Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Mr CW Boothby and Mr LJP O’Shea.

On the motion of Mrs Hall, seconded by Mr Gould it was

                        RESOLVED – the minutes of the meetings held on 30 August and 21 September 2011 be confirmed and signed by the Mayor.

No interests were declared at this stage.

The Mayor announced that £500 had been raised during his birthday celebrations and he thanked Members for their contributions. He also thanked Mr Bessant for competing in a triathlon and raising £500 for the Memphis nursery.

The Mayor informed Members of ‘the Big Splash’ which was being supported by Hinckley Leisure Centre and requested that Members consider taking part in one of the events.

a)         Question asked by Councillor Cartwright and addressed to the Executive Member for Rural Affairs

            “Many villages in Hinckley and Bosworth have poor and inadequate internet access as mentioned in a motion passed by this council on 24 February 2011, which called on the government to do more to ensure better broadband access in rural areas across Hinckley & Bosworth.

            Would the member for rural affairs then welcome the news that, as part of a government scheme, nearly £4 million will be coming to Leicestershire to ensure more people get superfast broadband by 2015.

            Fibre optic cabling to every home can only be a dream in the present economic climate, but fibre optic cabling from exchange to each village hub is much more achievable and would bring benefits to everyone connected to that hub.

            As an issue that affects everyone, businesses, schools, children and young people, homeowners, the elderly and the prospects and wellbeing of many would the Executive member give me assurances that the administration will do all it can to keep the pressure on the Broadband issue not just with the government but the service providers to bring superfast broadband not just to some but to everyone as quickly as can be, realising that especially rural areas will be very far down a very long list for improvements.”

            Response from Councillor WJ Crooks

            “Cllr Cartwright – thank you for your question, I welcome the prospect of Leicestershire, and this Borough in particular, getting the Government investment that has been earmarked for super fast broadband provision.

            I would draw Members’ attention to a report considered by the Executive at its last meeting. It noted that, whilst Hinckley and Burbage were fortunate to have been provided with super fast broadband in 2010, this has not extended to rural areas of the Borough and a large part of the rural sections of the Borough experience connectivity speeds of less than 2mbits/s. It has been estimated that the cost of improving broadband connectivity in Leicestershire would be circa £20M. Leicester and Leicestershire, however, have only received £3.1M funding from DCMS toward the cost. It is estimated that a minimum of an additional £3.1M funding is required to enable acceptable broadband levels across Leicestershire.

            In view of the above, Executive has resolved to support the Broadband Leicestershire Steering Group in challenging the Government to make available the additional funding and has requested further discussions with the County Council to consider the potential opportunities for rolling out broadband community-led projects in the Hinckley and Bosworth area.”

            As a supplementary question, Mr Cartwright asked that a copy of the letter sent to British Telecom by the Deputy Chief Executive be re-circulated to Members, and that the pressure to achieve improved broadband be maintained. Mr Crooks stated that there was due to be a countywide meeting on the issue in the same week, which the Chief Executive confirmed.

b)         Question asked by Councillor PS Bessant and addressed to the Leader of Council

            “Would the Planning Portfolio Holder  ...  view the full minutes text for item 201.

In his position statement, the Leader of Council referred to plans to meet with Greg Clark MP, CLG Minister, regarding issues surrounding the five year land supply as discussed at the meeting of Council on 30 August 2011, and ongoing discussions regarding the A5 involving all stakeholders. He highlighted the recent move to bring housing repairs in-house, and the appointment of a Finance Joint Chief Officer for Hinckley & Bosworth and Oadby & Wigston Borough Councils, along with the securing of ‘Achieving’ status under the Equalities Framework.

In response, Members supported the changes regarding Housing Repairs and thanked officers and the Executive Member for their work on Equalities. A Member expressed concern that there was currently a longer wait for disabled adaptations, but hoped that this might improve with the changeover in management.

The minutes of the Scrutiny Commission meeting held on 8 September were received for information.

Members received a report which sought agreement to accepting the responsibility for the employment of two permanent staff on behalf of the District Council’s Network (DCN), with all financial implications being met by the funds available to the DCN. On the motion of Ms Witherford, seconded by Mr Bray it was

                        RESOLVED –

(i)         responsibility for the employment of the permanent employees of the District Councils’ Network (DCN Manager and DCN Support Officer) be agreed;

(ii)        the supplementary annual budget of £65,000, pro rata for 2011/12 from 1 September £38,000, be agreed.

A report was presented to Council which sought approval to commit to the revised head lease term of 35 years (from the previously agreed 30 years) in return for which the freehold of the development would transfer to HBBC after completion of the extended term.

Although some reservations were expressed by some members regarding the overall and underlying capital provision for the development, Members were reassured on the specific point that the additional cost for extending the lease by five years would be outweighed by the value of the land and that it would not greatly affect the capital receipt required for the Argents Mead site.

