Agenda, decisions and minutes

No apologies for absence were received.

At each Cabinet meeting, up to 15 minutes shall be allocated for questions from and discussion with, non-Cabinet members.  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.

No non-Cabinet Members in attendance wished to speak under this item.

Members of the public who live or work in the Borough are invited to put one question or statement of not more than three minutes duration relating to items to be discussed in Part 1 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.

There were no members of the public in attendance.

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/056

Chairman of SEBC Overview and Scrutiny Committee: Diane Hind

Portfolio Holder: John Griffiths       

Lead Officer: Ian Gallin

RESOLVED:

That the concerns of the St Edmundsbury and Forest Heath Overview and Scrutiny Committees regarding the veto vote of the directly elected Mayor for the then proposed Mayoral Combined Authority for Norfolk and Suffolk, as outlined in paragraph 1.2 of Report No: CAB/SE/16/056, be formally acknowledged and noted, and this will be taken into account in any negotiations regarding the setting up of a Mayoral authority for Devolution during negotiations at a later stage.

The Cabinet considered Report No: CAB/SE/16/056, which sought formal noting from Cabinet of an amended recommendation of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, following its consideration of ‘What will Devolution mean for West Suffolk?’

Councillor Diane Hine, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee drew relevant issues to the attention of Cabinet, including that the Committee had jointly examined the topic of Devolution with Forest Heath District Council’s Overview and Scrutiny (O&S) Committee and was now presenting its findings to Cabinet.  Councillor Hind explained the areas that had been scrutinised by the Committees, as summarised in the report.

As reported at the Council meeting immediately prior to Cabinet, the situation with regard to the Norfolk and Suffolk Devolution agreement had significantly changed since publication of the agendas. 

The Cabinet acknowledged the examination of the issue of Devolution by the O&S Committees and noted its findings as set out in Section 3 of Report No: OAS/SE/16/026, including its concern regarding the potential for a veto vote of the directly elected Mayor for the then Norfolk and Suffolk Combined Authority, as outlined in paragraph 1.2 of Report No: CAB/SE/16/056.

The Cabinet thanked the Committees for their work and formally noted the recommendation, as amended, and agreed it should be taken into account in any future negotiations regarding the setting up of a Mayoral authority for Devolution.

RESOLVED:

That the concerns of the St Edmundsbury and Forest Heath Overview and Scrutiny Committees regarding the veto vote of the directly elected Mayor for the then proposed Mayoral Combined Authority for Norfolk and Suffolk, as outlined in paragraph 1.2 of Report No: CAB/SE/16/056, be formally acknowledged and noted, and this will be taken into account in any negotiations regarding the setting up of a Mayoral authority for Devolution during negotiations at a later stage.

Report No:   CAB/SE/16/057

Portfolio Holder: John Griffiths        Lead Officer: Ian Gallin

FOR INFORMATION ONLY: As the decisions taken by Council on the revised set of recommendations tabled at its meeting immediately preceding the meeting of Cabinet (see link in ‘Reasons for Decision’ column for Item 4 above) were not considered to be executive decisions in full or in part, the Cabinet was no longer required to endorse those decisions.

Members noted that as the decisions taken by Council on the revised set of recommendations tabled at its meeting immediately preceding this meeting, which were not considered to be executive decisions in full or in part, the Cabinet was no longer required to endorse those decisions.