Agenda and minutes

At the request of the Chairman, the Reverend Beverley Robertson opened the meeting with a prayer.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors J. S. Brogan, Dr B. T. Cooper, S. J. Dudley, B. Lewis F.CMI and L. J. Turner.  

(Members are reminded that they need to keep their register of interest forms up to date)

Councillor C. B. Taylor initially declared a personal interest in agenda items 10 and 11 relating to potential County Council spending cuts as a Member of the Worcestershire County Council.

The Chairman stated she had taken advice and it was not necessary for Members who were also County Councillors to declare an interest in the circumstances.

The minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 20th July were submitted.

RESOLVED  that subject to the deletion of the final paragraph of minute 39/11, the minutes be approved as a correct record.

There were no announcements from the Chairman or the Head of Paid Service.

The Civic Head referred to the following events:

(a)       Civic Service on 17th September 2011.

(b)       Black Country Night Out on 20th January 2012

(a)       Olympic Torch Procession

            The Leader advised that Bromsgrove was the only District in the County which would not be hosting part of the Olympic Torch Procession. A representative from Bromsgrove had been selected to take part in the procession but this Council had not been consulted or involved.

(b)       Sainsbury’s Development

            The Leader referred to the comments made by Councillor R. J. Shannon relating to the possibility of Sainsbury’s not proceeding with the development in Bromsgrove, and reported that a planning application had now been received to facilitate the supermarket development.

(c)        Balances/Capital Expenditure

            The Leader referred to a list which had been circulated containing information which had been requested previously by Councillor S. P. Shannon relating to Council expenditure and balances.

(d)       Overview and Scrutiny/Planning Committee

            The Leader expressed concerns regarding the operation of the Overview and Scrutiny Board and the Planning Committee. With regard to the Planning Committee he had requested officers to consider what changes could be made and how the efficiency of the Committee could be improved which would be of benefit to all Members of the Council.

            In relation to Overview and Scrutiny, the Leader felt that Scrutiny should be undertaken to look at areas or issues and to assess whether they were working properly and he felt the recent Car Park Task Group had been a good example of this. The Bus Services Task Group had not been undertaken in the correct manner as it had become very political, with letters and articles appearing in the press before the recommendations of the Task Group were known. The proposed County Council cuts in services had been greatly reduced in fact by District Councillors raising issues and working with the County Council but this was prior to the Task Group being set up. 

            The Leader also referred to the recommendation from the Overview and Scrutiny Board in relation to the Marlbrook Tip that he discuss with the Chief Executive how an investigation could be carried out by an appropriate audit/investigation team. There were concerns from the opposition that the Council would be investigating itself and in this regard the Leader was also concerned that there may be a need to  look at whether the Audit Board should also be chaired by an independent person rather than by a Member of the Council.

(e)       Consultations from Central Government   

            The Leader referred to a number of Consultation documents from Central Government including those relating to Business Rates and Council Tax Benefits and raised concerns regarding the implementation of these proposals.  

            Members then raised questions/comments to which the Leader responded as summarised below.

            Councillor P. M. McDonald referred to the Sainsbury’s issue and commented that five years ago the Leader had stated that the Market Hall site would be developed within a year and this had not happened so how could he be confident that the Sainsbury’s development would now go ahead. The Leader responded that the planning application for the service station on Birmingham Road had been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 52.

To consider the recommendations from the meeting of the Cabinet held on 7th September 2011 on the following items (the full Cabinet reports are enclosed for information at the back of the white section of the Council agenda book)

• Budget Preparation Guidelines
• Dedication of BDC Car Park Land to Highway (adjustment to Capital Budget)

(i)         BUDGET PREPARATION GUIDELINES

            The recommendation was moved by Councillor R. Hollingworth and seconded by Councillor Mrs. M. A. Sherrey JP.

            RESOLVED  that the Budget Preparation Guidelines as set out in appendix 1 to the report be approved.

(ii)        DEDICATION OF COUNCIL CAR PARK LAND TO HIGHWAY

            The recommendation was moved by Councillor D.W. P. Booth JP and seconded by Councillor R. Hollingworth.

            An amendment was moved by Councillor P. M. McDonald and seconded by Councillor L. C. R. Mallett that the sum of £100,000 be sought in respect of the land. 

            Having been put to the vote the Chairman declared the amendment to be LOST.

            The Cabinet recommendation was then put to the vote as the substantive motion and it was

            RESOLVED  that the sum of £50,000 from Sainsbury PLC be allocated to the Town Centre Regeneration Programme Capital Budget for 2011/12.

The minutes of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 20th July 2011 were received for information.

During the following item and it having been put to the vote, the Chairman obtained the consent of the Chamber to suspend Council Procedure Rules to enable Mr. S. Jorden, the Head of Worcester Regulatory Services to speak at the meeting in relation to that.

To deal with any questions on notice from Members of the Council, in the order in which they have been received.

