Meeting documents

14 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

The Chair was taken by Councillor Francine Haeberling, Leader of the Council.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

15 EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE

The Chair drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out on the Agenda

16 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

There were none.

17 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972

There were none.

18 TO ANNOUNCE ANY URGENT BUSINESS AGREED BY THE CHAIR(PERSON)

There was none.

19 QUESTIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

There were 24 questions from the following people: Councillor Nigel Roberts (4), Councillor Dr Eleanor Jackson, Councillor Will Sandry, Councillor Roger Symonds (2), Councillor Andy Furse (3), Councillor Paul Crossley (3), Councillor Caroline Roberts, Councillor Adrian Inker, Councillor Tim Ball, Councillor Nicholas Coombes (3), Councillor Cherry Beath (3), Councillor Loraine Brinkhurst

[Copies of the questions and responses, including supplementary questions and responses if any, have been placed on the Minute book as Appendix 1 and are available on the Council's website.]

20 STATEMENTS, DEPUTATIONS OR PETITIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

Tracey Moon made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 2] asking for a zebra crossing on Radstock Road near Welton Primary School after which she presented a petition to Cabinet.

Councillor Francine Haeberling referred the petition to Councillor Charles Gerrish for response.

Councillor Charles Gerrish asked Tracey Moon if she was aware that the Council had already commenced investigations at the site she referred to, in order to measure the footfall. Mrs Moon said she was aware of this.

21 MINUTES: WEDNESDAY 14^th May 2008

On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney, seconded by Councillor David Hawkins, it was

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 14^th May 2008 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair(person)

22 CONSIDERATION OF SINGLE MEMBER ITEMS NOW REQUISITIONED TO COUNCIL EXECUTIVE

There were none.

23 CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS REFERRED BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY BODIES

There were none.

24 COUNCIL ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT (Report 11).

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement welcoming the reported achievements. He expressed some concerns relating to Domiciliary Care and women's refuge provision. He asked what elements of the asset management would be decided in the public domain. He felt that the concessionary fares scheme was inadequately funded. He asked for assurances about the Tetrapak scheme. He expressed disappointment that the Cabinet had decided to aim for the level 2 equalities target when he felt that the Council was within reach of level 3.

Councillor Andy Furse referred to the underspend of £809K on the Major Projects Management reported on p.31 of the Appendix and asked which costs had been reclassified from capital to revenue and why. He asked why there was a risk of not delivering some projects yet at the same time reporting an underspend. He was also concerned that there were no plans to provide pedestrian crossings in the Southgate area.

Councillor Francine Haeberling, in proposing the item, thanked all staff and Councillors who had worked so hard to achieve such a good result for the Council.

Councillor Charles Gerrish seconded the proposal. He was delighted to report that indications were that the Council would meet all its Planning targets within the month. He responded to Councillor Crossley's comments by saying that it had been impossible to predict the very high public take-up of concessionary fares. The Tetrapak scheme would be at least 2 years but recent innovations in the waste industry meant that it was possible this might be improved. It was too soon to be able to answer Councillor Crossley's question about Bus Gate income.

Councillor David Hawkins agreed with Councillor Furse that the lack of crossings in Southgate would cause difficulty, especially in the coming autumn when there would be heavy coach traffic as a result of planned rail improvements. He offered to contact Councillor Furse with further information about this and to reply to his question about reclassification of items from capital to revenue.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney said that he felt the Home Care decision had been the right decision. It was essential for the Council to live within budget on a recurring basis and the scale of the underspend had been very small in terms of the whole budget. All councils were going through a very difficult time but the Council was well positioned because of its good management, despite the continuing pressures. He told Councillor Crossley that the Council would not be changing the cut-off point for asset management decisions. In response to the question from Councillor Furse, he advised that the Council had been required to move to "zero base" accounting and emphasised that the issue was not only about spending on Major Projects but was about the whole Council budget.

Councillor Vic Pritchard said that women's aid was already being delivered by a voluntary organisation - the same service would be provided by a different voluntary organisation and there would be no reduction in service. He also took the opportunity to say how pleased he was that the Council had recently successfully completed its first Rural Exception Scheme, in West Harptree, to identify land which could be used to provide housing with an emphasis on the needs of people with existing local links.

Councillor Francine Haeberling in summing up said that the Council had written to the rail track company asking that they delay their rail upgrade until after the Christmas shopping period so as to minimise disruption in the Southgate area.

Rationale

This report is a key part of the Council's performance management framework.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Francine Haeberling, seconded by Councillor Charles Gerrish, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To note the contents of this report for 2007/08 performance;

(2) To approve the corrective actions;

(3) To ask Divisional Directors to consider in light of the identified corrective actions whether additional actions are required to improve performance.

25 WEST OF ENGLAND JOINT MUNICIPAL WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (Report 12).

Councillor Roger Symonds made an ad hoc statement welcoming the Cabinet's declared intention to withdraw from Stage 3 of the Partnership proposals. He asked when the pilot would be starting and felt that time was running short if the proposals were to be implemented in 2009.

