Agenda and minutes

Reverend Jane Gibbs offered prayer, referring to the recent and sad deaths of Susan Taylor from Barwell during a channel swim and a couple who had been involved in an accident in Fenny Drayton.

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors Boothby and Chastney.

Minutes of the meetings held on 21 February and 14 May attached.

On the motion of Councillor Nichols, seconded by Councillor Bill, it was

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meetings held on 21 February and 14 May 2013 be approved and signed by the Mayor.

The Mayor has agreed to accept an additional item (on this supplementary agenda as 23a) to appoint to a new Outside Body.

The Mayor announced that she had agreed to accept an additional item of business (listed as 23a on the supplementary agenda) regarding appointment to two outside bodies. This matter had been deemed urgent due to the need to appoint to them prior to the next Council meeting.

No interests were declared at this stage.

The Mayor reported on a successful trip to Grand Quevilly, where an excellent food festival had taken place. Two chefs from North Warwickshire and Hinckley College had accompanied the civic delegation and the food they presented had been very well received, particularly the trifle.

(a)        From Councillor WJ Crooks addressed to the Leader of the Council

Does the Leader agree with me that the Hinckley & Bosworth Executive’s decision to keep out of the Leicestershire Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation Assessment was a good decision?

Response from Councillor SL Bray

Yes I totally agree that the decision to take a watching brief on the County wide GTAA and continue to progress with our borough wide GTAA was the correct one. The HBBC gypsy and traveller needs assessment has been completed and will be signed off by Executive in early September.  Members will be please to note the positive position that HBBC are now in following the study compared with other districts who were involved with the county-wide GTAA.

The Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment has used a fundamentally different methodology to calculate its’ Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation requirement to that used to prepare the Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council’s GTAA.

The HBBC GTAA did not rely on the 2007 GTAA but started from scratch based on the new national policy guidance.  Our methodology has been to identify our own need where it arises by undertaking thorough interviews with the gypsy and traveller community within the borough.  From those interviews an analysis of the population profile of the community was undertaken to establish the future need of that sector of our community.  The HBBC GTAA then goes an extra step and looks at ways in which that need can be met on a sequential approach, firstly by looking at capacity within existing sites, then by extensions to sites and then looking at new sites.

The starting point for the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland study was the numbers identified in the 2007 study, and the methodology involved contacting only a sample of the Gypsies and Travellers living in the County. It does not follow the second part of the Hinckley & Bosworth BC study in identifying land availability and potential delivery mechanisms for the need where it arises.

Just so Members get a feel for those figures which emerged from the Countywide refresh of the GTAA, from 2012 to 2031

·         Harborough require 80 pitches, plus 5 transit pitches and 25 plots for Showpeople

·          N W Leicestershire 68 pitches plus 20 transit pitches and 9 plots for Showpeople

(b)        From Councillor JS Moore addressed to the Executive Member for Finance

Could the Leader confirm that at the end of the 2011/12 Tax year the level of Council Tax arrears was in the region of £953,000.00? Information in my possession points to some of this debt originating as far back as 1998/99.

The recent changes regarding the introduction of “Universal Credit” benefits will, it is anticipated, bring about a significant increase in the incidence of arrears. Could I ask the Leader to provide this council with:

a)      The yearly level of Council Tax debt for the years 1998/99 through to 2011/12;

b)      The number of properties per year relating to this debt;

c)      Measurers taken by this Council  ...  view the full agenda text for item 77.

(a)        From Councillor WJ Crooks addressed to the Leader of the Council

Does the Leader agree with me that the Hinckley & Bosworth Executive’s decision to keep out of the Leicestershire Gypsy & Traveller Accommodation Assessment was a good decision?

Response from Councillor SL Bray

Yes I totally agree that the decision to take a watching brief on the County wide GTAA and continue to progress with our borough wide GTAA was the correct one. The HBBC gypsy and traveller needs assessment has been completed and will be signed off by Executive in early September.  Members will be please to note the positive position that HBBC are now in following the study compared with other districts who were involved with the county-wide GTAA.

The Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment has used a fundamentally different methodology to calculate its’ Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation requirement to that used to prepare the Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council’s GTAA.

