Agenda and draft minutes

There were no substitutes declared for the meeting.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillor Robert Nobbs.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting held on 10 January 2019 (copy attached).

The minutes of the meeting of 10 January 2019 were confirmed as an accurate record, and signed by the Chairman.

Members of the public who live or work in Forest Heath are invited to put one question/statement of not more than 3 minutes duration relating to items to be discussed in Part 1 of the agenda only.  If a question is asked and answered within 3 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 limit of 15 minutes for public speaking, which may be extended at the Chairman’s discretion.

There were no questions or statements from the public.

The Chairman advised that he attended the Joint Executive (Cabinet) Committee on 22 January 2019 and presented the Committee’s report on items it considered on 10 January 2019, which was noted.

The Cabinet Member for Resources and Performance will provide a verbal update on his portfolio over the last year.

On 8 March 2018, the Committee received an update from the Cabinet Member for Resources and Performance, setting out responsibilities covered under the portfolio.

At this meeting, the Portfolio Holder for Resources and Performance had been invited to the meeting to provide his annual update on his portfolio. 

Councillor Stephen Edwards opened his presentation by thanking the Committee for the invitation to address them on progress made within his Portfolio since March 2018.  He then provided a brief update covering the following areas:

Elections:  The Elections team was working hard in getting everything in place for the elections in May 2019.  There were new polling stations due to the change of boundaries and he was pleased to report there were no more caravans planned to be used as polling stations.

Human Resources: A new pay model had been agreed and would come into operation on 1 April 2019 for the new West Suffolk Council.  It was hoped that the new model would help with recruitment and retention.  The staff benefits package had been revised and now included financial advice and management.  12 members of staff had been trained as mental health first aiders to support the council’s health and wellbeing agenda.  Staff were being supported at the depot before their move to the new West Suffolk Operational Hub. 

Finance:  Delivered a two year balanced budget for the new West Suffolk Council.  £90,000 in single council savings were made as a result of insurance and audit tenders, which was better than predicted in the business case.  The Council had also recently changed Treasury Advisors to Arlingclose Limited.

Audit:  The Annual Governance Statement was usually approved in July each year.  However, this year it had to be produced and approved before becoming a Single Council.  The Statement was approved by the Performance and Audit Scrutiny Committee on 31 January 2019, which was six months earlier than we would normally expect.

ICT:  The ICT team was getting everything ready for Single Council.  A lot of work was going on behind the scenes, to ensure a seamless transition.

The Committee asked a number of questions on the above, to which comprehensive responses were provided, in particular on:

·         Apprenticeships and business learning on social media;

·         TUPE of staff to West Suffolk Council; and

·         Securing a balanced West Suffolk Council budget.

The Committee questioned whether employees at the Mildenhall Depot who were being relocated to the West Suffolk Operational Hub would be compensated for additional travel to work mileage, to which the Portfolio Holder agreed to provide a written response.  

The Committee discussed the sharing of staff, which took place in 2015 under shared services, and questioned what the council’s staff retention rate had been over the last four years, to which the Portfolio Holder agreed to provide a written response.

The Chairman of the Committee thanked the Portfolio Holder and Officers for attending the meeting.

There being no decision required, the Committee noted the contents of the verbal update.

Report No: OAS/FH/19/006

[Councillors Christine Mason and David Palmer declared non-pecuniary interests as they lived in Brandon and remained in the meeting and the subsequent vote]

Prior to the Committee considering this late urgent item, the Chairman outlined the procedure for the conduct of the call-in, which was set out in Appendix 4 of the report, and sought the name of the member who would be the main spokesperson for the call-in, being Councillor Victor Lukaniuk.

The Committee received Report No: OAS/FH/19/006, which requested the Committee investigates the called-in decision relating to the Portfolio Holders Decision Notice regarding “the submission of an expression of interest in round one of the Future High Street Fund, published on 28 February 2019.