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement agreeing with Councillor Symonds that Councillor Gerrish was to be congratulated for opting out of the incineration proposals. He offered the support of his Group if the Cabinet would uphold this position. He reminded the Cabinet that his Group would be very supportive of proposals for food waste collection and asked how this would proceed. He asked how the £2.3M would be spent on the pilot.

Councillor Charles Gerrish, in proposing the item, said that there was already evidence that the Council was taking right approach. He agreed with Councillor Crossley that he wanted to introduce food waste collection as soon as possible, but the extra cost of introducing before 2009 could not be defended. The current plans could be sustained in the next financial year and that was where the £2.3M would be spent (not on the pilot). He would welcome comments on how the pilot should best be run.

Councillor Gerrish wished to emphasise that the Council was seeking to maximise recycling from all residents and had not been party to the "expression of interest" by other partnership councils with respect to incineration. The proposal that Bristol City Council should continue in leadership of the partnership was only until new governance arrangements were in place. He was pleased to confirm the intention to move cardboard into the green box collection, because this would maximise public response.

Councillor David Hawkins seconded the proposal.

Rationale

Towards Zero Waste 2020: A Waste Strategy for Bath & North East Somerset 2005 - 2010 details initiatives that Bath & North East Somerset is undertaking whilst striving to meeting its LATS targets of reducing biodegradable waste to landfill. This can be seen on the Council's public website.

The waste disposal/treatment market is in a period of extensive change and development at the moment, driven by EU and national policy and strategy. A wide range of treatment technologies are being developed which will provide appropriate alternative options for residual waste in the future; however many are not yet wholly proven in the UK on residual waste and there is currently no such infrastructure in the West of England.

In the interim short to medium term (5-10 years), mitigations to avoid additional costs are implementing Phase 1 (waste reduction, reuse, and recycling) and Phase 2 (interim treatment capacity procurement).

The proposed Joint Waste Strategy details partnership working with neighbouring Unitary Authorities to develop new waste treatment infrastructure which will allow the sub-region to meet its landfill diversion needs in the future. Partnership working allows the authority to benefit from economies of scale and achieve Best Value.

The four phase approach to treating the sub-region's municipal residual waste allows Bath & North East Somerset the flexibility to continue to develop Zero Waste initiatives whilst benefiting from economies of scale achieved by partnership working in developing the necessary waste treatment infrastructure.

Other Options Considered

Consideration has been given to participating in the Phase 3 procurement, but this option was rejected for the reasons set out in pages 83 and 84 of Appendix A and paragraph 7.5 of this report. It is also considered that a long term 25 year contract would not be appropriate within the context of the Council's Zero Waste strategy.

The "do nothing" option was considered, but rejected on the grounds of being the most expensive cost option.

Procuring an individual contract for Bath & North East Somerset alone has been considered for waste treatment infrastructure but rejected, as a joint partnership procurement of Phase 2 capacity will enable the benefits of economies of scale and enhanced market opportunities to come forward.

Potential development of working arrangements with other Authorities outside of the West of England boundaries for example Somerset, Wiltshire and Gloucestershire have been explored at various stages. This has not produced viable proposals to move forward with for various reasons, such as timings, technology preferences and self-sufficiency principles.

On a motion from Councillor Charles Gerrish, seconded by Councillor David Hawkins, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To adopt the West of England Waste Management & Planning Partnership Joint Residual Municipal Waste Management Strategy May 2008;

(2) That Bath & North East Somerset will not participate in Phase 3 of the Joint Waste Strategy;

(3) To approve the commencement with the Phase 2 procurement, with Bristol City Council to act as the lead authority until the new governance arrangements for the West of England Partnership have been implemented, (refer Council resolution 11, 8th May 2008).

26 ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR PLAYING FIELD AT OLDFIELD PARK JUNIOR SCHOOL, BATH (Report 13).

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement expressing his support for the proposals. He reminded the Cabinet of the importance that Ward Councillors should be fully consulted on issues affecting their ward.

Councillor Chris Watt, in proposing the item, pointed out that there had been a typographical error in paragraph 12.1 of the report - the word "successful" should read "unsuccessful" although the context of the sentence made this clear. He apologised that there had been an oversight about consulting the ward members - they had been consulted on the general principle but not on the detailed proposals. He said that Councillor Will Sandry had asked what provision the Council could make so that those who were deprived of their smallholding land would be given alternative allotments. Councillor Watt said that although the Cabinet did not have the powers to make such an offer, he would write to the relevant officer asking that those who currently cultivated their smallholdings would be added to the top of the waiting list for a local allotment.

He felt that there was a wider public interest which made it important that this land should be made available to the school.

Councillor David Hawkins seconded the proposal.