The HBBC GTAA did not rely on the 2007 GTAA but started from scratch based on the new national policy guidance.  Our methodology has been to identify our own need where it arises by undertaking thorough interviews with the gypsy and traveller community within the borough.  From those interviews an analysis of the population profile of the community was undertaken to establish the future need of that sector of our community.  The HBBC GTAA then goes an extra step and looks at ways in which that need can be met on a sequential approach, firstly by looking at capacity within existing sites, then by extensions to sites and then looking at new sites.

The starting point for the Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland study was the numbers identified in the 2007 study, and the methodology involved contacting only a sample of the Gypsies and Travellers living in the County. It does not follow the second part of the Hinckley & Bosworth BC study in identifying land availability and potential delivery mechanisms for the need where it arises.

Just so Members get a feel for those figures which emerged from the Countywide refresh of the GTAA, from 2012 to 2031

·         Harborough require 80 pitches, plus 5 transit pitches and 25 plots for Showpeople

·          N W Leicestershire 68 pitches plus 20 transit pitches and 9 plots for Showpeople

(b)        From Councillor JS Moore addressed to the Executive Member for Finance

Could the Leader confirm that at the end of the 2011/12 Tax year the level of Council Tax arrears was in the region of £953,000.00? Information in my possession points to some of this debt originating as far back as 1998/99.

The recent changes regarding the introduction of “Universal Credit” benefits will, it is anticipated, bring about a significant increase in the incidence of arrears. Could I ask the Leader to provide this council with:

a)      The yearly level of Council Tax debt for the years 1998/99 through to 2011/12;

b)      The number of properties per year relating to this debt;

c)      Measurers taken by this Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 77.

Madam Mayor, Fellow Councillors, Officers, Members of the Public and Media.

Tonight marks two ‘firsts’: the first meeting of the Council in the Hinckley Hub and your first full meeting as the Mayor of this Borough. I am sure that, despite the length and complexity of the agenda before us, you will ensure that business is conducted fairly, but also efficiently.

I think all Members will join me in welcoming the move to this new energy efficient building. Not only have Borough Council teams moved into the Hub, but both Adult Social Care and Children’s Services teams have relocated from their County Council bases and have been welcomed into the building. We also have family workers engaged in the locality-managed Supporting Leicestershire Families initiative and other agencies will be hot-desking as part of the Community Safety ‘Endeavour‘ programme. By the end of September, JobCentre Plus will have relocated to the Ground Floor and we will be nearing 100% occupancy. This will bring immediate financial savings to all the public bodies located in the Hub. The next step, of course, will be to begin to integrate those functions and teams around the people and communities on whom they can have the greatest impact, thereby improving further the overall efficiency and effectiveness of public services in Hinckley and Bosworth; Community Budgeting made a reality!

Can I thank those Officers who have been particularly involved in the effective delivery of this project – the Assets Team, led by Malcolm Evans, and the ICT Team (vital to any such project, but often forgotten), led by Paul Langham.

The Chief Executive and I attended the recent annual LGA Conference in Manchester, which was generally low-key; perhaps not surprisingly, given the announcements in the Spending review for 2015/16, made the previous week. Steve and I did pick up on a number of leads from the Exhibition, which we will follow up with Members in due course, on Community Covenant and various benchmarking tools. We heard also Lord Heseltine’s view of how the country might make progress on economic development and regeneration nationally and locally. Whilst there may be little disagreement with his prescription of the ‘Single Local Pot’, I think most of us will have a disagreement with his view of how that might be governed – via the unelected Local Enterprise Partnerships and with Districts subsumed within new County Unitaries. As you might imagine, there was some clear division in the audience when he made that latter point; but it is one he has made before and not one which is shared by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government.

Speaking of whom, Mr Pickles was the centre of attention for Districts during the Conference, both for his main address on the Wednesday and for his appearance, with Brandon Lewis, at the District Councils’ Network Assembly on the Thursday. The reason for his ‘celebrity’ was his defence of the ‘hidden’ announcement the previous Thursday on New Homes Bonus  ...  view the full agenda text for item 78.

In his position statement, the Leader referred to several current issues, including the move to Hinckley Hub, changes to the New Homes Bonus and the City Deal.

Minutes of the Scrutiny Commission meetings held on 14 March and 9 May 2013 attached for information.

