Agenda and minutes

Scrutiny Commission - Wednesday, 21 April 2010 2.00 pm

Venue: Sparkenhoe Committee Room, County Hall, Glenfield

Contact: Mr. S. J. Weston (Tel: 0116 305 6226)  Email: sam.weston@leics.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

58.

Minutes. pdf icon PDF 284 KB

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 3 March 2010 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

 

59.

Question Time.

Minutes:

Dr. Martin Vaughan, a resident in Measham, asked the Chairman the following questions under Standing Order 35:-

 

“1.        How did Leicestershire County Council arrive at its current valuation for Measham Youth Club’s current land and building?

2.         Does the County Council consider this valuation to be incredibly mean considering that the lack of finance available to the Club will inhibit its ability to provide a replacement facility?

 

3.         The current site of the Youth Club is being bought as part of the Ashby Canal Project. What is the anticipated increase in land value the Council expects when it sells the land on to a developer?  Is this part of the motivating factors for the current valuation?

 

4.         How much profit does the Council expect itself or developers to achieve from the sale of the site?

 

5.         Has any analysis been undertaken to assess the long term impact on the local community from the loss of this Youth Club?

 

6.         Is the County Council going to stand idly by whilst an important community facility like Measham Youth Club is destroyed, potentially exacerbating local anti-social behaviour issues, as well as damaging future community cohesion?”

 

The Chairman replied as follows:-

 

“1.        The County Council is restricted by statute as to how it assesses compensation .There is a set of rules laid down in Section 5 of the Land Compensation Act 1961 which govern the basis of compensation. The current valuation of the site has been based on what is considered to be the market value of the site in accordance with Rule 2 of these Rules and reflects what is felt to be the value for the site assuming potential for its development for residential purposes.  In addition, the County Council will pay any eligible Disturbance and other statutory payments due to the Youth Club. The site extends to approximately 1 acre and whilst a residential development value has been applied, the valuation assumes a deduction to allow for the need to negotiate access to the site over other land. The Youth Club have appointed Surveyors to act on their behalf (and whose fees will be met by the County Council) and officers remain in discussion with them over whether this or an alternative valuation is appropriate in this case.

 

2.         The valuation reflects the fact that the County Council is governed by a statutory scheme in assessing compensation which precludes the consideration of factors such as the financial status of the owner.

 

3.         It is expected that any land which is surplus to the requirements of the Canal scheme, will be disposed of under the terms of the Joint Venture Agreement between the County Council and Ideal Country Homes (Measham) Ltd. Any income arising from an increase in the value of the land on disposal will arise solely from the reinstatement of the Canal and subject to Cabinet approval would simply be set against the cost of construction (which is estimated to be in the region of £13 million). There is therefore no profit to the County Council from the overall scheme.

 

4.         The answer to question 3 above sets out the basis on which the County Council is proposing to enter into the process of disposing of surplus land, including the Measham Youth Club. It is not possible at the present time to predict entirely accurately the proceeds of sale and to do so in a public forum would not be in accordance with the County Council’s usual practice, as this information is commercially sensitive pending conclusion of regulations and conveyencing procedures.

 

5.         The County Council’s Youth Service is aware  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

60.

Questions asked by members under Standing Order 7(3) and 7(5).

Minutes:

Mr Hunt CC asked the following questions of the Chairman:

 

“The current target for the achievement of Workplace Travel Plans is the Local Transport Plan (LTP2) target that, “50% of all employers with more than 250 staff shall have a Travel Plan by 2011" and in September 2008 the Director reported to the Environment Scrutiny Committee that we were on track to meet this target.

 

Would the Chairman:-

 

1.         Report on progress and provide a list of those employers who have delivered Travel Plans to date?

 

2.                  Tell the Commission which of these have reported progress since implementation, in terms of increased use of public transport, cycling and walking, and if there are any particularly excellent exemplars we could champion?

 

3.                  Schedule a report back to the Commission to indicate the level of success we have had by the 2011 milestone, and further monitoring and development anticipated?”

