Agenda, decisions and minutes

Councillors JD Batchelor, SGM Kindersley and RJ Turner declared personal non-prejudicial interests as elected Cambridgeshire County Councillors. They remained in the meeting and took part in the discussions and voting. 

To authorise the Chairman to sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2007 as a correct record (attached).

Council RESOLVED that the Minutes of the meeting held on 18 October 2007 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman, subject to the following amendments:

·         Minute 36 – Clarification of the nature of the interests declared by Councillor Mrs DP Roberts and Councillor Mrs EM Heazell;

·         Minute 49 – Clarification that the Vice-Chairman had laid the first brick of the Cancer Unit at Great Shelford.

The Chairman drew Council’s attention to the response from the Home Secretary to the Council’s Resolution in respect of Minute 48(a) (Motion in respect of resources for local policing), a copy of which would be placed on view in the Members’ Room.

The Chairman wished all Members a Happy New Year. 

“Would the Portfolio Holder for Resources and the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Environmental Services consider reviving a scheme to provide free rat control for residents on housing benefit and residents in sheltered housing?  There has been a recent infestation around sheltered housing in my Ward, which was very distressing for residents who could not afford the £50 fee or get out to buy their own rat poison. 

It may be that, in the interests of environmental health, and bearing in mind the development of poison resistance in some rat populations, all rat control should be free.”

Councillor Dr JE Lockwood asked the Health and Environmental Services and Resources Portfolio Holders the following question:

 “Would the Portfolio Holder for Resources and the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Environmental Services consider reviving a scheme to provide free rat control for residents on housing benefit and residents in sheltered housing?  There has been a recent infestation around sheltered housing in my Ward, which was very distressing for residents who could not afford the £50 fee or get out to buy their own rat poison. 

It may be that, in the interests of environmental health, and bearing in mind the development of poison resistance in some rat populations, all rat control should be free.”

Councillor Mrs DSK Spink MBE, Housing and Environmental Services Portfolio Holder, advised that the free scheme had ceased to operate when the Council was capped. Councillor Mrs Spink advised that she understood the distress caused to residents suffering infestations which they could not afford to deal with and that, as part of her recent consideration of the draft 2008-2009 budget for the service, she would investigate a scheme to assist these residents with pest control. She advised that a contingency pest control fund could be used for situations such as those described by Dr Lockwood.

Councillor Dr Lockwood replied that she was pleased with the Portfolio Holder’s answer and thanked her for undertaking to seek means of addressing residents’ concerns.

"I am pleased to see that the Housing and Environmental Services Portfolio Holder is undertaking a consultation over the Christmas recycling and refuse collections for next year. There is no doubt that many people found the gap of up to 3 weeks for a black bin collection or 4 weeks for a green bin collection particularly difficult at this time of year when people may have exceptional amounts of waste due to relations staying for the holidays. 

“My question is about the communication of the Collection Calendar, which compounded the problem this year. Why was the Christmas collection arrangement not printed in the winter edition of the South Cambs Magazine, which came out in December, but only in the autumn edition which most people had disposed of long before the holiday period?"

Councillor RT Summerfield asked the Staffing and Communication Portfolio Holder the following question:

"I am pleased to see that the Housing and Environmental Services Portfolio Holder is undertaking a consultation over the Christmas recycling and refuse collections for next year. There is no doubt that many people found the gap of up to 3 weeks for a black bin collection or 4 weeks for a green bin collection particularly difficult at this time of year when people may have exceptional amounts of waste due to relations staying for the holidays. 

“My question is about the communication of the Collection Calendar, which compounded the problem this year. Why was the Christmas collection arrangement not printed in the winter edition of the South Cambs Magazine, which came out in December, but only in the autumn edition which most people had disposed of long before the holiday period?"

Councillor Mrs SM Ellington, Staffing and Communication Portfolio Holder, apologised for the confusion caused by the change to the magazine publication schedules which had been introduced in 2007. She advised that, in the previous year, the collection calendar had covered a four month period with a 2-3 week overlap for each issue, with the months covered being in line with the production and delivery schedule for the magazine.  The delivery timetable in 2007 had been brought forward to obtain increased revenue from advertisements over the Christmas period; advertisers had requested the magazine be delivered well before Christmas, rather than over Christmas as had been the case previously.

Councillor Mrs Ellington advised that the last edition of the collection calendar covered 4-5 months and had not kept up with the change in delivery times. As a result, it had become out of synch with the delivery schedule.

Council was advised that the situation would be addressed in 2008 and that new and improved ways of communicating collection dates were under consideration.

“With reference to the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway (CGB) contract, I refer to my report to Council on 19 July 2007 (Minute 33) to subsequent meetings of the CGB Liaison Forum, to the Planning Committee on 5 December (Minute 140) and to the public question at Scrutiny Committee on 17 January 2008 from Impington Parish Council (reference to building on Busway land).

