Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting of the Commission held on 4 September 2002 were taken as read, confirmed and signed.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Order 35.

The Chief Executive reported that no questions had been received under Standing Orders 7(3) and 7(5).

There were no urgent items for consideration.

There were no declarations of interests.

There were no declarations made under Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rule 16.

The Chief Executive reported that there were no petitions to be presented.

Attached is a report being considered by the Cabinet on 29 October.  The Commission will be advised of the decision of the Cabinet and of any further developments.

The Commission considered the following reports in relation to the overall shape of Leicestershire’s bid for a Public Service Agreement:

 

·        The report considered by the Cabinet on 29^th October 2002 (marked ‘A’).

 

·        An outline of the PSA bid (marked ‘1’).

 

·        A summary of the targets within the bid (marked ‘2’).

 

·        Description of the targets within the bid (marked ‘3’).

 

·        Details of the proposed ‘stretch’ on actual targets (marked ‘4’).

 

Copies of these reports are filed with these minutes.

 

The Commission was advised that the Cabinet would be considering the final shape of the PSA bid at its meeting on 12^th November, and thereafter, the bid would be submitted to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.  The negotiating period would then commence and it was hoped that the bid could be finalised by February 2003.

 

In reply to questions relating to delivery of those targets where the County Council was dependent on others, and on the issue of the PSA distorting the County Council’s priorities, the Commission was advised as follows:

 

·        There was considerable common ground between the national priorities contained within the PSA and the key issues facing this and other County Councils.  The PSA also allowed for local priorities. The Cabinet was refining the Medium Term Corporate Strategy and linking that work to other corporate issues, including the development of medium term financial planning and the Community Strategy as well as the PSA;

 

·        The District Councils had been positive in the discussions on the PSA and had already contributed to draft delivery plans for individual targets. Following the agreement of the Cabinet to the PSA bid, action plans would be drawn up to monitor the delivery of targets.  District Councils and other parties, in particular the Police and Health bodies, would be expected to contribute to the achievement of a number of the targets within the PSA. The process of monitoring progress would apply to all parties.

 

RESOLVED

 

a)      That the Cabinet be advised that the Commission supports the proposed approach to Leicestershire’s bid for a Public Service Agreement.

 

b)      That a further report be submitted to the Commission following the outcome of the negotiations with the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

 

c)      That regular reports be submitted to the Commission on progress being made in achieving the PSA targets.

This matter was considered by the Highways Transportation and Waste Management Scrutiny Committee on 24 October.  The views of that Committee will be circulated shortly.

The Commission considered a report of the Director of Highways, Transportation and Waste Management concerning the Government’s consultation on the future development of Air Transport in the United Kingdom.  A copy of the report, marked ‘B’, is filed with these minutes.

 

The Commission also considered the views expressed by the Highways, Transportation and Waste Management Scrutiny Committee held on 24 October, 2002, and views submitted by two local County Councillors, Messrs. Perkins CC and Rushton CC.  Copies of these are also filed with these minutes.

 

Members were advised that:-

 

·        the Leader, together with the Leaders of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire County Councils would be meeting the emda Board to discuss this issue. It was understood that the emda Board was supportive of further development of East Midlands Airport and the proposals to build a second runway;

 

·        the Leader was of the view that the consultation paper should be the subject of debate at the County Council meeting on 27^th November;

 

·        Warwickshire County Council had commissioned independent consultants to assess the proposals for a new airport in the Rugby/Coventry area and it was hoped that a summary of their conclusions would be available to members in time for the debate at the County Council meeting.

 

During the discussion on this matter, the following additional concerns were raised:-

 

a)                 in respect of the further development of East Midlands Airport:-

 

·        the poor quality of the transport infrastructure to provide surface access to the airport;

 

·        arrangements currently in force allowed for unrestricted night flying;

 

·        a planning application had already been submitted to North West Leicestershire District Council for an extension to the existing runway at the airport.

 

b)           in respect of the proposals for a new airport in the Rugby/Coventry area, such a proposal would have a major damaging effect on areas within south Leicestershire in relation to noise, traffic and transportation, housing and business development in a predominantly rural area (which might not be in accordance with existing structure plan proposals) and other environmental issues.