 

The Chairman replied as follows:

 

“1         Good progress has been made and by the end of March a total of 47 'major employers' in Leicestershire had adopted travel plans as follows:

 

Employer / Organisation

Name

Nos

Emplyd

District

Year 1st

included

in APR

(Year ending)

PlgPermNo

or Voluntary

Alliance & Leicester, Carlton Park

1200

BL

2010

V

Antalis, Interlink Pk

300

NW

2008

2005/1857/07

Argos, Fosse Park

270

BL

2004

2002/0807/01

Asda, Thurmaston

280

CH

2001

1998/0433/02

Ashfield Healthcare, Ashby

1200

NW

2007

2004/1583/07

AstraZeneca, Loughborough

1300

CH

2003

V

Babcock HSC, Pegasus Pk

350

NW

2004

2001/1172/07

Blaby DC, Narborough

360

BL

2009

V

BT Rolatruc, Meridian

250

BL

2007

2004/0574/01

Caterpillar (UK) + Cat Logistics, Desford

1650

HI

2001

1998/0965/04

CaterpillarLogistics/Quinton Hazell, Hinckley

315

HI

2007

2006/0362/04

Centrica/British Gas Business, Grove Pk

1000

BL

2005

2002/0707/01

Charnwood BC, Loughborough

760

CH

2001

V

Dimensions, Willow Fm, Cas Don

250

NW

2010

2007/1128/07

Dunelm, Syston

250

CH

2006

2006/3459/02

Dunlop Bestobell, Shepshed

260

CH

2006

 2005/0696/02

E2Save, Loughborough

250

CH

2007

2006/3597/02

East Midlands Airport Ltd

250

NW

2002

V

EME/Powergen, Pegasus Pk, EMA

500

NW

2002

1999/0175/07

FloGas, Syston

1000

CH

2004

2003/1195/03

George at Asda, Magna Park

400

HA

2003

2004/0260/03

Hill Rom, Ashby

260

NW

2007

V

Hinckley Community Hospital Ph1

260

HI

2010

2002/0893/04

HM Prison - Gartree, Mkt Harboro

460

HA

2010

2005/1803/03

Johnson Stalbridge Linen Services, Hinckley

275

HI

2007

2004/0882/04

Kettleby Foods/Samworth, LFE

285

BL

2008

2007/0559/01

Kingfield Heath, Magna Park

440

HA

2003

2000/0779/03

Laddaw Ltd, Interlink Park, Bardon

250

NW

2005

2003/0651/07

LaFarge Aggregates, Watermead Business Pk, Syston

500

CH

2005

2001/2035/02

Leicestershire CC, Glenfield

1700

BL

2003

V

Long Clawson Dairy

260

ME

2008

2007/0145/06

Loughborough College of FE

450

CH

2005

2003/2730/02

Loughborough University

3000

CH

2002

V

LPC (UK) Ltd, Rothley Lodge

350

CH

2010

2000/2268/02

My Home Move, Grove Park

260

BL

2008

2004/0643/01

Next Retail Plc HQ, Enderby

1500

BL

2002

2002/0885/01

Next Retail Store, Fosse Park, Braunstone

280

BL

2001

1999/0409/01

Polypipe Civils, Loughborough

320

CH

2008

2008/2053/02

PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Pegasus Pk

500

NW

2003

2001/1017/07

RBS, Grove Park

280

BL

2009

2005/0508/01

Sainsbury's, Grove Farm

480

BL

2007

2003/0858/01

SainsburysStore, Loughborough

400

CH

2004

2002/2459/02

Samworth Bros (Saladworks), LFE, Blaby

500

BL

2004

2001/1004/01

Stephenson College II, Coalville

500

NW

2006

2001/1275/07

Tesco, Ashby

400

NW

2010

2008/1606/07

Tesco, Loughborough

450

CH

2006

2004/3387/02

Triumph MC (Factory 2), Hinckley

250

HI

2005

2003/0525/04

Summary

 

 

 

 

29 IN OUTER COUNTY

14960

 

 

 

18 IN INNER COUNTY

12045  ...  view the full minutes text for item 60.

61.

Urgent Items.

Minutes:

There were no urgent items for consideration.

 

62.

Declarations of interest.