The minutes of the Scrutiny Commission meetings held on 14 March and 9 May 2013 were noted.

To consider the passing of a resolution under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972 excluding the public from the undermentioned item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraphs 3 and 10 of Schedule 12A of the 1972 Act.

Further to the agenda which had exempted the public and press from the following item in accordance with paragraphs 3 and 10 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 (section 100A(4)), the situation had changed since publication of the agenda and it was no longer in the public interest to maintain the privacy of the matter. As such paragraph 10 no longer applied and it was, therefore, recommended that the debate be held in public and the report be released on request. It was therefore

RESOLVED – discussion on the report “Bus Station Site – Revised Development Agreement” be held in public session.

As a result of the item no longer being exempt and in light of the attendance of members of the public for the item, it was

RESOLVED – the abovementioned report be taken as the next item of business.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction).

Further to the previous item, which resulted in agreement that this report would be discussed in public, members were updated on the current position regarding the Development Agreement with Tin Hat Regeneration Partnership and Sainsbury’s Plc. Recent communications and activity since the November 2012 Council meeting were highlighted and it was confirmed that discussions had taken place between the relevant parties.

During debate, some Members raised concerns that the matter should have been considered by the Scrutiny Commission to ensure full scrutiny of all aspects and informed decision making. Questions were raised regarding the level of borrowing to which the council had to commit, the commitment of Sainsbury’s, the viability of the scheme and potential to let the units. Members were informed that whilst there was risk to the authority with progressing with the development, the risk was within manageable limits and that the break even point to make the purchase of Block C financially viable was around 56% of units let as at this level the cost of borrowing would be off set by the rental income and business rates up lift. It was also acknowledged that the steps being recommended were not uncommon initiatives from councils in the current climate in order to move forward with town centre re-developments.

It was moved by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor Lynch that the officers’ recommendations be approved. Councillor Bray, along with seven other councillors, stood to request that voting be recorded. The vote was taken as follows:

Councillors Bannister, Bill, Bray, Cartwright, Cope, Crooks, Gould, Mrs Hall, Mr Hall, Hodgkins, Hulbert, Inman, Lynch, Mayne, Moore, Mullaney, Nichols, Taylor and Witherford voted FOR the motion (19);

Councillors Allen, Batty, Bessant, Camamile, Ladkin, Morrell, O’Shea, Richards, Smith, Sprason, Sutton and Ward voted AGAINST the motion (12);

Councillor Lay abstained from voting.

The motion was therefore declared CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED –

(i)         the variations to the Development Agreement as set out in the report be agreed and the Chief Executive, in liaison with the Leader of the Council and the Executive Member for Finance, be granted delegated authority to conclude negotiations on a formal Deed of Variation;

(ii)        the revised commercial terms, financial implications and risks as set out in the report be agreed;

(iii)       the supplementary capital budget of £4,500,000 to reflect the Council’s capital investment in the Bus Station Scheme be approved;

(iv)       delegated authority be granted to the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction), in consultation with the Executive Member for Finance, to amend the profile of this capital budget should it extend over financial years without the need for additional supplementary or carry forward requests;

(v)        the short term rolling loan facility of up to £7,000,000 to the Tin Hat Partnership, be approved;

(vi)       an amendment to the Treasury Management Policy to allow up to £7,000,000 of loan monies to be held with the Council’s own bank for a maximum of two weeks to manage any delays that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 81.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction).

Council was presented with the Leicester-Shire and Rutland County Sports Partnership Annual Review 2012/13. Members were supportive of the work and a discussion on support for parishes to run summer schemes ensued, with some Members stating that they didn’t recall the support being offered to their parish council, whilst others expressed the view that some parish councils did not want to take on the responsibility. It was requested and agreed by officers that in future the information be sent to ward councillors as well as parish councils.

RESOLVED – the Annual Review be endorsed and the significant investment secured for sport and physical activity within the Borough during 2012/13 be noted.

It was agreed that agenda items 11, 12, 13 and 17 (Medium Term Financial Strategy, Draft Outturn 2012/2013, Review of General Fund Earmarked Reserves and Hinckley Hub Payment of Stamp Duty) would be introduced and debated on together, but voted upon separately.

