Agenda and minutes

Mick Connell

 

The Chairman reminded members that it would be the last meeting of the County Council that Mick Connell would be attending before his forthcoming retirement.

 

Mick had been Director of Adults and Communities for nine years and had made an enormous contribution to the Council.  More recently, Mick had led the County Council’s engagement with NHS partners to ensure that health and social care services were delivered effectively.

 

The Chairman, on behalf of all members of the Council, was very pleased to wish Mick well for a long and happy retirement. 

It was moved by the Chairman, seconded by Mr Snartt and carried:-

 

“That the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 3 December 2014, copies of which have been circulated to members, be taken as read, confirmed and signed.”

 

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to make declarations of interest in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

 

All Members who were also members of District Councils declared a personal interest in relation to the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2015-2019 (minute 41 below refers).

 

Dr Eynon declared a personal interest in the Better Care proposals set out in the MTFS as a salaried GP.

 

Dr Eynon also advised the Council that having discussed the matter with the Monitoring Officer and noting that a closing date for Snibston had been announced and no sign of the promised mining museum, her son’s job as a volunteer was at risk.  Whilst many other disabled people in her division were also affected, this would be a deep personal blow to her and her family.

 

The Monitoring Officer had advised that this changed her position as to where she could speak, as her peers may then judge her to have a bias on the debate.  She therefore declared a personal interest leading to bias in the debate regarding Snibston and said that she would take no part in the debate.

 

 

 

(A)      Dr Eynon asked the following question of the Leader or his nominee:-

 

“How many onward referrals have generic parenting services funded by this Council, such as ‘Fun and Families’ and ‘Family STEPS’ made to condition-specific services such as ‘ADHD Solutions’ in the last financial year and how is this work funded?”

 

Mr Ould replied as follows:-

 

“The County Council does not currently collect data regarding onward referrals that are made by service providers in receipt of financial resource.

The recent review of Voluntary and Community Sector services for children and families has highlighted the need to be more specific in its commissioning outcomes.  The new procurement specifications will include a clear set of performance data required to measure success against those identified outcomes.”

 

Dr Eynon asked the following supplementary question:-

 

“I would like to ask if Mr Ould is aware that currently ‘ADHD Solutions’, receive no funding whatsoever from ‘Fun and Families’ or ‘Family Steps’ for taking on children whose behaviour these services are ill-equipped to manage and does he believe that this should continue in the future arrangements?”

 

Mr Ould replied as follows:-

 

“Clearly we are in a position of change. The 78 organisations, who had 121 contracts, are accepting of the current situation which has been organised by Voluntary Action Leicestershire. On this specific point, I don’t have up-to-date information at the moment but I will undertake to look into the matter personally.” 

 

(B)     Mr Pendleton asked the following question of the Leader or his nominee:-

 

“What are the prospects of achieving a bypass for Kegworth should the Roxhill development not gain planning approval?”

 

Mr Osborne replied as follows:-

 

“In that event, the prospects would appear to be extremely remote.  It is very unlikely that the County Council would have sufficient funding available to deliver a Kegworth Bypass. 

 

Whilst the Highways Agency was at one time proposing a new route between the A6 south of Kegworth and the M1 at M1 J23a, this was as part of a now defunct M1 motorway widening proposal.  The Highways Agency’s preferred approach to addressing problems on the M1 through Leicestershire would, in the main, now appear to be based on the introduction of a SMART motorway which makes use of the hard shoulders at times of heavy traffic flow - this is similar to schemes introduced on the M6 and M42 near Birmingham.

 

There are no other development proposals that the County Council is aware of that are of a sufficient scale that could for that area reasonably be required to fund a bypass.”

 

(C)     Mr Hunt asked the following question of the Leader or his nominee:-

 

“Could the Leader:-

 

(i)       Explain why the promised long-term strategy for Beaumanor Hall which was expected a year ago has not been completed and put before members?

 

(ii)      Explain how is it that this Administration cannot afford to run a modern museum facility when it can afford to finance a 19th Century stately home with significant overheads?”

