Agenda and minutes

The Chair, Councillor Kevin Guy, welcomed everyone watching and participating at the virtual Cabinet meeting. The Chair made the following statement:

“Due to the ongoing Covid situation and a desire to retain a level of social distancing at Council meetings at this time, we are holding this ‘informal’ virtual Cabinet meeting to enable Cabinet, Councillors and members of the public to take part.  This virtual meeting will be conducted in the normal manner but, as any decisions made will not be legally enforceable, they will be formally made at the physically reduced, quorate decision-making meeting tomorrow on 1 April 2022.

We will review this approach for any future Cabinet meetings, in line with government and health guidance at that time.”

The Chair asked each of the Cabinet Members to introduce themselves.

Apologies were noted from Councillor Alison Born, who had another official engagement.

At this point in the meeting declarations of interest are received from Members in any of the agenda items under consideration at the meeting. Members are asked to indicate:

(a) The agenda item number in which they have an interest to declare.

(b) The nature of their interest.

(c) Whether their interest is a disclosable pecuniary interest or an other interest,  (as defined in Part 2, A and B of the Code of Conduct and Rules for Registration of Interests)

Any Member who needs to clarify any matters relating to the declaration of interests is recommended to seek advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officeror a member of his staff before the meeting to expedite dealing with the item during the meeting.

The Leader made the following urgent statement;

“As we pass two years since the temporary closure of the Approach Course, I am conscious of the importance of securing the future of this much loved and important green space. A petition to keep golf at the site received over 5000 signatures and a GoFundMe campaign attracted many generous pledges of support. This site has always been amicably shared by a variety of users. With golf on offer for over 60 years, residents and visitors of all ages and abilities have been able to play regularly or simply to have a go. Priced to be affordable and socially inclusive, the spectacle of golf played on the Common has been an iconic feature of Bath’s recreational scene.

In May last year I made a commitment to keeping a golf course at the Approach site subject to a viable operator being identified. Restoring this important leisure facility is consistent with our plan to enable more people to be more active more often, improving both health and well-being.

As we emerge from the pandemic, the time is right to look again for a provider. Together with Golf For All, this is an exciting opportunity for a vibrant café, reopening of the public toilets and enhancement of the existing green environment. Subject to council business processes, there will now be a procurement process, starting with a market engagement exercise, with a view to awarding a contract by August.

Questions submitted before the deadline will receive a reply from an appropriate Cabinet member or a promise to respond within 5 days of the meeting.  Councillors may ask one supplementary question for each question they submitted, up to a maximum of two per Councillor.

There were 30 questions from Councillors.

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

Councillors and members of the public may register their intention to make a statement if they notify the subject matter of their statement before the deadline.  Statements are limited to 3 minutes each.  The speaker may then be asked by Cabinet members to answer factual questions arising out of their statement.

Before moving to the statements from public and councillors, the Leader permitted Councillor Richard Samuel to make the following statement;

Councillor Samuel said that it had been stated publicly by Councillor Pritchard in a Conservative news release that public and councillors having to submit their speeches in advance so they can be vetted by Cabinet Members was an affront to democracy.  He then asked the Monitoring Officer to confirm that Cabinet Members have no involvement in vetting speeches.  The Monitoring Officer responded that he was happy to confirm that was the case.  He added that speeches are reviewed by officers to see if they pass a threshold test and that this is purely an officer function, and Cabinet Members do not censure or vet statements.

David Redgewell made a statement about transport and planning [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes on the Council's website].  Councillor Sarah Warren asked if David considered that the current round of bus cuts threatens its recovery as part of the modal shift needed in response to the climate emergency.  Mr Redgewell responded that he was extremely concerned.  He added that we need to act with the 4 Leaders and hold them to account.  When the £150 million is removed from the network in October, things will become seriously difficult.  The numbers do not show anywhere near 90% of passengers going back onto public transport.  It needs some proper work to protect the bus network.

Ms Tay McLean made a statement about Bathampton Meadows [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes on the Council's website].  Councillor Richard Samuel asked Ms McLean if she was aware that her statement contained some inaccuracies.  He explained that the acquisition by the National Trust of Bathampton Meadows and New Leaf farm were not linked purchases.  The transfer of Bathampton Meadows as a community asset transfer to the National Trust was completed before the National Trust concluded negotiations to acquire the land at New Leaf farm, and were funded in different ways by the National Trust.  He enquired if Ms McLean would be happy to receive a correction via email.  Councillor Samuel further asked if Ms McLean was aware that this issue could have been called in by councillors as part of the scrutiny review process at the time, if they were unhappy with the decision, but that had not taken place.  Ms McLean responded that she had not been aware of that.

