Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor Lynch with the substitution of Councillor Witherford authorised in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 16 June 2016.

On the motion of Councillor Camamile, seconded by Councillor Wallace, it was

RESOLVED – the minutes of the meeting held on 16 June 2016 be confirmed and signed by the Chairman.

No interests were declared at this stage.

Members will receive an update from CCG representatives.

Dr Nick Willmott and Caroline Trivithick presented an update on the Hinckley Community Health Services review. During the presentation, reference was made to:

·         The preference to keep x-and outpatient services together

·         Acknowledging the issue of public transport requirements in relation to accessing services at Sunnyside

·         Continuing to gather further evidence for the business case which would then be presented to NHS England

·         Acknowledgement of the strength of public feeling and fondness for Mount Road hospital

During discussion on the presentation, members raised the following points:

·         The importance of continuing services on the current site until facilities were open at the new site

·         The possible future use of the current Mount Road hospital for health-related voluntary bodies

·         The need for a walk-in centre in Hinckley

·         The desire to see improvement in medical services, as well as change and efficiencies

·         The recognition that the health services in Hinckley served towns and villages outside of Hinckley

·         Concern about the road outside Sunnyside hospital and the need to add traffic calming measures and to improve access and pedestrian safety

·         Potential for additional town centre parking on this site.

Members asked that the CCG continue to engage with the Scrutiny Commission and provide updates on proposals.

At the invitation of the Chairman, representatives of businesses in the town centre will be in attendance as witnesses.

This item was brought to the Scrutiny Commission following consideration of a petition at Council on 27 July which asked the authority to purchase the Co-op car park. Council had requested consideration of the matter by the Scrutiny Commission prior to a report being brought to Council on 6 September. Rosemary Wright, Chairman of the Chamber of Trade, and Carl Brooks, owner of a business in upper Castle Street, were in attendance at the invitation of the Chairman as witnesses.

Having heard the representations of Mrs Wright and Mr Brooks, it was proposed by Councillor Bray and seconded by Councillor Bill that the Council be recommended to purchase the Co-op site in order to support businesses and shoppers. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was carried and it was therefore

RESOLVED – Council be RECOMMENDED to seek to gain ownership of the Co-op site at the earliest opportunity, on the best possible terms, in order to secure car parking capacity in the upper Castle Street and surrounding area to support the traders and businesses located there.

To discuss the recent decision of the Executive in relation to a procurement exercise for Hinckley Markets. A representative of the market traders will be in attendance as witness.

Following a decision by the Executive at its meeting on 29 June 2016 to undertake a formal procurement exercise in relation to the operation of Hinckley Markets, some members of the Scrutiny Commission had requested to review the report before the decision being implemented. At the invitation of the Chairman, a representative of the market traders was in attendance as a witness.

During discussion, the following points were raised:

·         The importance of the market in drawing visitors to the town centre

·         The ageing profile of market traders who may take the opportunity to retire should a private operator be procured

·         Concern of traders about private management of the markets

·         The motivation of private operators being financial rather than operating in the interests of the town and current traders

·         The national decline of markets and success of Hinckley’s in comparison

·         The need to protect current stallholders being reflected in the tender documentation

·         Previous experiences of the Council of outsourcing had proven generally that services were better delivered in-house

·         The need to maintain a balance of traders, which is a policy unlikely to be maintained under private management

·         The need to give proper consideration to the matter, as it appeared to be a rushed decision.

A member enquired about the reasons for the report and whether it was due to a loss of revenue or other problems. In response, the Executive member explained that there were weaknesses, for example the Monday market and ageing traders, who may retire and their stalls may remain unfilled.

The following was requested by members:

·         Information on which other authorities had outsourced their markets and what results this had produced

·         To view the business case for considering a procurement exercise

·         That the Scrutiny Commission sees the documents before the tender is advertised

·         That the Scrutiny Commission has the opportunity to consider the outcome of the tender process prior to a decision by the Executive.

Councillor Bray wished it to be recorded that the Liberal Democrat group was opposed to any move to privatise the market and, seconded by Councillor Crooks, he moved that the Executive takes no further steps on the procurement of markets’ management until the Scrutiny Commission has had the opportunity both to examine the tender specification and to review the business case for change. Upon being put to the vote, the motion was CARRIED and it was

RESOLVED – that the Executive be RECOMMENDED to take no further steps on the procurement of markets’ management until the Scrutiny Commission has had the opportunity both to examine the tender specification and to review the business case for change.

