Agenda, decisions and minutes

Prior to the formal meeting, informal discussions took place on the following two substantive items:

(1)     West Suffolk: Promoting Physical Activity

(2)     Review of the Terms of Reference of the Joint Member Development Group

All Members of Forest Heath District Council’s Cabinet had been invited to attend St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Offices to enable joint informal discussions on the reports to take place between the two authorities, prior to seeking formal approval at their respective separate Cabinet meetings, immediately following the informal discussions.

The Leader of St Edmundsbury Borough Council welcomed all those present to West Suffolk House and the Interim Service Manager (Legal and Democratic Services) advised on the format of the proceedings for the informal discussions and subsequent separate meetings of each authority.

Under their Constitutions, both Cabinets listed as standing agenda items: an ‘Open Forum’ which provided the opportunity for non-Cabinet Members to discuss issues with Cabinet and also ‘Public Participation’, which provided the opportunity for Members of the public to speak.  Therefore, as any matters arising from the discussions held during these agenda items may have some bearing on the decisions taken during the separate formal meetings, non-Cabinet Members and members of the public were invited to put their questions/statements prior to the start of the joint informal discussions.

1.       Open Forum

          No non-Cabinet Members in attendance wished to speak under this item in relation to Items 4. and 5. of the agenda.

2.       Public Participation

          There were no members of the public in attendance who wished to speak under this item in relation to Items 4. and 5. of the agenda.

3.       West Suffolk: Promoting Physical Activity (Report Nos: CAB/SE/16/033 and CAB/FH/16/029)

          The Cabinets were presented with this report which set out a framework to enable and encourage people to lead active lives and increase activity levels across West Suffolk.  This would lead to the development of area plans which would help identify gaps and prioritise actions in line with the Councils’ and its partners, priorities to increase opportunities for people to take part in physical activity. This framework would build on the work undertaken by 4Global, to help shape West Suffolk into a place that would achieve the aim to increase physical activity, therefore, improving the health and wellbeing of its residents.

          Within this framework there was also the intention to develop an Open Space, Sport and Recreation Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for West Suffolk as a whole.  This would also informed how the local area was shaped to support both Councils’ aims to enable and encourage people to lead more active lives.

          Councillors Joanna Rayner (SEBC) and Andy Drummond (FHDC), Portfolio Holders for Leisure and Culture, also drew relevant issues to the attention of both Cabinets.

          Councillor Robin Millar (FHDC) referred to Appendix A and, in particular, to the column entitled ‘Children with excess weight (Year 6)’ and queried the figure in relation to the ‘All Saints Ward, Newmarket’ of ‘28.8%’, as to whether this figure this should actually be classified as ‘Green’ as the figure was ‘Better than Suffolk’ which was ‘30.5%’.  The Portfolio Holders acknowledged this query and confirmed that this would be clarified accordingly.

4.       Review of the Terms of Reference of the Joint Member Development Group (Report Nos: CAB/SE/16/034 and CAB/FH/16/030)

          The Cabinets were presented with this report which was requesting the Joint Member Development Group (JMDG) review their Terms of Reference (and to make any necessary amendments) to reflect the evolving role of Members, as Leaders, in the current and future challenging and changing times.

          The report explained that the JMDG had provided a programme developed, in part, from a training needs analysis completed annually, that aimed to equip and develop members for their roles.  This had been recognised as being successful and effective at the time of the joint award of the Charter for Elected Member Development in September 2014.  However, given that this was two years ago, there must not be complacency and the Councils should continue to aspire improvement in the work undertaken.

          Councillors Stephen Edwards (FHDC) and Ian Houlder (SEBC), Portfolio Holders for Resources and Performance, also drew relevant issues to the attention of both Cabinets.

On the conclusion of the informal joint discussions at 6.15 pm, the Chairman then formally opened the meeting of Forest Heath District Council’s Cabinet at 6.18 pm in the Conference Chamber West.     

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor James Waters.

(This item was undertaken at the beginning of the informal discussions, to allow Members to consider the issues raised by the non-Cabinet members in relation to Items 4. to 5.  The Open Forum on Item 6. will be subject to the following rules)

At each Cabinet meeting, up to 15 minutes shall be allocated for questions from and discussion with, non-Cabinet members in Part 1(B).  Members wishing to speak during this session should if possible, give notice in advance.  Who speaks and for how long will be at the complete discretion of the person presiding.

This item had already been considered during the informal discussions in relation to Items 4. and 5. On the agenda (Item 1. above within the notes of the informal discussions refers).

No non-Cabinet Members in attendance wished to speak on Item 6.

(Public speaking on Items 4. to 5. was undertaken at the beginning of the informal discussions, to allow Members to consider the issues raised by the members of the public. Public speaking on Item 6. will be subject to the following rules)

Members of the public who live or work in the District are invited to put one question/statement of not more than three minutes duration relating to items to be discussed in Part 1(B) of the agenda only.  If a question is asked and answered within three minutes, the person who asked the question may ask a supplementary question that arises from the reply.

A person who wishes to speak must register at least 15 minutes before the time the meeting is scheduled to start.