“In view of the continuing public anger over the dismissal of duly raised concerns and representations over contract management and road closures, Parish Council objections to junction and lighting designs submitted to discharge the various planning conditions and very real concerns about cost overrun and late delivery,will the Council now make full representation on behalf of the residents and taxpayers of the District to our County Council partners, with a view to full and open disclosure of contract progress, cost to date and final projection? Furthermore will any revision of realistic completion dates and commencement of services now be used in the process of determination of the Northstowe Planning Application?”

Councillor MJ Mason asked the Growth and Sustainable Communities Portfolio Holder the following question:

“With reference to the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway (CGB) contract, I refer to my report to Council on 19 July 2007 (Minute 33) to subsequent meetings of the CGB Liaison Forum, to the Planning Committee on 5 December (Minute 140) and to the public question at Scrutiny Committee on 17 January 2008 from Impington Parish Council (reference to building on Busway land).

“In view of the continuing public anger over the dismissal of duly raised concerns and representations over contract management and road closures, Parish Council objections to junction and lighting designs submitted to discharge the various planning conditions and very real concerns about cost overrun and late delivery,will the Council now make full representation on behalf of the residents and taxpayers of the District to our County Council partners, with a view to full and open disclosure of contract progress, cost to date and final projection? Furthermore will any revision of realistic completion dates and commencement of services now be used in the process of determination of the Northstowe Planning Application?”

Councillor Dr DR Bard, Growth and Sustainable Communities Portfolio Holder, advised that the Council would lobby the County Council regarding contractual issues in respect of the guided busway project, but had no direct control over it. In respect of the Northstowe planning application, Dr Bard advised that a revised timetable was currently being considered, however he did not envisage this affecting the determination of the application.

Councillor Mason expressed concern at the answer provided as it was his understanding that the Northstowe development was dependent on the Guided Busway being operational before construction commenced. The Busway was supposed to have been operational between Hinchingbrooke and Addenbrooke’s hospitals by 2006. Given that the County Council was a key development partner of the Council in respect of Northstowe, Councillor Mason urged the Portfolio Holder to make strong representations with a view to addressing these issues.

Councillor Dr Bard advised that, whilst he was aware of problems in the Histon area caused by the construction of the busway, the determination of the planning application at Northstowe was a completely separate issue.

“Given firstly, the Council’s well known record of financialmisjudgements, which have not only resulted in the council being capped,but also in thespending of millions of poundson these council offices, much of which could be empty if the housingstock is sold off,and secondly, given that the  £600,000 plus of Council tax payers’ and tenants’ rent money being proposed to spend on working up plans to sell off the council’s housing stock will be wasted if tenants do not vote for transfer, do you not agree that it would be totally irresponsible to proceed with this expenditure without firstconducting a test of tenants’ opinion on the proposals?”

Mr. Dave Kelleway asked the Housing Options Portfolio Holder the following question:

“Given firstly, the Council’s well known record of financialmisjudgements, which have not only resulted in the council being capped,but also in thespending of millions of poundson these council offices, much of which could be empty if the housingstock is sold off,and secondly, given that the  £600,000 plus of Council tax payers’ and tenants’ rent money being proposed to spend on working up plans to sell off the council’s housing stock will be wasted if tenants do not vote for transfer, do you not agree that it would be totally irresponsible to proceed with this expenditure without firstconducting a test of tenants’ opinion on the proposals?”

Councillor SM Edwards, Housing Options Portfolio Holder, thanked Mr. Kelleway for his question and advised that the matter would be the subject of a full debate later on the Agenda. In the meantime, the short answer to Mr. Kelleway’s question was ‘no’.

Councillor Edwards drew Council’s attention to the findings of the Independent

Tenant Advisor (ITA), hired to support the Council, its tenants and leaseholders engage with the options appraisal process. The findings showed that there was now a greater understanding of the Council’s financial position compared to the last survey in 2005, as well as a greater willingness to enter into discussion about change. Having said this, levels of understanding about the nature and role of housing associations was low, therefore a test of all tenants’ opinion at this stage was likely to result in tenants choosing the no change option rather than an option which was largely unknown. For these reasons it was vital that further work was undertaken to assist tenants and leaseholders to understand the options better.  Councillor Edwards advised that the status quo was not an option; subsequent decisions to retain or transfer the housing stock would each have significant implications for the Council and its tenants. The Council remained committed to acting in the best interest of its tenants; to this end it would work very closely with tenants in drawing up future proposals.

By way of a supplementary question, Mr. Kelleway asked whether the likely capital receipt arising from the sale of the housing stock represented good value for money given that transfer, if approved, would take place below market value. Councillor Edwards advised that it was very much in the tenants’ interests to have lower values placed upon their properties in order to reduce the initial investment by a purchaser which would allow it to invest more in repair, maintenance and improvement.

