for a new breakthrough achievement for the CPP.  One of the challenges was where to start and, given that 40% of suicide victims in Highland were under 30 years of age, it was suggested that the focus should be on young people.  One aspect would be tackling the stigma surrounding the issue of suicide.  In addition, there were issues in terms of support for young people who were bereaved, housing and mental health care for Looked After Children, and mental health support in colleges/universities and for the LGBT community.  With the approval of the Board, work would continue to articulate a breakthrough achievement that all partners could contribute to, with a view to recommendations being presented to the next meeting.

Having recognised the complexity of the issue, the need for any action to be evidence-based, and the challenges in terms of identifying a breakthrough achievement that all partners could contribute to, the Board AGREED the proposed area of suicide prevention and that further work be undertaken to articulate the breakthrough achievement with a view to recommendations being presented to the next meeting of the Board.

9.    Skills Investment/Talent Attraction and Retention

The Board was asked to discuss the area of skills, talent attraction and retention, and the opportunities for Partnership approaches.  To support the discussion, a paper on talent attraction, considered at the latest meeting of the Convention of the Highlands and Islands (CoHI), had been circulated by HIE.

During discussion, the following issues were raised:

• in relation to the recommendation that a CPP working group be established, it was highlighted that a working group had already been established by CoHI which, it was confirmed, would work in close collaboration with the Skills Investment Plan (SIP) Programme Board;
• it was suggested that consideration be given to whether there was anything that could be done to ensure that organisations were not missing out on talent because a potential candidate’s partner could not find work.  In that regard, reference was made to the recruitment of couples in Alaska, where it had been demonstrated that there was a better chance of families remaining in a particular area if both partners were employed;
• talent attraction and retention was one of the biggest risks and challenges public and private sector organisations faced, and the need for holistic solutions was emphasised.  It was suggested that a CPP workforce plan be developed, covering the disciplines required and how it was intended to advertise and recruit;
• one of the key issues for UHI was improving marketing to schools;
• Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union would have a significant impact on a number of sectors – eg UHI staff and students, and small scale tourism;
• the SIP needed to be live document and it was suggested that community planning partners at both Highland and local level needed to do more to provide information on training needs, now and in the future;
• the geography of Highland and UHI’s complex structure of colleges and learning centres presented significant challenges;
• strategic thinking was required to address the different issues and opportunities that existed in different parts of Highland – eg Dounreay in Caithness and the Liberty development in Lochaber;
• whilst it was recognised that a regional approach was necessary, local and sectoral solutions were also required;
• the importance of evaluating any measures that were put in place was emphasised;
• there were many different facets to talent attraction and retention – eg availability of suitable housing;
• it was important to try and retain young people in Highland by growing existing provision and expanding into key areas;
• only through joint work with industry would it be possible to provide the right skills going forward;
• it was necessary to go into schools and open young people’s minds to a breadth of careers from an early age;
• providing the best learning pathways was key, particularly when working with young people from areas of deprivation, and information was provided on the work taking place in that regard;
• the importance of reskilling was emphasised;
• it was suggested that it be delegated to the Chief Officers’ Group to undertake a piece of work on skills investment/talent attraction and retention and how the CPP could add value to the work being undertaken by CoHI, and that a report be presented to a future meeting of the Board;
• to avoid duplication, it would be helpful to circulate the Regional Strategy and Action Plan referred to in the CoHI report; and
• there was a skills/talent attraction workstream associated with the Liberty development, details of which could be provided.

Thereafter, the Board AGREED:

i.    that it be delegated to the Chief Officers’ Group to undertake a piece of work on skills investment/talent attraction and retention and how the CPP could add value to the work being undertaken by CoHI, and that a report be presented to a future meeting of the Board; and
ii.    that the Regional Strategy and Action Plan referred to in the CoHI report be circulated to partners for information.

10.    Date of Next Meeting

The Board NOTED that the next meeting would take place on Wednesday 21 March 2018 in the NHS Highland Board Room, Assynt House, Beechwood Business Park, Inverness.

The meeting ended at 12.35 pm.