There is an overall time limit of 15 minutes for public speaking, which may be extended at the Chairman’s discretion.

This item had already been considered during the above informal discussions in relation to Items 4. and 5. on the agenda (Item 2. above within the notes of the informal discussion refers).

There were no members of the public in attendance who wished to speak under this item in relation to Item 6 of the agenda.

Report No: CAB/FH/16/029

Portfolio Holder: Andy Drummond             Lead Officer: Jill Korwin

(For reference purposes, St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Report Number is CAB/SE/16/033)

RESOLVED:

That the West Suffolk: Promoting Physical Activity Framework, as set out in Appendix A to Report No CAB/FH/16/029, be approved.

(Report No: CAB/FH/16/029)

Further to the joint informal discussions held prior to the meeting with St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Cabinet on Report No: CAB/FH/16/029, it was proposed, seconded and with the vote being unanimous, it was

RESOLVED:

That the West Suffolk: Promoting Physical Activity Framework, as set out in Appendix A to Report No CAB/FH/16/029, be approved (with clarification on whether the figure for ‘Children with excess weight (Year 6)’ in relation to the ‘All Saints Ward, Newmarket’ of ‘28.8%’, should be classified as ‘Green’.)

Report No: CAB/FH/16/030

Portfolio Holder: Stephen Edwards            Lead Officer: Karen Points

(For reference purposes, St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Report Number is CAB/SE/16/034)

RESOLVED:

That the Joint Member Development Group reviews their Terms of Reference and programme to reflect the evolving role of members as Leaders in challenging and changing times, based on the structure outlined within Report No CAB/FH/16/030.

(Report No: CAB/FH/16/030)

Further to the joint informal discussions held prior to the meeting with St Edmundsbury Borough Council’s Cabinet on Report No: CAB/FH/16/030, it was proposed, seconded and with the vote being unanimous, it was

RESOLVED:

That the Joint Member Development Group reviews their Terms of Reference and programme to reflect the evolving role of members as Leaders in challenging and changing times, based on the structure outlined within Report No CAB/FH/16/030.

Report No: CAB/FH/16/031

Portfolio Holder: Lance Stanbury     Lead Officer: Steven Wood

RESOLVED:

That:-

1.           The work undertaken to-date to develop an A11 Growth Corridor project, be noted.

2.           The key findings of the Feasibility Study be endorsed.

3.           Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Growth, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, to enter into legal agreements to establish suitable governance for the project and to with Partners to bring the project forward.

(Report No: CAB/FH/16/031)

Councillor Lance Stanbury, Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, presented this item which set out the findings of the Feasibility Study into the delivery of an A11 Growth Corridor and to seek the authority to continue work, in partnership with other relevant local authorities, towards its establishment.

As part of the scope of the Feasibility Study, the Partner Councils (ie Breckland Council, Forest Heath District Council and South Norfolk District Council), had proposed 25 sites, along the A11, for the consultants to evaluate.  These were assessed on a “multi-criteria basis”, including:

·         Deliverability – how easy was it to develop the site given existing constraints?

·         Suitability – was the site suitable for development?

·         Achievability – would the site be developed?; did it have planning permission?; was it readily available for immediate occupation?

·         Contribution – would the site help to transform the Corridor to meet the draft vision?

The outcome of this evaluation was that 11 sites (the detail of these sites were set out in the Exempt Appendix 2 to the report) had been shortlisted to make a significant contribution to economic growth along the A11.  Three sites of these sites were also likely to make a very significant contribution to the overall criteria.  These sites were set out in Table 1 of paragraph 1.2.2 of the report.

Therefore, the Cabinet were asked to support and endorse the findings of the Feasibility Study and agree to embark on the next delivery stage of bring the project to life.  The Leaders of both South Norfolk District Council and Breckland Council had indicated their support for the findings of the Study and had agreed to move towards a partnership phase.  Conversations had also been progressing with East Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council to see whether they would also support the establishment of an A11 economic growth corridor.

It was proposed, seconded and with the vote being unanimous, it was

RESOLVED:

That:-

1.           The work undertaken to-date to develop an A11 Growth Corridor project, be noted.

2.           The key findings of the Feasibility Study be endorsed.

3.           Authority be delegated to the Head of Planning and Growth, in consultation with the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, to enter into legal agreements to establish suitable governance for the project and to with Partners to bring the project forward.

To consider whether the press and public should be excluded during the consideration of the following items because it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during the items, there would be disclosure to them of exempt categories of information as prescribed in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, and indicated against each item and, in all circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

See Minute No. 216. below.

Exempt Appendix 2 to Report No: CAB/FH/16/031

Portfolio Holder: Lance Stanbury              Lead Officer: Steven Wood

(This exempt Appendix is to be considered in private under paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972, as it contains information relating to the financial and business affairs of a particular organisation)

(No representations have been received from members of the public regarding this item being held in private)

(Exempt Appendix 2 to Report No: CAB/FH/16/031)

The Cabinet considered Exempt Appendix 2 to Report No: CAB/FH/16/031.  However, as no reference was made to specific detail, this item was not held in private session.