 'Following the closure to all vehicular traffic of Park Lane (aka Gatehouse Lane) Histon for 7.5 weeks in February 2007 to create a cycle way, businesses and particularly the traders in Histon & Impington became aware of how severely their trade was affected.  In October the same road was again closed by the County Council to construct crossings for the Guided Busway. This was despite petitioning of the County Council (with suggestions from the businesses for methods of maintaining through traffic).  The character of Histon & Impington is largely dependent on the balance between residential, industrial and commercial areas. 
What actions has South Cambridgeshire District Council taken, and what does it intend to do, to preserve the commercial businesses of the villages?'

Ms. Susie Barker asked the Growth and Sustainable Communities Portfolio Holder the following question:

 'Following the closure to all vehicular traffic of Park Lane (aka Gatehouse Lane) Histon for 7.5 weeks in February 2007 to create a cycle way, businesses and particularly the traders in Histon & Impington became aware of how severely their trade was affected.  In October the same road was again closed by the County Council to construct crossings for the Guided Busway. This was despite petitioning of the County Council (with suggestions from the businesses for methods of maintaining through traffic).  The character of Histon & Impington is largely dependent on the balance between residential, industrial and commercial areas. 
What actions has South Cambridgeshire District Council taken, and what does it intend to do, to preserve the commercial businesses of the villages?'

Councillor Dr DR Bard, Growth and Sustainable Communities Portfolio Holder, thanked Ms Barker for her question. He advised that he had written to the County Council on 28 January 2008 setting out the concerns she had raised. The letter also requested details of mitigation measures the county council had taken in respect of its works at Histon. Unfortunately, the District Council was only in a position to lobby the county council; it was not able to control its actions. Dr Bard advised that he would forward a copy of the letter to Ms. Barker.

By way of a supplementary question, Ms Barker asked what means were available to secure recompense for financial loss caused by the works. Dr Bard advised that, whilst he sympathised with local businesses which had lost out as a result of the works, compensation was an issue which needed to be taken up directly with the county council.

To note all petitions received since the last Council meeting.

The Chairman welcomed the Assistant Head Teacher and Year Nine students from Sawston Village College to the meeting to present a petition to the Housing and Environmental Services Portfolio Holder in respect of a recycling scheme within their school. In introducing the petition, the students advised that the school used over one million pieces of paper during the school year. The school had taken measures to reduce paper usage, for example through the increased use of information technology, but students were frustrated that paper used in the classroom could not be recycled. A number of discussions had taken place with the Council regarding the introduction of such a scheme, however there had been no progress since August 2007. The students’ petition therefore represented a plea for assistance in taking forward the issue. The school required recycling bins for all classrooms, staff rooms and the playground. Other local schools had expressed interest in joining the scheme, which could make a great difference to recycling rates within the local community.

Councillor Mrs DSK Spink MBE, Housing and Environmental Services Portfolio Holder, thanked the students for their presentation and petition. She replied that the Council shared their enthusiasm for recycling, however such initiatives had significant associated costs. Following initial meetings with the school the Council had advised that it would look into providing a county-wide scheme for all secondary schools. Whilst several months had passed since these discussions, Mrs Spink announced that the specialist vehicle required for the scheme had been ordered and would be delivered shortly. The recycling scheme should be up and running shortly after its arrival.

In response to a question, Councillor Mrs Spink confirmed that kitchen waste from schools was collected as part of the Council’s commercial waste collection service.

The students formally presented the petition to the Portfolio Holder, following which the Chairman, on behalf of the Council, thanked them for their succinct and informative presentation on such an important issue. 

Cabinet RECOMMENDED to Council that the revised Licensing Policy document be adopted as Council policy.

The revised policy considered by the Cabinet is available to view using the following link from the Council's website, www.scambs.gov.uk/meetings  

Council RESOLVED that the revised Licensing Policy document be adopted.

Councillor Mrs DSK Spink MBE moved, Councillor RMA Manning seconded, and Council subsequently RESOLVED that the revised Licensing Policy document be adopted.

The Scrutiny and Overview Committee RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that the scrutiny members’ job description and the portfolio monitors’ job descriptions be approved for incorporation into Part 5 of the Constitution (Section I – Member Role Descriptions) and the Members’ Toolkit.

The draft role descriptions are available to view with the electronic version of this Agenda, available using the following link from the Council’s website, www.scambs.gov.uk:

http://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.asp?CId=410&MId=3512&Ver=4

Council RESOLVED that the scrutiny members’ job description and the portfolio monitors’ job description be approved for incorporation into Part 5 of the Constitution (Section I – Member Role Descriptions) and the Members’ Toolkit.

Councillor Mrs EM Heazell moved, Councillor MJ Mason seconded and Council subsequently RESOLVED that the scrutiny members’ job description and the portfolio monitors’ job description be approved for incorporation into Part 5 of the Constitution (Section I – Member Role Descriptions) and the Members’ Toolkit.

The Corporate Governance Committee RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL adoption of the revised Financial Regulations for incorporation into Part 4 of the Constitution, subject to the following amendments and minor typographical corrections:

(a)               references to “Chief Accountant” to read “Head of Accountancy”;

(b)               the penultimate sentence of paragraph 3.6 read: “No body of the Council nor any officer will commit items of expenditure not provided in their estimates unless, in cases of extreme importance and after opportunities for virement have been exhausted, specifically approved by the Executive up to level 3 and within approved policy or specifically approved by Council if outside approved policy and / or above level 3”; and

(c)               amendments to section 6, Operation of Bank Accounts, to include specific reference to BACS transfers. 

