A copy
of the report to be submitted to the Cabinet at its meeting on 19 September
2014 will be available and circulated to members of this Committee on 10
September 2014. The Committee will be invited to comment on the outcome of the
consultation and the proposals. The views of the Committee will be reported to
the Cabinet.
The
report and associated appendices can be viewed through the following link,
Agenda Item 14 refers: http://politics.leics.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=135&MId=4190&Ver=4
Minutes:
The Committee
considered a joint report of the Director of Adults and Communities and the
Director of Corporate Resources to be considered by the Cabinet on 19
September. The report outlined the outcome and issues arising from the
consultation on the future of Snibston, attached two
business plans put forward and provided further information on the County
Council's offer for Snibston. The report sought
approval from the Cabinet to undertake work to allow the Cabinet to be in
a position to take decisions on the future of Snibston
at its meeting in December 2014. A copy of the report marked 'Agenda Item 11'
is filed with these minutes.
The Chairman noted that the Committee had received written representations from
the Local Member, Dr T Eynon CC, a copy of which was circulated to members of
the Committee and is appended to these minutes.
The Chairman then
invited the Chairman of ‘Friends of Snibston’,
Dr Brian Vollar, to provide a brief submission
on the matter.
Dr Vollar congratulated the County Council in presenting the outcomes of the consultation and recommending that a decision on the future of Snibston be delayed to allow consideration to be given to the business plans put forward by the 'Friends of Snibston' and Mr Suleman, Director of Resources at the Derby Museum Trust. He also drew attention to an open letter that had been signed by 1000 visitors to the Snibston museum at the recent miners’ gala which had been addressed to the Leader of the County Council, urging the County Council to abandon proposals to close the museum and assist the ‘Friends of Snibston’ in developing their alternative proposals put forward. He noted that the business plans put forward would now be subjected to formal assessment under submissions of interest put forward under the Community Right to Challenge, as outlined in the Localism Act 2011. However, he was concerned about the terms of the transfer of the site and assets as outlined in the report. He hoped that the County Council would work with the ‘Friends of Snibston’ to assist them in developing a sustainable and cost effective solution.
The Cabinet Lead Member for Heritage, Leisure and Arts, Mr R Blunt CC, thanked Dr Vollar for his comments and the work that been undertaken by 'Friends of Snibston'. The decision on the future of Snibston was very complex and, as such, the Cabinet was being asked to grant more time to allow officers to consider all the proposals put forward before any decision be made. He emphasised that any solution agreed for Snibston would need to be viable and sustainable in the long term and hence it was necessary for all parties to be clear of the terms of the transfer.
During the discussion some members of the Committee expressed concern about the process hitherto and reference was made to the work that had been commissioned from external consultants, Winckworth Sherwood and subsequently not made public. It was claimed that this had given an impression that the County Council was not willing to consider or support alternative proposals. It was however recognised that the report now being considered had a different tone and it appeared to recognise the need to work with the ‘Friends of Snibston’ and look at alternatives and this was to be welcomed. Some members expressed the view that there might be merit in engaging an independent person, preferably from another authority to provide external assurance. The Chairman and a number of members disagreed with the comments above, commenting that this questioned the integrity and professionalism of officers.
The Director and Cabinet Lead Member advised the Committee that:
(i) The Council would work with the ‘Friends of Snibston’ and Mr Suleman to get a better understanding of the proposals and provide clarity of the requirements of the County Council. It was important to ensure any proposal to run Snibston was financially viable in the long term;
(ii) The proposals in the report would also see officers continuing to develop the Council’s proposed option in parallel so that when the matter was considered again by the Cabinet an informed decision could be taken;
(iii) With regard to the issue of external assurance it was reported that the business plans were currently being evaluated and, if considered appropriate, external advice would be sought.
It was moved by the Chairman and seconded by Mr Jennings:
(a) That the outcome of the consultation be noted;
(b) That the receipt of the business plans submitted by the Director of Resources at Derby Museum Trust and the Friends of Snibston be noted and that support be given to the further consideration to whether these should be treated as Expressions of Interests (EOIs) under the Localism Act (Community Right to Challenge);
(c) That the Committee supports the following further
recommendations in the report to the Cabinet authorising officers to undertake
the following actions so that a detailed report can be prepared for
consideration by the Cabinet in December on the way forward for Snibston:-
i.
an
assessment of the business plans put forward against the statutory framework
of the Localism Act and any further work or information that would be
needed in relation to these business plans in light of the requirements of the
Community Right to Challenge;
ii.
a
feasibility study and any early necessary action needed to implement the
Council’s proposed offer including any revisions that might be required as a
result of the consultation responses;
iii.
an
Equalities and Human Rights Impact Assessment in relation to the Council’s offer
and the business plans now submitted;
iv.
the implications
of either option on the collections currently on display and in storage at the Snibston site including proposals for the future management
of those collections.
An amendment was moved by Mr Charlesworth and seconded by Mr Kaufman:
That the following be added to the motion:-
“d) That an independent person be sought from another authority to provide external assurance in the consideration of the alternative proposals submitted for Snibston.”
The amendment was not carried, four members voting
for the amendment and four against.
The motion was put, four members voting for the motion and
four against. The Chairman exercised her second and casting vote in favour of
the motion. The motion was carried
(The Committee was advised that in line with normal practice
the contents of the amendment above, which was not carried, would be drawn to
the attention of the Cabinet.)
RESOLVED:
(a) That the outcome of the consultation be noted;
(b) That the receipt of the business plans submitted by the Director of Resources at Derby Museum Trust and the Friends of Snibston be noted and that support be given to the further consideration to whether these should be treated as Expressions of Interests (EOIs) under the Localism Act (Community Right to Challenge);
(d) That the Committee supports the following
further recommendations in the report to the Cabinet authorising officers to
undertake the following actions so that a detailed report can be prepared for
consideration by the Cabinet in December on the way forward for Snibston:-
i.
an
assessment of the business plans put forward against the statutory framework
of the Localism Act and any further work or information that would be
needed in relation to these business plans in light of the requirements of the
Community Right to Challenge;
ii.
a
feasibility study and any early necessary action needed to implement the
Council’s proposed offer including any revisions that might be required as a
result of the consultation responses;
iii.
an
Equalities and Human Rights Impact Assessment in relation to the Council’s
offer and the business plans now submitted;
iv.
the implications
of either option on the collections currently on display and in storage at the Snibston site including proposals for the future management
of those collections.