On the motion of Mr Lynch, seconded by Mr Bray, it was

                        RESOLVED –

                        (i)         previously agreed reports be noted;

(ii)        the revised head lease term of 35 years in return for which the freehold of the development would transfer to HBBC on completion of the extended term, be agreed.

Members were advised of the progress of the Site Allocations Development Plan Document (DPD) and the content of the report which sought agreement to withdraw all Gypsy & Traveller proposed allocations.

On a specific question raised by Mrs Sprason, Mr Bray agreed to provide her with a written answer.

Councillor Cartwright requested that the permanent site proposed for land at Anstey Lane, Groby and the transit site proposed for Sacherveral Way in Groby be specifically listed as being removed from the Site Allocations DPD. On the motion of Mr Bray, seconded by Mr Cartwright, it was

                        RESOLVED –

(i)         the formal withdrawal of all Gypsy and Traveller proposed allocations be agreed;

(ii)        any future plans to allocated sites will be informed by the Gypsy and Traveller Needs Assessment.

Approval was sought to the 2011 Polling District and Polling Place Review prior to publication. In response to Members’ questions, the following points were clarified:

• The reference to ‘ward’ was a borough, not parish, ward;
• ‘Polling Place’ was a term prescribed by law, and referred to, for example, the building which hosts the polling station(s);
• There could be multiple polling stations in one polling place.

Concern was expressed regarding one of the proposed polling stations in Barwell being a long way off the road. In response it was explained that it was the only public building which could host a polling station in that parish ward, as previously there had been no polling station in that parish ward, which had caused problems in a parish by-election for that ward. Concern was also raised regarding access for larger disability vehicles at one of the polling stations sited in Groby Village Hall and the need for very clear arrangements at the Mary Forryan centre in Hinckley. Assurance was given that these issues would be addressed.

Mr Crooks left the meeting at 7.50pm.

It was moved by Mr Bray, seconded by Mr Cartwright and

                        RESOLVED – the Polling District and Polling Place Review be approved.

Members of Council received a report which sought approval to proposed changes to the Constitution. In presenting the report, the Executive Member noted that the majority of changes proposed were ‘housekeeping’ issues and changes to improve the service for applicants. She also reported an amendment to paragraph 3.3.3, bullet point 2 as follows:

• Amendments to the application of LDF policy documents will be considered by Planning Committee with a recommendation then sent to Council, where adoption will be required to take place.

It was requested that the wording ‘where adoption will be required to take place’ be amended for purposes of clarity, to “with a recommendation to adopt”. It was also requested that the same principle of items being referred to Council for adoption be applied to the other processes listed. These requested further amendments were supported.

Mrs Camamile left the meeting at 7.58pm.

It was then agreed that the fourth bullet point be replaced with:

• Evidence bases for LDF policy documents are to be approved by the Executive and the Senior Members’ Group. The Executive and any one of the Group Leaders or the Labour representative may require referral to Council.

On the motion of Ms Witherford, seconded by Mr Bray, it was

                        RESOLVED – the report be agreed with the abovementioned amendments.

Mrs Camamile returned and Mr Bessant left at 8.01pm.

In presenting the Overview and Scrutiny end of term report 2007-2012 and annual report 2010/11, the Chairman of the Scrutiny Commission thanked the two Vice-Chairmen for their hard work and thanked officers for their support. He outlined the key objectives of working as a critical friend to the Executive and considering matters of concern for the community. He also acknowledged the challenge of engaging more effectively with the public.

Mr Bessant returned at 8.05pm.

The main achievements of the Scrutiny Commission were highlighted, including the creation of an Anti Poverty Strategy and subsequent setting up of a Credit Union, reviewing the work of Housing Associations, monitoring waiting lists for disabled adaptations and external scrutiny such as out of hours healthcare and the East Midlands Ambulance Service.

In referring to the work programme for 2011/12, it was noted that there were two main reviews with one internally focussed on assisting those experiencing fuel poverty, and an externally focussed review on care for the elderly.

Mr Lay as Chairman was thanked for his leadership of the Overview & Scrutiny function and for having been able to maintain non-political debate.

                        RESOLVED – the End of Term and Annual Report be approved.

Following a request for an additional Member to represent the authority on the Stepping Stones Project it was moved by Mr Bray and seconded by Mr Bill that Mr Crooks be appointed to the vacancy. It was then proposed by Mr Bessant and seconded by Mr Allen that Mrs Sprason be appointed. The vote was taken by means of a show of hands, with Mr Crooks receiving 17 votes and Mrs Sprason receiving 14 votes.

                        RESOLVED – Mr Crooks be appointed to the Stepping Stones Project.