One question on notice was taken.

Question submitted by Councillor S. P. Shannon to the Leader

“Does the Leader share concern of Labour Councillors that since responsibility for food safety inspection of schools, nursing homes, cafes, restaurants, fish and chip shops even lay by burger vans has been handed over to Worcester based “Shared Services Project”. The inspection of food safety standards operated in these premises can now rely on just a telephone call to ask if everything is being done correctly and that this “inspection” will suffice for another 12 months?”

The Leader referred the question to Councillor C. B. Taylor as the relevant Portfolio Holder to respond.

Councillor Taylor replied that he had spoken to the Leader and he had every confidence in the work of the Worcestershire Regulatory Services and therefore the answer to the question was no.

Councillor Shannon asked a supplementary question as to who takes responsibility for this dangerous strategy and queried when a fit and proper inspection of food outlets regime would return to this District.

At the invitation of the Chairman, the Head of Worcestershire Regulatory Services (WRS) Mr. S. Jorden responded to the supplementary question and stated that there was no dangerous strategy and that WRS had never only dealt with high risk food businesses by way of a phone call. The way in which food businesses were inspected was dictated by the Food Standards Agency through a national framework and this had been followed for the last ten years. Where there was a high risk food business in any District this would be inspected on a regular basis dependant upon the risk.  

Councillor Shannon then stated that he had not mentioned high risk food establishments but he did consider schools (which were not being inspected) to be high risk. In view of the importance of the issue relating to schools the Chairman invited Mr. Jorden to respond.

Mr. Jorden stated that he was happy to discuss fully any specific concerns of Councillor Shannon outside the meeting but that in general WRS inspected all businesses, including schools, according to risk which was based upon a national code of practice from the Food Standards Agency. It was stated that irrespective of the type of business the assessment was based on a categorised risk which determined amongst other things the frequency of inspections. A range of interventions was used to ensure those businesses were complying and indeed could prove compliance over time. This process had not changed for the last ten years and it was not intended to change it significantly moving forward a year.

As the Council Procedure rules had been suspended, The Chairman allowed Councillor L. C. R. Mallett to ask a question of Mr. Jorden. Councillor Mallett queried whether there had been any change in the regularity or risk grading of the inspections that were carried out on any type of food establishment over the last five years. Councillor Mallett stressed he was not referring to whether WRS had changed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 56.

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillor R. Hollingworth:-

“This Council supports the concept of the universal credit system but does not believe that the current implementation plan will work and this Council should therefore write to the Secretary of Communities to ask him to deliver proper localisation and not the centralisation he seems to be striving for.”

Members considered the following motion submitted by Councillor R. Hollingworth.

“that this Council supports the concept of the universal credit system but does not believe that the current implementation plan will work and that this Council should therefore write to the Secretary of State for Communities to ask him to deliver proper localisation and not the centralisation he seems to be striving for.”

The motion was moved by Councillor R. Hollingworth and seconded by Councillor Mrs M. A. Sherrey JP.

Having been put to the vote, the Chairman declared the motion to be CARRIED.

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillor Mrs. M. A. Sherrey JP:

“1.  The Council should ask the Home Secretary to reconsider the cuts in Police Funding and should recommend to him that the money that will be spent on the proposed Police Commissioners should be better spent on front line Policing.

2. The Council should ask the Home Secretary to request the County Council to reconsider the cuts in Positive Activities given that it is felt that the additional costs to public services arising from these cuts will be far greater than the cuts themselves.”

Councillor Mrs. M. A. Sherrey JP withdrew this motion.

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillor P. M. McDonald:

“The proposed cutbacks in youth provision by the County Council could have devastating effects on our youth and the wellbeing of our communities.

Young people are becoming one of the most deprived groups within our communities with poor job prospects.

Any cuts in youth provision can only add to their isolation and thus exclusion from mainstream society.

Therefore, this Council calls upon the County Council to withdraw its proposal to cut back youth provision and maintain its present provision and by doing so giving much needed support to our young people at a time they feel neglected and forgotten."

Members considered the following motion submitted by Councillor P. M. McDonald.

“The proposed cutbacks in youth provision by the County Council could have devastating effects on our youth and the well being of our communities.

Young people are becoming one of the most deprived groups within our communities with poor job prospects.

Any cuts in youth provision can only add to their isolation and thus exclusion from mainstream society.

Therefore, this Council calls upon the County Council to withdraw its proposal to cut back youth provision and maintain its present provision and by doing so giving much needed support to our young people at a time they feel neglected and forgotten.”

The motion was moved by Councillor P. M. McDonald and seconded by Councillor L. C. R. Mallett.

Following some discussion and a brief adjournment an amendment was moved by Councillor R. Hollingworth and seconded by Mrs M. A. Sherrey JP  that the final paragraph of the motion by altered to read: “ Therefore this Council calls upon the County Council and puts its full weight behind the Local Strategic Partnership to do the same to withdraw its proposal to cut back youth provision and maintain its present provision and by doing so giving much needed support to our young people at a time when they feel neglected and forgotten.”