 

Mr Pain replied as follows:-

 

(i)       Unfortunately this has been delayed by work on the Snibston review, Energy Strategy, County Hall Masterplan and Economic Development projects.  These projects are high priority and will deliver significant savings for the County Council.

 

(ii)      A strategic review of Beaumanor Hall is now underway and will provide the basis for developing a long-term strategy for this facility.  This review will include a detailed analysis of the financial performance of the facility.

 

It is worth noting that in the current year, Beaumanor Hall is predicted to break even on a turnover of £1.4m.  Based on a ‘status quo’ operation, small losses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.

It was moved by Mr Rhodes and seconded by Mr Shepherd:-

 

“(a)   That subject to the items below, approval be given to the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) which incorporates the recommended revenue budget for 2015/16 totalling £348m as set out in Appendices A, B and C of the report and includes the growth and savings for that year as set out in Appendix D;

 

(b)  That approval be given to the projected provisional revenue budgets for 2016/17, 2017/18 and 2018/19, set out in Appendix B to the report, including the growth and savings for those years as set out in Appendix D thereto and to the undertaking of such preliminary work, including consultation and equality impact assessment, as may be necessary towards achieving the savings specified for those years;

 

(c)  That the level of earmarked funds as set out in Appendix E be noted and the use of earmarked funds be approved;

 

(d)  That the amounts of the County Council's Council Tax for each band of dwelling and the precept payable by each billing authority for 2015/16 be as set out in Appendix F;

 

(e)  That the Chief Executive be authorised to issue the necessary precepts to billing authorities in accordance with the budget requirement above and the tax base notified by the District Councils, and to take any other action which may be necessary to give effect to the precepts;

 

(f)   That approval be given to the 2015/16 – 2018/19 capital programme as set out in Appendix G;

 

(g) That the Director of Corporate Resources be authorised to approve the following for inclusion in the 2015/16 - 2018/19 Capital Programme;

 

(i)      Invest to save schemes;

(ii)     Advance design and other advance work on urgent schemes within the capital programme including schools capital maintenance pending confirmation of the allocations from the Department for Education (DfE);

 

(h)    That the Director of Corporate Resources and the Director of Children and Family Services be authorised to approve the inclusion of funded new school accommodation capital schemes in the Capital Programme to enable the County Council to meet its statutory responsibility for the delivery of sufficient school places;

 

(i)      That the financial indicators required under the Prudential Code included in Appendix L, Annex 2 be noted and that the following limits be approved:-

 

 

 

	2015/16 £m	2016/17 £m	2017/18 £m	2018/19 £m
Operational boundary for external debt
i) Borrowing	289.8	280.9	271.0	270.6
ii)   Other long term liabilities	1.3	1.2	1.1	1.0
TOTAL	291.1	282.1	272.1	271.6
Authorised limit for external debt
i)    Borrowing	299.8	290.9	281.0	280.6
ii)   Other long term liabilities	1.3	1.2	1.1	1.0
TOTAL	301.1	292.1	282.1	281.6

 

(j)      That the Director of Corporate Resources be given delegated authority to effect movement within the authorised limit for external debt between borrowing and other long term liabilities;

 

(k)    That the following borrowing limits be approved for the period 2015/16 to 2018/19:

 

(i)   Upper limit on fixed interest exposures 100%

(ii)  Upper limit on variable rate exposures 50%

(iii)  Maturity of borrowing:-

 

	Upper Limit	Lower Limit
	%	%
Under 12 months	30	0
12 months and within 24 months	30	0
24 months and within 5 years	50	0
5 years and within 10 years	70	0
10 years and above	100	25

 

(l)      That the Director of Corporate Resources be authorised to enter into such loans or undertake such arrangements as necessary to finance capital payments in 2015/16, subject to the prudential limits in (k) above;

 

(m)  That the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and the Annual Investment Strategy for 2015/16, as set out in Appendix L, be approved including the following:  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41a

“(a)   This Council notes:-

 

        (i)     the decision of Cabinet on the 14^th January 2015 to close Snibston Discovery Museum in its current form;