Minutes:

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

 

The following members each declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest in respect of Item 10 as members of district/borough councils (Minute 68 refers):

 

Mr. A. D. Bailey CC

Mr. R. Blunt CC
Mr. G. A. Boulter CC

Mrs. R. Camamile CC
Mrs. J. A. Dickinson CC
Mr. S. J. Galton CC
Mr. Max Hunt CC
Mr. P. G. Lewis CC

Mrs. R. Page CC

Mrs. P. Posnett CC

Mrs. J. Richards CC
Mr. R. J. Shepherd CC

 

The following members each declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest in respect of item 13 as concessionary travel pass holders (Minute 70 refers):

 

Mr. A. D. Bailey CC

Mr. G. A. Boulter CC

Dr. R. K. A. Feltham CC

Mrs. J. Richards CC
Mr. R. J. Shepherd CC

 

63.

Declarations of the Party Whip in accordance with Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16.

Minutes:

There were no declarations of the party whip.

 

64.

Presentation of Petitions under Standing Order 36.

Minutes:

The Chief Executive reported that no petitions had been received under Standing Order 36.

 

65.

Change to the Order of Business.

Minutes:

The Chairman sought and obtained the consent of the Commission to vary the order of business from that set out in the agenda.

 

66.

Scrutiny Review Panel Report on Road Safety.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Commission considered the final report and recommendations of the Scrutiny Review Panel on Road Safety Measures. A copy of the report, marked ‘B’, is filed with these minutes.

 

The Chairman of the Panel, Mr. R. J. Shepherd CC, introduced the report and commended its recommendations which would assist in improving further the Council’s road safety record.

The Commission considered the comments of Mr. J. T. Orson CC which outlined reasons why the Council’s policy for not allowing the use of blind spot mirrors on the highway should be reinvestigated. A copy of the submission from Mr. Orson is filed with these minutes.

 

The following points arose from discussion:

 

  • The Panel looked at a number of techniques to limit speed, such as Vehicle Activated Signs, 20 mph speed limits and speed humps. The Panel had worked on the basis that one was not necessarily more effective than another, but that each should be used on its merits in each case;

  • It would be increasingly important going forward that a focus be placed on the education of drivers through, for example, the introduction of green driver and fleet driver defensive programmes both within the County Council and the wider local business sector in an effort to change driving trends, reduce speeding and have a positive effect on the environment;

  • In regard to Mr. Orson’s comments, the Commission considered that this issue had now been fully explored as part of the Review and that it was fully supportive of the proposals included in the report.

RESOLVED:

 

That, subject to taking account of the comments made above, the conclusions and recommendations of the Review Panel be endorsed and that the report be submitted to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 15 June.

 

67.

Enforcement Programme for the Under age Sales of Tobacco Products and Aerosol Paints 2010/11. pdf icon PDF 222 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the proposed 2010/11 Enforcement Programme for Under Aged Sale of Tobacco and Aerosol Products. A copy of the report, marked ‘C’, is filed with these minutes.

 

In response to concern raised by members that, arising from test purchasing in relation to tobacco products, too few illegal sales had led to prosecutions, the Chief Executive reported that the Council’s was required to be considered in its approach and work productively with businesses to publicise the law and improve practice, rather than ensure that the majority of breaches of the law went before the courts.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the Cabinet be advised that this Commission supports and welcomes the proposed Enforcement Programme outlined in the report.

 

68.

Medium Term Delivery Plan. pdf icon PDF 218 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the Medium Term Delivery Plan. A copy of the report, marked ‘D’, is filed with these minutes.

 

It was questioned why, in the absence of the Leader, the Cabinet Lead Member - Mr. M. B. Page CC - had not been in attendance to present the report, given that it was a major document on which the Authority had identified its key corporate priorities up to 2013. The Chairman indicated that he and the other Commissioners had enquired with the Lead Member as to his availability, but he unfortunately had a prior engagement.

 

Arising from consideration of the document, the following points were noted:

 

General

  • A paginated contents would be a useful addition;

  • There was general concern expressed in relation to a number of targets, given the Authority’s recently agreed Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) which included efficiency savings in a number of areas in which the document included delivery targets. A view was expressed that these targets would need to be closely monitored against the MTFS and that it would be necessary to take into account the savings requirement to be achieved by other agencies;

“Children and Young People”

  • The target to reduce bullying (as referred to on page 24) should be strengthened, with a particular focus on ensuring a consistent approach to reducing racist attitudes and other forms of discrimination, as bullying was only one aspect of this wider issue;

“A Prosperous, Innovative and Dynamic Community”