Having been put to the vote, the Chairman declared the amendment to be unanimously carried.

The amendment was then put to the vote as the substantive motion and the Chairman declared it to be unanimously CARRIED.    

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillor C. J. Bloore:

“It was originally agreed that a feasibility study would be carried into whether Bromsgrove District Council and Redditch Council could take advantage of economies of scale through sharing services. It was agreed from the outset that should any political group decide against a move to share services then it would not go ahead.

With the outcome of the feasibility study it was decided by a political group it did not support the outcome to share services. This was ignored by the controlling group who embarked on shared services with Redditch spending millions of pounds on start-up costs.

From shared services it developed into shared management, shared authority to merging with Wyre Forest to create a North Worcestershire Authority to rival the County Council.

At no time have the residents of Bromsgrove been consulted and all decisions relating to this issue have been made and discussed in secret. The actions being taken in secret threaten to lose Bromsgrove’s identity and service supplied on local need.

Therefore we call upon the Council to have a referendum letting the people decide on whether they agree with the decisions that have been made in secret and want to merge with Redditch and Wyre Forest.”

This motion stood deferred to the next ordinary meeting of the Council.

To consider the recommendations from the meeting of the Cabinet held on 7th September 2011 on the following items (the full Cabinet reports are enclosed for information on pink paper at the back of the Council agenda book)

• Land Drainage Shared Services Business Case

• Single Business Case for Shared Services
• Car Park Shared Services Business Case
• North Worcestershire Emergency Planning Shared Services Business Case

         (Note: Although the Council agenda had indicated that the public may be excluded during the consideration of this item, in the event it was considered in public as it was noted that staff involved had already received detailed information on the issue).

(i)         LAND DRAINAGE AND WATERCOURSES BUSINESS CASE

            The recommendations from the Cabinet were moved by Councillor M. J. A. Webb and seconded by Councillor R. Hollingworth.

RESOLVED:           

(a)       that the shared Land Drainage Service proposals detailed in the Business Case (Option 3) be approved, in accordance with the previously agreed Project Initiation Document dated 22nd June 2011;

(b)       that it be agreed that this new service be known as the “North Worcestershire Land Drainage Service”; and

(c)        that all initial set up costs be met from existing budgets.

(ii)        SINGLE BUSINESS CASE FOR SEVEN SERVICES

            The recommendations from the Cabinet were moved by Councillor R. Hollingworth and seconded by Councillor Mrs M. A. Sherrey JP.

            It was noted that Strategic Planning was not part of the Shared Services programme at present.

            On a requisition under Council Procedure Rule 17.5, the following details of voting on the recommendations were recorded:

            For the recommendations:   Councillors Mrs. S. J. Baxter, Dr. D. W. P. Booth, Mrs. J. M. Boswell, J. R. Boulter, M. A. Bullivant, R. A. Clarke, S. R. Colella, R. J. Deeming, Mrs. R. L. Dent, K. A. Grant-Pearce, Miss P. A. Harrison, R. Hollingworth, Mrs. H. J. Jones, R. J. Laight, P. Lammas, J. A. Ruck, C. R. Scurrell, Mrs. M. A. Sherrey JP, Mrs. C. J. Spencer, C. B. Taylor, C. J. Tidmarsh, M. J. A. Webb and P. J. Whittaker (23);

            Against the recommendations: Councillors C. J. Bloore, Ms. M. T. Buxton, L. C. R. Mallett, Mrs. C. M. McDonald, P. M. McDonald, E. J. Murray, S. P. Shannon, R. J. Shannon, Mrs E. M. Shannon and C. J. K. Wilson (10)

RESOLVED:           

(a)       that the Single Business Case proposals be approved in respect of shared services for the following seven services:

·        Community Services

·        Customer Services

·        Environmental Services

·        Financial Services

·        Legal and Democratic Services

·        Planning and Regeneration

·        Secretariat and Directorate Support Services

(b)       that the detail within the Operational Shared Services Agreement be noted and that subject to the change of date in section 14, which will remain blank until agreement has been reached by full Council and the need for the appendices to be populated, the Agreement be endorsed and signed on behalf of the Full Council.

(iii)       CAR PARKING BUSINESS CASE

            The recommendations from the Cabinet were moved by Councillor M. J. A. Webb and seconded by Councillor D. W. P. Booth JP.

            On a requisition under Council Procedure Rule 17.5, the following details of voting on the recommendations were recorded:

            For the recommendations:   Councillors Mrs. S. J. Baxter, Dr. D. W. P. Booth, Mrs. J. M. Boswell, J. R. Boulter, M. A. Bullivant, R. A. Clarke, S. R. Colella, R. J. Deeming,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 61.