In line with the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Procedure Rules, as contained within Part 4 of the Forest Heath District Council Constitution, Councillor Victor Lukaniuk, with the support of Councillors Andrew Appleby, Christine Mason, David Palmer and Peter Ridgwell called-in the Portfolio Holders decision notice published on 28 February 2019.  The call-in had been actioned under items 1 and 8 of the principles for decision making, as follows:

-      We in Brandon were not given the opportunity to make a case for funding; and

-      The process was flawed.

Full reasons given for the call-in were set out in the Call-in Notice, attached at Appendix 1 to the report.  Also attached to the report were a number of appendices, namely:

-      Appendix 2: Portfolio Holder’s Decisions Notice (28 February 2019)

-      Appendix 3: Portfolio Holder’s Report

-      Appendix 4: Call-in meeting general guidance notes.

In line with the guidance note, the Chairman invited the lead call-in member, Councillor Victor Lukaniuk to outline to the Committee the reasons/concerns in actioning the call-in, making reference to items 1 and 8 of the principles of decision making (below):

Principle 1:  The decision was not reasonable within the common meaning of the word, i.e. it was not a rational decision based on sound judgement; and

Principle 8:  When making a decision, a presumption in favour of openness was not applied and a clarity of aims and desired outcomes was not displayed.

Councillor Lukaniuk informed the Committee that he considered it was a poor decision, and the first he had heard about the Future High Street Fund Bid was on 19 February 2019, then on 28 February 2019 when the actual Portfolio Holder decision was published.  As a result, he felt Brandon councillors we were not able to put forward a case for the Town to be the subject of the bid.  He believed the Portfolio Houlder should have made efforts to contact local members as otherwise they were excluded from the debate.  He then referred to a quote in the Haverhill Echo from Councillor Susan Glossop, St Edmundsbury Borough Councils Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth.

The Chairman invited the Forest Heath District Council Portfolio Holder for Planning and Growth, Councillor Lance Stanbury to respond to the points raised by Councillor Victor Lukaniuk, making reference  ...  view the full minutes text for item 289.

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.

As the next item on the agenda was exempt, it was proposed by Councillor Rona Burt, seconded by Councillor Brian Harvey, and with the vote being unanimous, it was

          RESOLVED:

That the press and public be excluded during the consideration of the following item 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 item, there would be disclosure to them of exempt categories of information as prescribed in Part 1 of Schedule 12 A of the Local Government Act 1972, and indicated against the item and, in all circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

EXEMPT – Report No: OAS/FH/19/005

Prior to receiving the Exempt report, the Chairman informed the Committee that the Cabinet Member for Leisure and Culture had sent his apologies as he was unable to attend the meeting, and circulated an exempt statement in his absence.

The Committee was then reminded that in April 2018, it carried out a review of the main Home of Horseracing project, and the performance of the museum in its first 18 months.  The Committee concluded that, whilst the museum still had much work to do in order to deliver its business plan, the Council’s original objectives for the project were already being met.  However, at that time, the capital project to rebuild Palace House and Stables as a museum had not been closed, and it was therefore agreed to defer scrutiny of that specific element until all information was available.  Specifically, it was agreed to hold a second, internally focused, scrutiny session to look at any learning that could be applied to future Council projects.

The Committee received Exempt Report No: OAS/FH/19/005, which provided members with the requested assessment of the transferable learning, which the Council could take from the 2012-2018 capital project to create the National Heritage Centre for Horseracing and Sporting Art, known as the Home of Horseracing project.

The report included information on the background, current project status, project governance and council involvement, project finances; construction phase, and lessons learned from construction project.

The Committee considered the exempt report in detail and asked a number of questions to which comprehensive responses were provided, including concern regarding the recent closure of the restaurant at the museum.

In particular the Committee discussed the main learning points, which were now been taken forward in future projects, such as the Mildenhall Hub, being:

-      The importance of partnerships as strong as this one in delivering projectis;

-      The structure and timing of procurement exercises;

-      Managing the cash-flow situation created by pledges/grants being dependent on completion of works. 

There being no decision required, the Committee noted the contents of the Exempt Report.