(a)        From Mr MT Mullaney

"This council believes that there should be a parliamentary constituency that covers the bulk of the borough of Hinckley and Bosworth 

The council accepts that a new Bosworth cannot be coterminous with the Borough as it would exceed the number of electors per constituency required by law.

This Council therefore notes with dismay the proposals by the Boundary Commission for England to create a Bosworth constituency nearly half of which comprises of wards from North West Leicestershire.

The Council believes that the proposals to move huge parts of Bosworth into a new Mid-Leicestershire and into Blaby constituency will effectively obliterate a Bosworth constituency in anything but name.

We believe the proposal to split Hinckley and Burbage is clearly nonsense as, for example, the majority of Burbage residents look towards Hinckley for its local services. We believe the same is true of proposals to split Barwell and Earl Shilton both of which have very close ties.

The Council therefore resolves to object to these proposals and calls on the chief executive to formally write to Boundary Commission to express this during the consultation process.”

(b)        From Mr DC Bill

“This Council, having due regard to the standing of the Post Office and Royal Mail, views with dismay the news that it is the intention of the Royal Mail to close the sorting office in Hinckley in 2013.

This Council notes that the Royal Mail management and the unions have already expressed concern about the future of the staff and we share those concerns. We are just as concerned about the effect this will have on the delivery of vital postal services to this area.

We believe that if this move is carried out it will have an adverse effect on all customers of the Royal Mail both as individuals and as public or commercial concerns.

We object, therefore, in the strongest possible terms to this proposal and seek urgent discussions with the relevant decision-makers within the organisation to secure other viable alternatives.”

(c)        From Mrs J Richards

This Council acknowledges that it has some considerable way to go to persuade the residents of Barwell and Earl Shilton of the wisdom of its plans to expand the settlements by well over four thousand dwellings along with associated employment land designations.

Given this acknowledgement and the significance of what Hinckley & Bosworth Borough Council is proposing and the undeniable immense impact of this policy upon these two communities, this Council commits to commence a full and meaningful consultation of each and every household in Barwell and Earl Shilton before proceeding any further with its SUE plans.

(a)        From Mr MT Mullaney

"This council believes that there should be a parliamentary constituency that covers the bulk of the borough of Hinckley and Bosworth 

The council accepts that a new Bosworth cannot be coterminous with the Borough as it would exceed the number of electors per constituency required by law.

This Council therefore notes with dismay the proposals by the Boundary Commission for England to create a Bosworth constituency nearly half of which comprises of wards from North West Leicestershire.

The Council believes that the proposals to move huge parts of Bosworth into a new Mid-Leicestershire and into Blaby constituency will effectively obliterate a Bosworth constituency in anything but name.

We believe the proposal to split Hinckley and Burbage is clearly nonsense as, for example, the majority of Burbage residents look towards Hinckley for its local services. We believe the same is true of proposals to split Barwell and Earl Shilton both of which have very close ties.

The Council therefore resolves to object to these proposals and calls on the chief executive to formally write to Boundary Commission to express this during the consultation process.”

The motion was seconded by Mr Bill.

During discussion on the motion, some Members, whilst in general agreement that the boundary change proposals were nonsensical, felt that sending a letter would not be effective and it was suggested that Members should make representations individually or through their political groups.

Mr Bill, supported by a further eight Members, requested that voting be recorded on the motion. The vote was taken as follows:

Mr Bannister, Mr Bill, Mr Bray, Mr Cartwright, Mr Cope, Mr Crooks, Mr Gould, Mrs Hall, Mr Hall, Mrs Hodgkins, Mr Hulbert, Mr Inman, Mr Lay, Mr Lynch, Mr Mullaney, Mr Nichols, Miss Taylor and Ms Witherford voted FOR the motion (18);

Mr Allen, Mr Batty, Mr Bessant, Mrs Camamile, Mrs Chastney, Mr Ladkin, Mr Moore, Mr Morrell, Mrs Richards, Mrs Smith, Mrs Sprason, Mr Sutton and Mr Ward abstained from voting.

The motion was therefore declared CARRIED and the motion supported.

Mrs Hodgkins and Ms Witherford left the meeting at 9.04pm.

(b)        From Mr DC Bill

“This Council, having due regard to the standing of the Post Office and Royal Mail, views with dismay the news that it is the intention of the Royal Mail to close the sorting office in Hinckley in 2013.

This Council notes that the Royal Mail management and the unions have already expressed concern about the future of the staff and we share those concerns. We are just as concerned about the effect this will have on the delivery of vital postal services to this area.

We believe that if this move is carried out it will have an adverse effect on all customers of the Royal Mail both as individuals and as public or commercial concerns.

We object, therefore, in the strongest possible terms to this proposal and seek urgent discussions with the relevant decision-makers within the organisation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 211.