 

RESOLVED:-

 

a)      That the comments made at the meeting of the Highways, Transportation and Waste Management Scrutiny Committee be noted and forwarded to the Cabinet.

 

b)      That the comments submitted by Messrs Perkins CC and Rushton CC be noted and forwarded to the Cabinet.

 

c)      That the Cabinet be advised that the Commission supports the following resolution agreed at the meeting of the Highways, Transportation and Waste Management Scrutiny Committee on 24^th October:-

 

          ‘i)     That the statement by the Leader of the Council (appended to the report) supporting a gradual and incremental growth of East Midlands Airport but rejecting the option of a second runway there and proposals for a new airport between Coventry and Rugby, be endorsed, in view of –

 

·      the environmental consequences of rapid expansion in air traffic for the County, and

 

·      concerns over the accuracy of growth forecasts up to 30 years ahead;

 

          ii)     That in addition to the points made by the Leader, the response to the Government’s proposals should stress the urgent need for an integrated public transport system, to –

 

·      ensure the continued success of East Midlands Airport in the immediate future and address the problem of congested roads; and

 

·      cope with the possible increase in future demand for air travel.’

 

d)     That the Cabinet be further advised that the Commission does not support the proposals for developing a new airport in the Rugby/Coventry area on the basis that such a development would adversely affect communities and the environment in south Leicestershire.

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the requirements placed upon the County Council by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and in particular the requirement to have in place a Publication Scheme.  A copy of the report marked ‘C’, is filed with these minutes.

 

RESOLVED:

 

a)      That the progress made in developing a Publication Scheme be noted;

 

b)      That the Cabinet be advised that the Commission supports the Publication Scheme.

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive setting out the views of the Executive on the conduct of the five member panel established to consider community strategies and the response of the Scrutiny Reference Group thereto.  A copy of the report, marked ‘D’, is filed with these minutes.

 

RESOLVED:

 

a)      That the views expressed by the Executive and the conduct of the five member panel and the response of the Scrutiny Reference Group thereto be noted.

 

b)      That the five member panel continue on the basis outlined in the response of the Scrutiny Reference Group, and set out in paragraph 4(d) in the report.

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the consultation draft of the Leicestershire Community Strategy and the views of the five member panel thereon.  A copy of the report, marked ‘E’, is filed with these minutes.

 

In response to questions, the Commission was advised of the methods to be used to consult on the Strategy.  These would include posing questions/issues to the newly established Leicestershire Citizens Panel, the Young Person’s Citizens Jury, focus groups targeting sectors who would not traditionally participate in consultation exercise (eg. Young adults, ethnic minorities and small business).  This would be additional to the usual channels such as websites, articles in the press and magazines and through meetings and events organised by the Leicestershire LSP and other organisations.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the comments of the five member panel on the consultation draft of the Leicestershire Community Strategy be supported and forwarded to the Cabinet.

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning the comments of the five member panel on the consultation draft of the Blaby Community Strategy.  A copy of the report, marked ‘F’, is filed with these minutes.

 

RESOLVED:

 

a)      That the views of the five member panel on the consultation draft of the Blaby County Strategy be noted;

 

b)      That the action taken by the Chief Executive following consultation with the Chairman and Spokesmen of the Commission to submit the comments of the five member panel to the Cabinet, be noted.

The Commission considered a report of the Chief Executive concerning scrutiny of the health service.  A copy of the report, marked ‘C’, if filed with these minutes.

 

In reply to questions, the Chief Executive advised that discussions were taking place at officer level with the relevant health bodies and Leicester City Council.

 

RESOLVED:

 

a)      That the current position on health scrutiny be noted;

 

b)      That a response to the current consultation paper, if appropriate, be dealt with by the Chief Executive in consultation with the Group Leaders;

 

c)      That it be noted that the Constitution Committee of the County Council would have responsibility for agreeing the basis for future arrangements for health scrutiny;

 

d)      That a further report be made to the next meeting of the Commission on progress being made and proposals to develop scrutiny arrangements for the health service.

RESOLVED:

 

That the next meeting of the Commission be held at 2.30pm on Wednesday 8^th January 2003.

 

 

 

 

2.30-4.45pm                                                              CHAIRMAN

6 November 2002