The revised regulations, incorporating the above changes, are attached.

Council RESOLVED that the revised Financial Regulations be approved for incorporation into Part 4 of the Constitution, subject to the following amendments and minor typographical corrections:

(a)               References to “Chief Accountant” to read “Head of Accountancy”;

(b)               The penultimate sentence of paragraph 3.6 read: “No body of the Council nor any officer will commit items of expenditure not provided in their estimates unless, in cases of extreme importance and after opportunities for virement have been exhausted, specifically approved by the Executive up to level 3 and within approved policy or specifically approved by Council if outside approved policy and / or above level 3”; and

(c)               Amendments to section 6, Operation of Bank Accounts, to include specific reference to BACS transfers. 

Councillor TJ Wotherspoon moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded and  Council subsequently RESOLVED that the revised Financial Regulations be approved for incorporation into Part 4 of the Constitution.

The Corporate Governance Committee RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL adoption of a Local Code of Governance. 

The Code considered by the Committee is available to view using the following link from the Council's website. (www.scambs.gov.uk/meetings)

Council RESOLVED that the Local Code of Governance be adopted.

Councillor TJ Wotherspoon moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded and Council subsequently RESOLVED that the Local Code of Governance be adopted.

Cabinet RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL:

(a)               that the Council develop a housing transfer proposal in consultation with its tenants, as it considers transfer to a not for profit housing association to be in the best interests of the Council’s tenants, future housing applicants and staff because:

·                     it would enable improvements to homes and housing services;

·                     it would be the most sustainable option for the longer term ownership management and development of affordable homes in the district; and

·                     it offered the best prospects for staff in terms of job security.

Council recognises that housing transfer cannot proceed without the support of its tenants and wishes to involve them fully in developing its proposal.

(b)               that an application be submitted to Communities and Local Government (CLG) for a place on the 2008 housing transfer programme by the deadline of 31 March 2008; and

(c)               that authority be delegated to the Leader and Cabinet to agree a new landlord selection process that involves tenants, elected members and staff, the result of the new landlord selection process being presented to Council for approval. 

The report and appendices submitted to the Cabinet are attached by way of supporting information.

 Council RESOLVED:

(a)               That the Council develop a housing transfer proposal in consultation with its tenants. Council recognises that housing transfer cannot proceed without the support of its tenants and wishes to involve them fully in developing its proposal. The Council further recognises that retention will be an option for consultation.

(b)               That an application be submitted to Communities and Local Government (CLG) for a place on the 2008 housing transfer programme by the deadline of 31 March 2008; and

(c)               That authority be delegated to the Leader and Cabinet to agree a new landlord selection process that involves tenants, elected members and staff, the result of the new landlord selection process being presented to Council for approval. 

Councillor MP Howell declared a personal non-prejudicial in this item on account of his employment by a housing association. Councillor Howell remained in the room and took part in the discussions and voting, but advised that he would withdraw of any future discussion which involved particular housing associations.

Councillor SM Edwards moved and Councillor RMA Manning seconded the recommendations of the Cabinet, omitting the following words from recommendation (a):

“As it considers transfer to a not for profit housing association to be in the best interests of the Council’s tenants, future housing applicants and staff because:

·                      It would enable improvements to homes and housing services;

·                     It would be the most sustainable option for the longer term ownership management and development of affordable homes in the district; and

·                     It offered the best prospects for staff in terms of job security.”

Councillor JD Batchelor proposed an amendment, adding the following sentence to recommendation (a):

“The Council further recognises that retention will be an option for consultation.”

The mover and seconder of the original Motion accepted this amendment, which therefore became part of the substantive Motion.

Councillor NJ Scarr moved and Councillor NN Cathcart seconded an amendment in the following terms:

“That Council resolves to conduct a test of opinion amongst its tenants prior to progressing any transfer proposals.”

The amendment, on being put, was declared lost.

During the course of the debate on this item, Council RESOLVED that Standing Order 12.5 be suspended to allow the thirty-minute limit on debate to be extended.

In response to a question, the Housing Options Portfolio Holder clarified the process for developing a transfer proposal. Subject to Council approval of the current proposal and subsequent approval of a preferred landlord and an offer to tenants, a tenant ballot would take place in which tenants would be asked whether they supported the Council's offer to transfer. There would be a retention option on the ballot paper. If a majority of tenants voting did not support the transfer then all tenants would continue to be tenants of the Council.

Council RESOLVED:

(a)               That the Council develop a housing transfer proposal in consultation with its tenants. Council recognises that housing transfer cannot proceed without the support of its tenants and wishes to involve them fully in developing its proposal. Council further recognises that retention will be an option for consultation.