Rationale

The lack of on site playing field provision at Oldfield Park Junior School has been identified since 1995 as causing difficulty with curriculum delivery. The site is designated in the Local Plan as land for primary education use. Direct approaches to the small holding owners have failed to gain their agreement to purchase by the council. Planning approval has been gained for the change of use. Both Council and school funding is now available to meet the costs of purchase and providing playing field facilities. The provision of an on site playing field will contribute to the Every Child Matters outcomes of being healthy and staying safe and meets a key Council priority in improving the environment for learning.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Chris Watt, seconded by Councillor David Hawkins, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To authorise a compulsory purchase order under section 530 Education Act 1996 of the land shown in the report;

(2) To authorise the Chief Property Officer to take the necessary steps to secure the making, confirmation and implementation of CPO to acquire the land in question;

(3) To approve the allocation of £173,000 from the 2008/09 Children's Service capital programme.

27 BUSINESS CONTINUITY AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN (Report 14).

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement welcoming the report. He asked that future consideration be given to the way in which volunteers can play their part.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney thanked Councillor Crossley for his useful and relevant suggestion. He also noted that the Council would give further consideration to how to involve Parish Councils more effectively in this. He emphasised that the Plan was by its nature evolving and he was pleased that so much progress had already been made.

Councillor Vic Pritchard seconded the proposal. He said that the Council already asked Parish Councils to identify possible risks and this had recently been considered at his local Parish Cluster meeting.

Rationale

Implementing a sound Business Continuity Plan enables resources to be prioritised in the time of a crisis and indirectly contributes to improving service planning on an ongoing basis. This therefore contributes to section 4 - Internal Control of the CPA Key Line of Enquiry for Use of Resources and indirectly contributes to the outcomes of the Community Strategy and Corporate Improvement Priorities.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney, seconded by Councillor Vic Pritchard, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To approve the Business Continuity Plan;

(2) To delegate authority to the Head of Audit, Risk & Information to keep the plan up-to-date with the latest best practice and refine it as necessary.

28 REVENUE AND CAPITAL OUTTURN 2007/08 (Report 15).

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement in which he asked for an explanation of the amount of £100K reserves not mentioned in paragraph 1.16 of the appendix. He asked for clarification about the staff savings, mentioned on p.13 of the appendix, relating to the Transportation and Planning overspend. He noted that the Cleansing budget appeared as £47K underspent but that this was in a service which had attracted a regrettable number of complaints from the public. He asked why, given that the Equalities budget had been underspent by £92K, the Cabinet were nevertheless content to aim only for level 2 when clearly level 3 would be achievable.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney, in proposing the item, drew attention to 2 documents, copies of which had been circulated in the public gallery before the meeting: they were an update report [attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3] and an amended version of page 12 of the report [attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4]. The amended page 12 showed that there was no missing £100K but that this had been a typographical error, for which he apologised. He said that the Cabinet's aim in seeking to achieve level 2 with respect to equalities was so that the equalities agenda could be imbedded into every manager's thinking and that by seeking in this way to change the whole organisation, level 2 was more realistic at first.

Councillor Hanney referred to the supplementary question asked by Councillor Inker [Question 13 of the Q&A sheet, attached to the Minutes as Appendix 1]. He said that Cabinet members had delivered their services within the budget and that this showed that the Council was being effectively managed by working to medium-term, not short-term plans. The benefits to the residents would become evident during the anticipated period of financial difficulty for local government.

Councillor Hanney said that he was delighted to be able to announce that a recent successful VAT claim by the Council had resulted in a £4.766M refund. These funds would be applied towards the Council's reserves.

Councillor Francine Haeberling seconded the proposal.

Councillor Charles Gerrish reported that the Transportation service was actively filling vacancies. The underspend in waste and cleaning was because of good management. He wanted to apologise to Councillor Crossley and to local residents for recent confusion about the deep-clean in Southdown but felt that the problems had been mainly caused by the excellent response from local people, which was much greater than expected.

Rationale

The recommendations made are based upon the Budget Management Scheme and a consideration of the Council's latest financial position and reserves strategy.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney, seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1) To note the provisional revenue budget outturn for 2007/08 at £778,000 underspent;

(2) To approve the carry forward proposals and write-off requests as exceptions to the Budget Management Scheme. The approval of write-off requests is conditional upon action plans being in place to meet the ongoing implications in 2008/09 onwards;

(3) To approve the creation of earmarked reserves totalling £700k and the transfer to the Exceptional Risk Reserve of £751k;

(4) To agree that any resulting surplus arising from decisions made should be returned to unallocated general fund reserves;

(5) To agree the revenue virements for 2007/08 and 2008/09;

(6) To note the provisional outturn of the 2007/08 capital programme;

(7) To approve the capital slippage as listed in the report;

(8) To approve the adjustments to the 2007/08 capital programme;

(9) To note the reserves position which shows that the council's reserves strategy is two years ahead of target;

(10) To note the emerging pressures for 2008/09 and that action plans are being prepared by Strategic Directors and Divisional Directors to address these implications;

(11) To note the Treasury Management Outturn position.

(12) To agree that in light of the overall out-turn position and the arms-length financial framework for Heritage Services that the £115k Heritage Services underspend be transferred to an earmarked reserve. Any draw down of the reserve to be authorised by the s151 officer in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Resources and Cabinet Member for Tourism, Leisure and Culture, in the context of the Heritage Services Business Plan.