 

(ii)    the important contribution that the Science and Technology Museum at Snibston has made to Coalville’s heritage and ongoing economic prosperity, bringing £4.2m into the Coalville economy every year and inspiring children across and beyond Leicestershire to take up STEM subjects at school;

 

(iii)    the strength of support for retaining Snibston Discovery Museum from right across Leicestershire, including cross party support;

 

        (iv)   the County Council’s preferred plan as presented to the Scrutiny Committee lacked detail and that the plan to disperse the Museum Collections currently held at Snibston and replace the existing Gallery with a smaller mining museum would require one-off capital and revenue transition costs that might not be affordable after the next Comprehensive Spending Review.

 

(b)    This Council, therefore, calls on the Cabinet to reverse its decision to stop efforts to save the Discovery Museum and instruct officers to work with the Friends of Snibston and their associated museum experts so that, through co-operation, robust analysis and constructive challenge, a financially viable plan for Snibston Discovery Museum might be established that makes the savings required whilst retaining this facility for the benefit of the people of Leicestershire, noting that such work with the Friends of Snibston can be undertaken in parallel to the existing planning so that there is no risk of slippage in the delivery of the financial savings required.”

 

(Note: Having declared a personal interest which would lead to bias in this matter, Dr Eynon left the meeting during consideration of this item).

 

It was moved by Mr Sharp and seconded by Mr Spence that:-

 

“(a)   This Council notes:-

 

        (i)     the decision of Cabinet on the 14^th January 2015 to close Snibston Discovery Museum in its current form;

 

(ii)    the important contribution that the Science and Technology Museum at Snibston has made to Coalville’s heritage and ongoing economic prosperity, bringing £4.2m into the Coalville economy every year and inspiring children across and beyond Leicestershire to take up STEM subjects at school;

 

(iii)    the strength of support for retaining Snibston Discovery Museum from right across Leicestershire, including cross party support;

 

        (iv)   the County Council’s preferred plan as presented to the Scrutiny Committee lacked detail and that the plan to disperse the Museum Collections currently held at Snibston and replace the existing Gallery with a smaller mining museum would require one-off capital and revenue transition costs that might not be affordable after the next Comprehensive Spending Review.

 

(b)    This Council, therefore, calls on the Cabinet to reverse its decision to stop efforts to save the Discovery Museum and instruct officers to work with the Friends of Snibston and their associated museum experts so that, through co-operation, robust analysis and constructive challenge, a financially viable plan for Snibston Discovery Museum might be established that makes the savings required whilst retaining this facility for the benefit of the people of Leicestershire, noting that such work with the Friends of Snibston can be undertaken in parallel to the existing planning so that there is no risk of slippage in the delivery of the financial savings required.”

 

On the motion being put and before the vote was taken, five members rose asking that a named vote be recorded.

 

The vote was recorded as follows:-

 

For the motion

Mr Bill, Mr Boulter, Mr Bray, Mr Charlesworth, Mrs Fox, Mr Galton, Mr Gamble, Dr Hill, Mr Hunt, Mr Kaufman, Ms Knaggs, Mrs Loydall, Mr Lynch, Mr Miah, Mr Mullaney, Ms Newton, Mr Sharp, Mr Sheahan, Mr Spence, Mr Sprason, Mr Welsh, Miss Worman, Mr Wyatt, Mr Yates.

 

Against the motion

Mr Bentley, Mr Blunt, Mrs Camamile, Mr Coles, Mr Coxon, Mrs Dickinson,

Dr Feltham, Mr Hampson, Mr Hart, Mr Houseman, Mr Jennings, Mr Kershaw,

Mr Lewis, Mr Liquorish, Mr Orson, Mr Osborne, Mr O’Shea, Mr Ould, Mrs Page, Mr Pain, Mr Pendleton, Mrs Posnett, Mrs Radford, Mr Rhodes, Mr Rushton, Mr Shepherd, Mr Snartt, Mr White.

 

The motion was put and not carried, 24 members voting for the motion and 28 against.