(b)               That an application be submitted to Communities and Local Government (CLG) for a place on the 2008 housing transfer programme by the deadline of 31 March 2008; and

(c)               That authority be delegated to the Leader and Cabinet to agree a new landlord selection process that involves tenants, elected members and staff, the result of the new landlord selection process being presented to Council for approval.

Councillors NN Cathcart, Mrs SJO Doggett, Mrs SA Hatton, Mrs DP Roberts and

NJ Scarr requested to be recorded as voting against the Motion. 

The Constitution Review Working Party RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that the changes to Council Standing Orders set out in the report be approved for incorporation into Part 4 of the Constitution.

The proposed amendments are available to view with the electronic version of this Agenda, available using the following link from the Council’s website, www.scambs.gov.uk:

http://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.asp?CId=410&MId=3512&Ver=4

Council RESOLVED that the changes to Council Standing Orders set out in the report to the Constitution Review Working Party be approved for incorporation into Part 4 of the Constitution.

Councillor JH Stewart moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded and Council RESOLVED that the changes to Council Standing Orders set out in the report to the Constitution Review Working Party be approved for incorporation into Part 4 of the Constitution.

The Constitution Review Working Party RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that proposed revisions to Article 11 (Joint Arrangements) be approved.

The proposed revised Article 11 is available to view with the electronic version of this Agenda, available using the following link from the Council’s website, www.scambs.gov.uk:

http://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.asp?CId=410&MId=3512&Ver=4

Council RESOLVED that proposed revisions to Article 11 (Joint Arrangements) be approved.

Councillor JH Stewart moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded andCouncil RESOLVED that proposed revisions to Article 11 (Joint Arrangements) be approved.

The Constitution Review Working Party RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that:

(1)   Responsibility for the initial re-grading and re-evaluation of posts and the determination of the scale point applicable following re-evaluation be removed from the Terms of Reference of the Employment Committee and delegated to the Chief Executive for onward delegation as appropriate, and that

(2)   The Employment Committee retain responsibility for appeals functions arising from these processes.

Council RESOLVED that:

(1)    Responsibility for the initial re-grading and re-evaluation of posts and the determination of the scale point applicable following re-evaluation be removed from the Terms of Reference of the Employment Committee and delegated to the Chief Executive for onward delegation as appropriate, and that

(2)   The Employment Committee retain responsibility for appeals functions arising from these processes.

Councillor JH Stewart moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded and Council RESOLVED that:

(1)    Responsibility for the initial re-grading and re-evaluation of posts and the determination of the scale point applicable following re-evaluation be removed from the Terms of Reference of the Employment Committee and delegated to the Chief Executive for onward delegation as appropriate, and that

(2)   The Employment Committee retain responsibility for appeals functions arising from these processes.

The Constitution Review Working Party RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that the following paragraph be added to the Executive Procedure Rules in Part 4 of the Constitution:

 “3.2 Speaking rights at Portfolio Holder Meetings

The following persons shall be entitled to speak once, to ask questions and/or make representations, on each item of business under consideration at a Portfolio Holder meeting:

• Monitors appointed by the Scrutiny and Overview Committee;
• Spokespersons appointed by the Major Opposition Group.
• Other Members of the Council who may be present.

No Member shall speak for longer than three minutes without the Portfolio Holder’s permission; this includes Members who are appointed to both the above positions.

The Portfolio Holder may, at his/her discretion:

• Allow Monitors and/or spokespersons and other Members to speak more than once;
• Allow other persons present at the meeting to speak.”

Council RESOLVED that the following paragraph be added to the Executive Procedure Rules in Part 4 of the Constitution:

 “3.2 Speaking rights at Portfolio Holder Meetings

The following persons shall be entitled to speak once, to ask questions and/or make representations, on each item of business under consideration at a Portfolio Holder meeting:

• Monitors appointed by the Scrutiny and Overview Committee;
• Spokespersons appointed by the Major Opposition Group.
• Other Members of the Council who may be present.

No Member shall speak for longer than three minutes without the Portfolio Holder’s permission; this includes Members who are appointed to both the above positions.

The Portfolio Holder may, at his/her discretion:

• Allow Monitors and/or spokespersons and other Members to speak more than once;
• Allow other persons present at the meeting to speak.”

Councillor JH Stewart moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded, and Council RESOLVED that the following paragraph be added to the Executive Procedure Rules in Part 4 of the Constitution:

 “3.2 Speaking rights at Portfolio Holder Meetings

The following persons shall be entitled to speak once, to ask questions and/or make representations, on each item of business under consideration at a Portfolio Holder meeting:

• Monitors appointed by the Scrutiny and Overview Committee;
• Spokespersons appointed by the Major Opposition Group.
• Other Members of the Council who may be present.

No Member shall speak for longer than three minutes without the Portfolio Holder’s permission; this includes Members who are appointed to both the above positions.

The Portfolio Holder may, at his/her discretion:

• Allow Monitors and/or spokespersons and other Members to speak more than once;
• Allow other persons present at the meeting to speak.”