Councillor Yukteshwar Kumar made a statement entitled “Are we listening enough?” [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes on the Council's website].

Councillor Vic Pritchard made a statement about Bathampton Meadows [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes on the Council's website].  Councillor Samuel asked if Councillor Pritchard was aware that Mr Graham Pristo had made a complaint to the Council on this subject on 1^st March 2020 raising 7 questions.  He added that both Mr Pristo and the Leader  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

The Cabinet is asked to confirm the minutes of the following meetings as a correct record:

Informal virtual Cabinet meeting - 10 February 2022

Cabinet meeting - 11 February 2022

It was RESOLVED to recommend the approval of the minutes of 11^th November 2021 to Cabinet on 1^st April 2022.

This is a standard agenda item, to cover any reports originally placed on the Weekly list for single Member decision making, which have subsequently been the subject of a Cabinet Member requisition to the full Cabinet, under the Council’s procedural rules

This is a standing agenda item (Constitution rule 14, part 4D – Executive Procedure Rules) for matters referred by Policy Development and Scrutiny bodies.  The Chair of the relevant PDS Panel will have the right to attend and to introduce the Panel’s recommendations to Cabinet.

A list of Cabinet Single Member decisions taken and published since the last Cabinet meeting to note (no debate).

The Cabinet agreed to note the report.

As part of the national regionalising adoption agenda, Bath and North East Somerset Council, along with five other Local Authorities, set up a Regional Adoption Agency named Adoption West. The Agency commenced operation on 1 March 2019.

The Cabinet is asked to agree that the term of the original Commissioning Agreement (as defined) be extended for a period of up to five years. The original agreement allows for this extension and the Adoption West Board, which includes all six Local Authorities, including B&NES Council; is in support of this.

Councillor Dine Romero introduced this report.  She explained that this was the formal request to extend the existing Adoption West contract by 5 years, to amend the financial arrangements and the service specification.  She explained that a small extension of 3 months had already been agreed by all partners, the 6 Local Authorities who wholly own this company.  This company has well established governance, including cross-Authority and cross-party scrutiny.  Councillor Romero then moved the recommendations.

Councillor Richard Samuel seconded the recommendations, as a pragmatic approach to provide future stability for this important service.

RESOLVED unanimously

1.  To note that all other 5 Local Authority owners of Adoption West have approved the contract extension through their respective Executives;

2.  To approve the extension of the Commissioning Agreement with Adoption West for the delivery of services as per the original contractual specification, by 5 years until 28 February 2027; and directs the Director Of Children’s Services and Education  in consultation with the Directors of Finance, and Legal and Democratic Services and in consultation with the Cabinet member for Children's Services and Education  to agree in writing, in accordance with clause 3.2 of the Commissioning Agreement, a five year contract extension and execute any and all related documents required to implement that extension.

3.  To note that the AW Board, which Mary Kearney-Knowles, Director of Children’s Services and Education is part of; is unanimously supportive of the contract extension. This recognises that Adoption West is realising its potential, and delivers a good quality, consistent offer for children and adoptive families across its operational footprint.

The report introduces the Heritage Services Business plan for approval. The Plan sets out the strategy to rebuild visitor numbers and financial performance on a sustainable basis, whilst maintaining the high standards of visitor experience conservation and presentation that underpin commercial success.

Councillor Dine Romero introduced this report and moved the recommendations.  She explained how the pandemic and lockdown had highlighted the considerable reliance the Council places on income that Heritage Services brings in, and there has inevitably been a reduction in the number of visitors.  Despite the outlook being unclear with the pattern of visitor travel remaining hard to predict, performance is expected to recover for 2024/25.  Nevertheless, the plan does seek to build up visitor numbers as well as address the relocation of the Fashion Museum so she was seeking approval for a new charity to support the Fashion Museum.  This will be akin to the Roman Baths Foundation with sustainability and climate emergency embedded within its projects.  There are also other opportunities to build on, having achieved the second UNESCO inscription.  There are also some more prosaic plans, including fixing the Victoria Art Gallery roof.

Councillor Richard Samuel, in seconding the report, commended the new Head of Heritage Services and his team in doing a great job in providing some good solutions in this report.

RESOLVED unanimously to;

1.  Approve the Heritage Services Business Plan; and

2.  Approve, in principle, the creation of a charity to support the new Fashion Museum and Collections Study Centre Project