During discussion, the following points were noted:

• The Stamp Duty figure had been anticipated so the reserves were available;
• Some Members expressed concerns regarding increased reliance on investment income;
• Universal Credit would have an impact but the MTFS reflected the currently anticipated position regarding welfare reforms;
• In response to a question it was stated that there had been no affect on frontline services;
• The Medium Term Financial Strategy was updated every six months.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction).

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

RESOLVED – the Medium Term Financial Strategy be approved.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction).

It was moved by Councillor Lynch, seconded by Councillor Bray, and

RESOLVED –

(i)         the draft General Fund outturn for 2012/13 be approved;

(ii)        transfers to earmarked reserves and balances be approved;

(iii)       carry forwards of expenditure and income to 2013/14 be approved;

(iv)       the transfer of year end under spend on the Housing Revenue Account  to the HRA fund balance be approved;

(v)        a transfer from the Housing Repairs Account to the Housing Repairs capital programme in order to fund the adverse variance as set out in paragraph 3.15 be approved;

(vi)       the recommendations in respect of the year end outturn for the General Fund capital programme and the Housing Revenue Account capital programme and carry forwards be approved.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction).

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

RESOLVED –

(i)         the recommended transfers from balances to earmarked reserves be approved;

(ii)        earmarking of additional reserves to fund future expenditure be approved.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction).

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

RESOLVED – the creation of a budget of £165,549 to be funded from the relocation reserve be approved to cover the cost of the Stamp Duty Land Tax payable on the lease of the Hinckley Hub building.

Having reached 9.30pm and in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9, it was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Lynch and

RESOLVED – the meeting be allowed to continue and reviewed again at 10.30pm, if necessary.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction).

Members received the HRA Investment plan and associated budget detail. During discussion, the following points were raised:

• The need to refresh some existing council properties;
• The delays with boiler repairs and the need to look into the maintenance contract to ensure it is appropriate;
• The future need for more sheltered accommodation and for care homes;
• The possibility of the council buying land for rural exception sites;
• The need to project future housing stock requirements;
• The need to achieve a balance between building new houses and improving existing stock.

It was moved by Councillor Mullaney, seconded by Councillor Bray, and unanimously

RESOLVED –

(i)         the HRA Investment Plan and associated budget profile be approved;

(ii)        the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction) in consultation with the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction), Executive Member for Finance, ICT & Asset Management and the Executive Member for Housing be granted delegated authority to approve individual budget schemes (revenue and capital) within the investment profile;

(iii)       quarterly reports on the implementation of the HRA investment be presented to the Executive, with an Annual Report provided to Council alongside the annual budget outturn report.

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction).

Members received a report which provided an update on progress made to explore the feasibility of a Private Sector Leasing Scheme. The report was welcomed and it was felt that action should be taken to bring empty properties back into use. It was suggested that rural homes should be a priority and that the council should encourage owners to work with it. It was moved by Councillor Mullaney, seconded by Councillor Bray and

RESOLVED –

(i)         the use of a Private Sector Leasing Scheme across the Borough be approved;

(ii)        the use of flexible, fixed term tenancies for properties that form part of the scheme be approved;

(iii)       the addition of a clause to the Tenancy Policy stating that where a property forms part of the Scheme, lifetime tenancies cannot be granted but a tenancy will be granted for the longest term possible within the timeframe of the leasing term, be approved;

(iv)       delegated authority be granted to the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction) to create appropriate capital and revenue budgets once the nature of the individual works are known, up to the value of £468,900;

(v)        a supplementary budget of £6,000 to fund the administration cost and £20,610 annually for two years for modern apprentices be approved;

(vi)       the Deputy Chief Executive (Corporate Direction) be granted delegated authority to create rental income budgets once the properties have been brought back into use;

(vii)      an income budget of £90,000 to reflect the grant income due to be received from the Homes and Communities Agency for Empty Homes phase 2 be approved;

(viii)      an income budget of £60,000 to reflect contributions from property owners to fund works on their properties be approved;

(ix)       a total expenditure budget of £210,000 for expenditure incurred on the 6 commercial properties identified be approved;

(x)        a virement of £60,000 from the current under spent major works grants budget to the empty homes commercial property budget to fund the Council’s contributions to these works be approved.