Report and appendices attached. 

RECOMMENDATION

That:

1.      The Council enters a Local Agreement with Cambridgeshire County Council and Cambridge City Council to establish a Section 29 Committee for relevant fringe areas of Cambridge;

2.      In consequence of (1) above, the Council makes a formal request to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to publish an Order for the establishment of a Joint Policy Committee for the Cambridge Fringes under Section 29 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004; and

3.      The Council notes that final proposals will be referred back to the Council when the Secretary of State consults upon the draft Order, although consideration will be restricted by the terms of the Local Agreement to which the Council will be a signatory.

 RESOLVED that:

1.      The Council enter a Local Agreement with Cambridgeshire County Council and Cambridge City Council to establish a Section 29 Committee for relevant fringe areas of Cambridge;

2.      In consequence of (1) above, the Council make a formal request to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to publish an Order for the establishment of a Joint Policy Committee for the Cambridge Fringes under Section 29 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004; and

3.      Final proposals be referred back to the Council when the Secretary of State consults upon the draft Order, noting that consideration will be restricted by the terms of the Local Agreement to which the Council will be a signatory.

Council considered a report seeking approval to request formally that the Secretary of State place an order before Parliament establishing a Joint Planning Policy Committee for specified cross-boundary locations on the edge of Cambridge City.

In response to Members’ questions, the Growth and Sustainable Communities Portfolio Holder clarified that the NIAB site was not included as it was not part of the draft North-West Cambridge Action Area Plan, and that the Cambridge Southern Fringe had not been included as development in this area was likely to come forward far sooner than development of the Cambridge East site.

Councillor Dr DR Bard moved, Councillor RMA Manning seconded and Council RESOLVED that:

1.      The Council enter a Local Agreement with Cambridgeshire County Council and Cambridge City Council to establish a Section 29 Committee for relevant fringe areas of Cambridge;

2.      In consequence of (1) above, the Council make a formal request to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government to publish an Order for the establishment of a Joint Policy Committee for the Cambridge Fringes under Section 29 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004; and

3.      Final proposals be referred back to the Council when the Secretary of State consults upon the draft Order, noting that consideration will be restricted by the terms of the Local Agreement to which the Council will be a signatory.

The report and recommendations of the Corporate Manager for Planning and Sustainable Communities is attached.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Council is recommended to:

The appendices to the report are available to view at the Council Offices and have been published with the electronic version of this Agenda. They are available to view using the following link to the Council’s website, www.scambs.gov.uk:

http://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/ieListDocuments.asp?CId=410&MId=3512&Ver=4

SUPPLEMENTARY NOTE

Attached is an erratum to the version of the Cambridge East Area Action Plan recommended for adoption.  One relates to an error in the Inspector's Report and the others are cases where the Inspector's changes have not found their way into the AAP.  These changes need to be incorporated into the adopted plan and recommendation (a) above has been altered accordingly. 

Council:

Council considered a report recommending adoption of the Cambridge Southern Fringe and Cambridge East Area Action Plans as part of the South Cambridgeshire Local Development Framework.

The Growth and Sustainable Communities Portfolio Holder drew Council’s attention to a schedule of revisions to the Cambridge East Area Action Plan, relating to errors in the Inspector’s report and cases where the Inspector’s changes had not been incorporated into the final plan.

Councillor Dr DR Bard moved, Councillor NIC Wright seconded and Council:

Report attached. 

RECOMMENDATION

That meetings during the 2008-2009 Civic Year be scheduled as follows:

Council RESOLVED that meetings during the 2008-2009 Civic Year be scheduled as follows:

Councillor JH Stewart moved and Councillor RE Barrett seconded the recommendation set out in the report in respect of the schedule of Council meetings for the 2008-2009 Civic Year.

Councillor A Riley moved and Councillor JD Batchelor seconded an amendment in the following terms:

That,

(1)   In addition to the meetings scheduled in the recommendation, Council meetings in June and October 2008 and March 2009 be restored to the calendar, and;

(2)   All Council meetings take place on the fourth Thursday of the month.

The amendment, on being put, was declared lost.

Council RESOLVED that meetings during the 2008-2009 Civic Year be scheduled as follows:

Councillors JP Chatifeld, Dr JE Lockwood, MJ Mason, Mrs DP Roberts, Mrs HM Smith, Dr SEK van de Ven and JF Williams requested to be recorded as voting against this Motion.

The report and recommendations of the Independent Remuneration Panel and covering report of the Chief Executive are attached.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Council is recommended to

(a)               Accept the recommendations contained in the independent Members’ Remuneration Panel report attached as appendix A to this report, i.e. that

(i)            The basic allowance and Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) be increased by 2.5%.

(ii)          No SRA be payable for the Chairman of Northstowe JDCC.

(iii)         The Chairmen of the Corporate Governance and Policy Development Committees receive SRAs of £1775 per annum.

(iv)        The SRA for the Chair of Licensing Committee be reduced to £1775 per annum.