  • A number of the targets contained in the document, such as those to improve the lives of vulnerable people (as referred to on page 13) appeared to be at odds with the recently agreed MTFS, which had included a cut in the Breaking the Barriers Team, which located employment opportunities for those with learning difficulties. It was highlighted that much of the document had been stress-tested within the context of the MTFS, particularly those that involved partners as part of the LAA, however some targets outside the remit of the LAA had not;

  • The use of the Community Infrastructure Levy and Tax Incentive Fund (as referred to on page 13) as an avenue of exploration in regard to the support of infrastructure investments was questioned, given that the Fund had yet to receive full approval by the Government;

“Climate Change and Attractive Environment”

  • Some members felt that the reference to climate change (as referred to on page 16) as being scientifically definitive was too strong. It was felt that reference should be made to the fact that scientific evidence now ‘appeared’ to be overwhelming;

  • The evidence used to indicate that temperatures would increase by 2.2°C in winter and 2.5°C in summer should be cited;

“Voluntary and Community Sector and Volunteering”

  • The references to use of the voluntary and community sector to delivery a number of activities to empower communities was questioned given the Council’s cut in financial contribution to Voluntary Action Leicestershire which had led to a reduction in hours of service for community hubs.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the comments of the Commission be forwarded to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 10 May.

 

69.

Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2010-11. pdf icon PDF 209 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the Youth Offending Service’s (YOS) Youth Justice Strategic Plan 2010-11. A copy of the report, marked ‘E’, is filed with these minutes.

 

In response to questions, the Commission was advised as follows:

 

  • There were risks to delivery in relation to a number of targets contained within the document, particularly given the Authority’s budget position and the Service’s multi-agency funding, however it was pleasing that annual funding contributions had remained unaffected thus far;

  • The YOS had a large and increasing volunteering workforce providing critical work towards the targets contained within the Plan. It was suggested that the volunteering arrangements could be more strongly highlighted in the Plan, given the excellent contribution they made to youth justice in Leicestershire.

RESOLVED:

 

That the Plan and the performance of the YOS, particularly in relation to its increase in recruitment of volunteers, be commended to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 10 May.

 

70.

Draft Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Strategy 2010-13. pdf icon PDF 70 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the draft Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Strategy 2010-13. A copy of the report, marked ‘F’, is filed with these minutes.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the draft Equality, Diversity and Human Rights Strategy 2010-13 be commended to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 10 May.

 

71.

Scrutiny Review Panel Report on Concessionary Travel.

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Commission considered the final report and recommendations of the Scrutiny Review Panel on Concessionary Travel. A copy of the report, marked ‘G’, is filed with these minutes.

 

The Chairman of the Panel, Mr. G. A. Boulter CC, introduced the report and commended its recommendations which would assist in providing a more cohesive concessionary travel scheme.

 

It was reported that the Department for Transport (DfT) wished to simplify the guidance on reimbursement of bus operators, but that this was threatened by the possibility of some bus operators taking the matter to judicial review. It was therefore expected that the process would be delayed.

 

There remained uncertainty over how many people would in future sign up to the concessionary scheme. The reimbursement to bus operators and the subsequent financial contribution from the Authority would therefore remain unpredictable.

 

RESOLVED:

 

(a)               That the conclusions and recommendations of the Review Panel be endorsed and that the report be submitted to the Cabinet for consideration at its meeting on 15 June;

(b)               That the Commission concurs with the view of the Panel that, it would be beneficial to reconvene the Panel when the outcome of consultation carried out by the DfT in relation to the reimbursement of bus operators became available.

 

72.

Dates of future meetings.

The following dates are proposed for future meetings of the Commission:

 

Wednesday 9 June 2010

Wednesday 1 Sept 2010

Wednesday 10 November 2010

Wednesday 8 December 2010

 

Wednesday 2 February 2011

Wednesday 2 March 2011

Wednesday 20 April 2011

Wednesday 8 June 2011

Wednesday 7 September 2011

Wednesday 9 November 2011

 

(All meetings to start at 2.00pm)

 

Minutes:

The following programme of meetings for 2010/11 was NOTED:

 

Wednesday 9 June 2010

Wednesday 1 Sept 2010

Wednesday 10 November 2010

Wednesday 8 December 2010

 

Wednesday 2 February 2011

Wednesday 2 March 2011

Wednesday 20 April 2011

Wednesday 8 June 2011

Wednesday 7 September 2011

Wednesday 9 November 2011

 

(All meetings to start at 2.00pm)