(Councillor Morrell was absent whilst the vote was taken).

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction).

Council was presented with a report which requested creation of a budget to pay for Waste Management vehicles and recycling banks. On the motion of Councillor Mullaney, seconded by Councillor Bray, it was

RESOLVED –

(i)         the purchase of a new refuse collection vehicle for an estimated £75,000 to be funded from the waste management reserve be approved;

(ii)        the purchase of a second hand telescopic handler for £28,000 to be funded from the waste management reserve be approved;

(iii)       the creation of a capital budget of £40,000 in 2013/14 and 2014/15 to purchase new recycling banks to be funding by making a revenue contribution to fund capital expenditure arising from savings in the recycling budgets, be approved;

(iv)       the £8,380 saving arising from purchasing instead of spot hiring the telescopic handler be noted.

(Councillor O’Shea was absent during the voting on this item).

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction) attached.

Members received a revised Statement of Community Involvement following its presentation to Planning Committee. On the motion of Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Bill, it was

RESOLVED – the revised Statement of Community Involvement be approved and arrangements for further consultation be endorsed.

(Councillor O’Shea was absent during voting on this item).

Report of the Deputy Chief Executive (Community Direction).

The appendices to this document, including the Area Action Plan document, are available on the Council’s website as part of the agenda documentation. Alternatively please contact the report author if a paper copy is required.

Agreement was sought to consult on the Earl Shilton and Barwell Area Action Plan (AAP) pre-submission document and supporting documents. The following matters were raised during debate:

• Disappointment was expressed that the LLITM hadn’t been prepared in time to be consulted upon prior to determination of the Barwell SUE planning application. It was confirmed that this was now ready and would form part of the consultation prior to determination of the Earl Shilton SUE;
• Members were concerned that the application for the Doctors’ surgery which had been permitted in Barwell had not been commenced, and they hoped that improvements would be secured for Earl Shilton;
• Consultation on the Earl Shilton SUE application would take the format of exhibitions, letters to residents and meetings with the town council.

On the motion of Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Bill, it was unanimously

RESOLVED –

(i)         the publication of the pre-submission draft Earl Shilton & Barwell Area Action Plan, Sustainability Appraisal and supporting documents for consultation during the period between Friday, 30 August and Monday, 14 October 2013 be approved;

(ii)        the submission of the Earl Shilton and Barwell Area Action Plan and supporting documents to the Secretary of State for examination following analysis of the representations received during consultation be approved;

(iii)       the requirement for submission of a single outline planning application for the Earl Shilton Sustainable Urban Extension in line with the advice given in paragraph 9.1 of the Area Action Plan be endorsed.

Councillor Bessant left the meeting at 10.19pm.

Report of the Monitoring Officer.

Members received a revised Code of Conduct which had been recommended by the Ethical Governance and Personnel Committee who had rejected the originally proposed countywide code of conduct but had agreed some changes to the council’s current code.

Some concern was expressed regarding the interpretation of the code by potential complainants, how to deal with a potential bias due to membership of a political party, and how this would affect voting on issues where there was a political whip. In response it was stated that many of the new parts were similar to the previous Code of Conduct which had been in existence prior to commencement of the new regime. It was explained that, despite having no provision for ‘personal interests’, members had still been wishing to declare such interests for reasons of openness and transparency.

It was moved by Councillor Witherford, seconded by Councillor Bill and

RESOLVED – the revised Code of Conduct be adopted.

Having reached almost 10.30pm and in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9, it was moved by Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Cope and

RESOLVED – the meeting be allowed to continue to completion of business.

Report of the Monitoring Officer.

Members were presented with the Corporate Plan 2013-16. It was moved by Councillor Witherford, seconded by Councillor Bray and

RESOLVED – the Corporate Plan be approved.

To agree membership of committees as follows (those with changes are indicated, the remainder are included for completeness):

(1)        Planning Committee (17 Members)

Cllr R Mayne (Chairman); Cllr DM Taylor (Vice-Chairman); Cllr RG Allen; Cllr JG Bannister; Cllr T Chastney; Cllr WJ Crooks; Cllr A Hall; Cllr M Hulbert; Cllr DW Inman; Cllr KWP Lynch; Cllr J Moore; Cllr K Morrell; Cllr LJP O’Shea; Cllr H Smith, Cllr BE Sutton; Cllr R Ward; Cllr BM Witherford.