(v)          No change be agreed in the allowance for members of the Standards Committee.

(vi)        The Vice-Chairmen of Council and the Planning and Licensing Committees receive 50% of the Chairman’s allowance.

(vii)       An increase of 2.5% be made to the Dependant’s Carer’s Allowance

(viii)     No increase be made to the remaining Travel and Subsistence allowances

(ix)         The allowance paid to the Panel for expenses be replaced with payment for travelling to the meeting only.

The above allowances to be effective from 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009

(b)        Re-appoint Valerie Bright and appoint Jonathan Barker, as members of the Remuneration Panel for a three-year period to 31 January 2011.

(c)            Authorise payment of a Financial Loss Allowance of £20.00 per meeting per member to the Independent Remuneration panel when conducting future annual reviews of Members’ allowances.

(d)        Advise the Democratic Services Manager of any issues it wishes to be considered as part of the next review.

Council RESOLVED:

(1)   That the Independent Remuneration Panel be requested to reconsider levels of Basic and Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) for 2008-2009, taking into account the following views expressed by Members:

·         That an SRA should be payable to the Chairman of the Northstowe Joint Development Control Committee due to the significance of the Committee to partnership working and the future development of the district.

·         That the SRA payable to the Chairman of the Scrutiny and Overview Committee be set at a level commensurate with those paid to the Leader of the Major Opposition Group and Chairman of the Planning Committee.

·         That the responsibility of the Chairman of the Licensing Committee is not more significant than that of Members sitting on and chairing hearing panels, therefore it is questionable whether the position merits an SRA.

·         That it would not be appropriate to increase the Basic Allowance by 2.5%, due to the reduced number of meetings, and taking into account wage increases elsewhere in the public sector.

(2) That the recommendation to appoint of Mr. Jonathan Barker to the Independent Remuneration Panel be reviewed in light of Mr. Barker’s future association with the Cambridge East development.

Councillor JH Stewart moved and Councillor SM Edwards seconded the following recommendations:

“That Council:

(a)               Accept the recommendations contained in the independent Members’ Remuneration Panel report attached as appendix A to the report, i.e. that

(i)            The basic allowance and Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) be increased by 2.5%.

(ii)          No SRA be payable for the Chairman of Northstowe JDCC.

(iii)         The Chairmen of the Corporate Governance and Policy Development Committees receive SRAs of £1775 per annum.

(iv)        The SRA for the Chair of Licensing Committee be reduced to £1775 per annum.

(v)          No change be agreed in the allowance for members of the Standards Committee.

(vi)        The Vice-Chairmen of Council and the Planning and Licensing Committees receive 50% of the Chairman’s allowance.

(vii)        An increase of 2.5% be made to the Dependant’s Carer’s Allowance.

(viii)     No increase be made to the remaining Travel and Subsistence allowances.

(ix)        The allowance paid to the Panel for expenses be replaced with payment for travelling to the meeting only,

and that the above allowances be effective from 1 April 2008 to 31 March 2009

(b)        Re-appoint Valerie Bright and appoint Jonathan Barker, as members of the Remuneration Panel for a three-year period to 31 January 2011.

(c)            Authorise payment of a Financial Loss Allowance of £20.00 per meeting per member to the Independent Remuneration panel when conducting future annual reviews of Members’ allowances.

(d)        Advise the Democratic Services Manager of any issues it wishes to be considered as part of the next review.”

Members expressed concern with several of the Independent Remuneration Panel’s recommendations and with the proposal to appoint Mr. Barker due to his close association with the development at Cambridge East through his role as Company Secretary of Marshalls Aerospace.

Councillor SGM Kindersley moved and Councillor A Riley seconded a procedural Motion in accordance with Standing Order 13(d), referring the recommendations back to the Chief Executive and Independent Remuneration Panel for further consideration.

The amendment, on being put, was declared carried.

Council RESOLVED:

(1)   That the Independent Remuneration Panel be requested to reconsider levels of Basic and Special Responsibility Allowance (SRA) for 2008-2009, taking into account the following views expressed by Members:

·         That an SRA should be payable to the Chairman of the Northstowe Joint Development Control Committee due to the significance of the Committee to partnership working and the future development of the district.

·         That the SRA payable to the Chairman of the Scrutiny and Overview Committee be set at a level commensurate with those paid to the Leader of the Major Opposition Group and Chairman of the Planning Committee.

·         That the responsibility of the Chairman of the Licensing Committee is not more significant than that of Members sitting on and chairing hearing panels, therefore it is questionable whether the position merits an SRA.

·         That it would not be appropriate to increase the Basic Allowance by 2.5%, due to the reduced number of meetings, and taking into account wage increases elsewhere in the public sector.

(2) That the recommendation to appoint  ...  view the full minutes text for item 59.

Report attached. 

RECOMMENDATION

That Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Public Health Act 1925 be adopted by the

Council.

Council RESOLVED that Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Public Health Act 1925 be adopted.