Councillor Wallace wished it to be recorded that he voted against the motion.

To seek support for a revised Local Development Scheme for the period 2016-2019.

Members received a report which proposed a revised Local Development Scheme (LDS) for 2016-19 which was a statutory requirement and crucial in decision making. During discussion and in response to questions asked, the following points were made:

·         The significant weight of the local plan in decision making

·         The need to commit to support all parishes and defined communities, particularly on approaching the end of the period covered by the document in 2019

·         The need to keep abreast of housing numbers and delivery of affordable housing (it was noted that a report on affordable housing delivery was on the work programme for the October meeting)

·         The gypsy and traveller study, the outcome of which would be reported to the planning policy working group, was queried and it was requested that it be presented to a future meeting of the Commission

·         The important need to explain reasons for housing growth to the public.

RESOLVED –

(i)            Council be RECOMMENDED to make a commitment to neighbourhood planning;

(ii)           The outcome of the gypsy and traveller study be brought to a future meeting.

To inform members of enhancement schemes under the Environmental Improvement Programme.

The Scrutiny Commission received a report which outlined the Environmental Improvement Programme for 2016/17. Members welcomed the report and were supportive of the continuing scheme which, they felt, added vitality to rural settlements. It was requested that any schemes that weren’t recommended for approval be included in future reports, and that any not recommended for 2016/17 be circulated to members outside of the meeting.

RESOLVED – the report be endorsed and any applications not supported be listed in future reports.

To consider and make recommendations to the Executive in relation to the charge for the garden waste service for 2017/18 and in part for 2018/19.

Members received a report which sought support for setting the charge for the garden waste service for 2017/18 and, for those paying by direct debit, for 2018/19. Councillor Bray stated that he could not support the report as he didn’t agree with the imposition of a charge at all, and, along with three other members, stood to request voting on the recommendation be recorded. The vote was taken as follows:

Councillors Camamile, Richards, Sutton, Wallace, Ward and Williams voted FOR the recommendation (6);

Councillors Bray, Crooks, Bill, Lay and Witherford voted AGAINST the recommendation (5).

It was therefore

RESOLVED –

(i)            the Executive be RECOMMENDED to approve the charge for the garden waste service for 2017/18 at £24;

(ii)           the Executive be RECOMMENDED to approve the charge for those paying for the garden waste service by direct debit at £24 for 2018/19.

To seek support for recommendations to Council regarding revision of the Parish & Community Initiative Fund and an additional fund available to larger parishes.

The covering report and appendix B have been amended.

A report which recommended revisions to the Parish and Community Initiative Fund (PCIF) and creation of a new Developing Communities Fund was presented to members. The report and proposals were welcomed.

In relation to the PCIF, concern was expressed about inviting schools to bid for funding and it was emphasised that the decision to consider them only if funding remained after all other bids had been considered must be enforced, or that they should only be invited to bid if there was funding after the first tranche of bids had been considered. Following discussion, it was agreed that the latter would be proposed as a recommendation.

Members also asked whether the PCIF would be available for projects in Hinckley, and in response it was noted that it would, and that match funding would need to be provided from the special expenses area budget.

RESOLVED –

(i)            The report be welcomed and proposals be endorsed;

(ii)           Council be RECOMMENDED to agree to only invite schools to submit a bid to the PCIF if there was funding remaining after all bids had been considered.

To seek views on the draft Efficiency Plan prior to consideration by Council and, if approved, submission to the DCLG.

The views of the Scrutiny Commission were sought on the current draft of the Efficiency Plan which would be considered by Council on 6 September and, if approved, submitted to the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) by 14 October. It was noted that there was no set format for the submission and also that the appendices would be amended prior to council as figures were updated.

RESOLVED – the report be welcomed and supported.

Attached for information.

The minutes of Finance & Performance Scrutiny on 20 June and 25 July 2016 were received for information.

The work programme for 2016-17 was supported, subject to the addition of any other items agreed at this meeting.