(2)               Scrutiny Commission (12 Members)

Cllr MR Lay (Chairman); Cllr C Ladkin (Vice-Chairman); Cllr DM Taylor (Vice-Chairman); Cllr PR Batty; Cllr PS Bessant; Cllr MB Cartwright; Cllr A Hall; Cllr M Hulbert; Cllr DW Inman; Cllr JS Moore; Cllr K Morrell; Cllr K Nichols.

            (3)        Hinckley Area Committee (10 Members)

Cllr SL Bray (Chairman); Cllr L Hodgkins (Vice-Chairman); Cllr JG Bannister; Cllr DC Bill; Cllr DS Cope; Cllr KWP Lynch; Cllr MT Mullaney; Cllr K Nichols; Cllr DM Taylor; Cllr BM Witherford.

(4)        Licensing Committee (11 Members)

Cllr K Nichols (Chairman); Cllr M Hulbert (Vice-Chairman); Cllr PR Batty; Cllr SL Bray; Cllr MB Cartwright; Cllr DM Gould, Cllr MT Mullaney; Cllr LJP O’Shea; Cllr J Richards; Cllr H Smith; Cllr S Sprason.

(5)        Licensing (Regulatory) Committee (11 Members)

Cllr K Nichols (Chairman); Cllr M Hulbert (Vice-Chairman); Cllr PR Batty; Cllr SL Bray; Cllr MB Cartwright; Cllr DM Gould, Cllr MT Mullaney; Cllr LJP O’Shea; Cllr J Richards; Cllr H Smith; Cllr S Sprason.

(6)               Ethical Governance & Personnel Committee (9 Members) (change in membership)

Cllr DW Inman (Chairman); Cllr R Camamile; Cllr WA Hall; Cllr KWP Lynch; Cllr JS Moore (replacing Cllr Bill); Cllr LJP O’Shea; Cllr J Richards (filling vacancy), Cllr R Ward; Cllr BM Witherford.

(7)        Finance, Audit & Performance Committee (7 Members) (change in membership)

Cllr DM Taylor (Chairman); Cllr R Mayne (Vice-Chairman); Cllr PR Batty (filling vacancy); Cllr R Camamile; Cllr P Hall; Cllr JS Moore (replacing Cllr Bannister); Cllr K Morrell.

On the motion of Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Bill, it was

RESOLVED – the membership of committees be approved as set out in the supplementary agenda.

To appoint representatives for the Voluntary and Community Sector Commissioning Board, as part of the new Voluntary and Community Sector arrangements established for Hinckley and Bosworth, and to amend membership of the Hinckley Highways Forum to maintain political balance.

(a)        Voluntary and Community Sector Commissioning Board

            The Executive has recommended that Councillors Keith Lynch and Bron Witherford be appointed as the Council’s representatives.

(b)        Hinckley Highways Forum (9)

Cllr RG Allen, Cllr WJ Crooks, Cllr DM Gould, Cllr PAS Hall, Cllr DW Inman, Cllr MR Lay, Cllr K Morrell, Cllr BE Sutton and Cllr BM Witherford.

Substitutes (9):

            Cllr PS Bessant (for Cllr Allen), Cllr MB Cartwright (for Cllr Crooks), Cllr MS Hulbert (for Cllr Gould), Cllr K Nichols (for Cllr PAS Hall), Cllr R Mayne (for Cllr Inman), Cllr PR Batty (for Cllr Morrell), Cllr R Ward (for Cllr Sutton), Cllr DS Cope (for Cllr Witherford).

            (Cllr Batty replacing Cllr Moore as substitute for Cllr Morrell).

On the motion of Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Bill, it was

RESOLVED – the membership of outside bodies be approved as set out in the supplementary agenda.

Report of the Chief Executive.

Members were informed of suggested revisions to the Senior Management Structure which would achieve a more cohesive approach at Chief Officer level and a reduction in costs. On the motion of Councillor Bray, seconded by Councillor Bill, it was

RESOLVED – the Senior Management Restructure as proposed be approved.