Councillor NIC Wright moved, Councillor AG Orgee seconded, and Council RESOLVED that Sections 17, 18 and 19 of the Public Health Act 1925 be adopted.

Councillor AG Orgee thanked the Principal Solicitor for her work in addressing the concerns of local residents in his Ward regarding street naming issues.

The Anti-theft, fraud and corruption policy has been updated. A revised version, endorsed by the Corporate Governance Committee, is attached.

The policy requires Council approval as it is included as an appendix to the Officers’ Code of Conduct in Part 5, Section G of the Constitution.

RECOMMENDATION

That the revised Anti-theft, Fraud and Corruption Policy be adopted by the Council and incorporated into the Constitution.

RESOLVED that the revised Anti-theft, Fraud and Corruption Policy be adopted by the Council and incorporated into the Constitution. 

Councillor TJ Wotherspoon moved, Councillor RT Summerfield seconded, and Council RESOLVED that the revised Anti-theft, Fraud and Corruption Policy be adopted by the Council and incorporated into the Constitution. 

There were no questions on joint meetings. 

Councillor MJ Mason referred Council to his report which had been distributed to all Members prior to the meeting. The report provided an update on issues arising from meetings of the Cambridgeshire Guided Busway Liaison Forum. Councillor Mason requested that Members raise any specific issues with him, having read the report.

Councillor NCF Bolitho advised that he had attended the Annual General Meeting of the Mepal Outdoor Centre in December 2007. He reported that around one third of those who had attended activity holidays organised by the centre lived in the district and city council areas.

Councillor DR SEK van de Ven paid tribute to former Councillor Mary Course, who was an independent district councillor for Meldreth and Whaddon for many years, and one of this council’s longest serving members. Councillor Mrs Course died just over a year ago.  At the time she stood down from the Council, she was vice chairman of council.

She advised that the Meldreth Parish Council was establishing a Mary Course Prize, to be awarded annually to pupils at Meldreth Primary School for work related to some aspect of local history.  Cllr Dr van de Ven advised that any contributions, however small, would be gratefully received.

Councillor Mrs JM Guest advised that the Melbourn Community Sports’ manager had been in post for one year, however membership numbers remained low. She advised further that, in respect of the Francis John Clare Almshouses, one of the Almshouses was empty at the present time and the property would be upgraded before being let.

“At present, South Cambs District Council policy is to charge a flat fee of £60 for the delivery of new bins (one green bin, one black bin, and a green box) to all new homes in the district. No exceptions of any kind are made, and for health and safety reasons it is not possible for residents to collect bins from our depot.

We believe that while the principle of charging council tax-payers for something so fundamental to environmental health is questionable, it is also impractical for many residents, who simply can't afford it.

We call upon the Executive to waive this fee for all new social rented housing units in the district, at the earliest opportunity.”

Councillor Dr SEK van de Ven moved and Councillor Mrs EM Heazell seconded a Motion in the following terms:

“At present, South Cambs District Council policy is to charge a flat fee of £60 for the delivery of new bins (one green bin, one black bin, and a green box) to all new homes in the district. No exceptions of any kind are made, and for health and safety reasons it is not possible for residents to collect bins from our depot.

We believe that while the principle of charging council tax-payers for something so fundamental to environmental health is questionable, it is also impractical for many residents, who simply can't afford it.

We call upon the Executive to waive this fee for all new social rented housing units in the district, at the earliest opportunity.”

The Motion on being put, was declared lost. 

At this point in meeting, Council RESOLVED, in accordance with Standing Order 9 and with no Members voting against, to continue the meeting beyond four hours’ duration to enable the remaining business on the Agenda to be transacted.

"This Council instructs the relevant portfolio holder to carry out a review of the governance arrangements for the South Cambridgeshire Local Strategic Partnership and, in particular, to call for justification for its recent decision regarding the expenditure of £100,000 of taxpayers’ money. The report to be available at the next council meeting."

Councillor JD Batchelor moved and Councillor RT Summerfield seconded a Motion in the following terms:

 "This Council instructs the relevant portfolio holder to carry out a review of the governance arrangements for the South Cambridgeshire Local Strategic Partnership and, in particular, to call for justification for its recent decision regarding the expenditure of £100,000 of taxpayers’ money. The report to be available at the next council meeting."

The Motion, on being put, was declared lost.

"That this Council takes all necessary steps to create a new Parish at Arbury Park as soon as possible."

With the consent of the meeting, Councillor SGM Kindersley withdrew the following Notice of Motion standing in his name:

 "That this Council takes all necessary steps to create a new Parish at Arbury Park as soon as possible."

To note the Chairman’s engagements since the last Council meeting:

To note the following engagements, in addition to the above, attended by the Vice-Chairman since the last meeting:

The Chairman and Vice-Chairman’s engagements since the last meeting were noted.

Councillor MP Howell advised that he had also attended the visit to Wysing Arts Centre on 19 January. Councillor Howell thanked Councillors Ford, Roberts and all others who had supported the centre.