Agenda, decisions and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from Members.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Grenville Chamberlain, Simon Crocker, Neil Davies, Lynda Harford, James Hockney and Des O’Brien.

Councillor Sue Ellington, Chairman, welcomed Shirley Tracey to her first meeting of the Council in her new role as Interim Monitoring Officer.

To receive any declarations of interest.

Councillor Brian Burling declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in item number 8(d) as a rate payer and indicated that he would leave the meeting upon consideration of this item.

Members are requested to inform Democratic Services of any changes in their Register of Members’ Financial and Other Interests form.

The Chairman reminded Members that they needed to update their register of interests whenever their circumstances changed.

To authorise the Chairman to sign the minutes of the meeting held on 28 January 2016 as a correct record.

The minutes of the previous meeting held on 28 January 2016 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct record, subject to typographical corrections at minute numbers 2 and 5 and the inclusion of the correct reference to the New Communities Joint Strategic Needs Assessment at minute number 12(b).

To receive any announcements from the Chairman, Leader, the Executive or the Head of Paid Service.

Councillor Ray Manning, Leader of the Council, reminded Members that a report on the Local Development Plan would be considered at the Planning Portfolio Holder Meeting on 14 March 2016 and subsequently an extraordinary meeting of the Council on 23 March 2016.  This would provide the Council with an opportunity to consider the results of the consultation that had been carried out regarding proposed modifications and agree what the Council sent back to the Inspectors.  It was noted that the report for the Portfolio Holder Meeting would be published on 4 March 2016.

Councillor Manning also reported that extensive discussions were currently ongoing between the Government and Leaders of local Councils regarding devolution.  He invited Members of the Council to join him for an informal question and answer session at the close of the meeting.   

To note that no public questions have been received. 

No questions from members of the public had been received. 

To note that no petitions for consideration by Council have been received since the last meeting.

No petitions for consideration by the Council had been received since the last meeting. 

The Independent Remuneration Panel RECOMMENDED:

(1)        Pending the next review of South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Members’ Allowance Scheme, that any changes to current Special Responsibility Allowance payments deemed necessary to reflect changes in Member roles and responsibilities should be made by a re-allocation of current Special Responsibility Allowance payments without increasing the Council’s overall Special Responsibility Allowance cost envelope.

(2)        That the Members’ Basic Allowance is increased by the equivalent percentage amount that the Council agrees to apply to the pay rates of Council staff, effective from 1 April 2016, and that thereafter the Basic Allowance is increased annually on the same indexed basis pending the next review of the Members ’Allowance Scheme.

(3)        That where a Councillor in receipt of the allowance fails to attend 50% of the meetings for which that allowance is paid in any six-month period, that Councillor be invited to repay an appropriate sum of the allowance received during that period.

(4)        That there should be no increase to the Independent Person’s or their Deputy’s annual allowance payment, given that the additional commitment involved is intrinsically ad hocand may never be performed during their period of office.

Council AGREED:

(1)        Pending the next review of South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Members’ Allowance Scheme, that any changes to current Special Responsibility Allowance payments deemed necessary to reflect changes in Member roles and responsibilities should be made by a re-allocation of current Special Responsibility Allowance payments without increasing the Council’s overall Special Responsibility Allowance cost envelope.

(2)        That the Members’ Basic Allowance be increased by the equivalent percentage amount that the Council agrees to apply to the pay rates of Council staff, effective from 1 April 2016, and that thereafter the Basic Allowance is increased annually on the same indexed basis pending the next review of the Members ’Allowance Scheme.

(3)        That where a Councillor in receipt of the allowance fails to attend 50% of the meetings for which that allowance is paid in any six-month period, that Councillor be invited to repay an appropriate sum of the allowance received during that period.

(4)        That there should be no increase to the Independent Person’s or their Deputy’s annual allowance payment, given that the additional commitment involved is intrinsically ad hocand may never be performed during their period of office.

Councillor Ray Manning, Leader of the Council, proposed the recommendations contained within the report following a review of the Members’ Allowances Scheme undertaken by the Independent Remuneration Panel.  Councillor Simon Edwards, Deputy Leader of Portfolio Holder for Finance and Staffing, seconded the proposal.

Councillor Anna Bradnam queried Appendix B to the report which set out proposed changes to Officer Employment Procedure Rules.  It was noted that the changes set out in the appendix had already been approved at a previous meeting of the Council and were included within the report to assist in explaining the new role of the Independent and Deputy Persons with regard to the appointment and dismissal of the Council’s Chief Officers.  Councillor Bradnam, in acknowledging the process for Chief Officers, asked why reference had not been included to Executive Directors in the appendix.  It was agreed that a response to this query would be provided directly to Councillor Bradnam.

Council unanimously AGREED:

(1)        Pending the next review of South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Members’ Allowance Scheme, that any changes to current Special Responsibility Allowance payments deemed necessary to reflect changes in Member roles and responsibilities should be made by a re-allocation of current Special Responsibility Allowance payments without increasing the Council’s overall Special Responsibility Allowance cost envelope.

(2)        That the Members’ Basic Allowance be increased by the equivalent percentage amount that the Council agrees to apply to the pay rates of Council staff, effective from 1 April 2016, and that thereafter the Basic Allowance is increased annually on the same indexed basis pending the next review of the Members ’Allowance Scheme.

(3)        That where a Councillor in receipt of the allowance fails to attend 50% of the meetings for which that allowance is paid in any six-month period, that Councillor be invited to repay an appropriate sum of the allowance received during that period.

(4)        That there should be no increase to the Independent Person’s or their Deputy’s annual allowance payment, given that the additional commitment involved is intrinsically ad hocand may never be performed during their period of office.

Cabinet RECOMMENDED to Council that the Corporate Plan setting out the Council’s vision, objectives and actions for 2016–2021 be approved, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

Council APPROVED the Corporate Plan setting out the Council’s vision, objectives and actions for 2016–2021, as set out in Appendix 1to the report.

Councillor Peter Topping, Portfolio Holder for Finance and Staffing, proposed that the Council approved the Corporate Plan, setting out the Council’s vision, objectives and actions for 2016-2021, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

Councillor Roger Hickford, Chairman of the Scrutiny and Overview Committee, seconded the proposal.

Councillor Sebastian Kindersley made reference to the intention of the Council’s housing company, Ermine Street Housing Ltd, to act as an ethical landlord and was of the view that this implied other private landlords acted unethically.  Councillor Mark Howell, Portfolio Holder for Housing, said that this related to the additional support the housing company would offer, as much as it could, to those tenants who were experiencing difficulties, such as financial difficulties, for example.  He acknowledged that there were excellent private landlords operating in the district, some of which offered similar services.

Councillor Douglas de Lacey proposed an amendment to the Corporate Plan objective ‘homes for our future’, stated in the document as being to ‘secure the delivery of a wide range of housing to meet the needs of existing and future communities’.  His amendment was to include the words ‘in line with the Council’s Local Plan’ and add a new paragraph (i) under the objective to read ‘reaffirm the Council’s requirement for 40% of affordable homes’.

Councillor Deborah Roberts seconded the amendment.

Councillor John Williams moved an amendment to Councillor de Lacey’s original amendment, to add the word ‘emerging’ so that it read ‘in line with the Council’s emerging Local Plan’.

Councillor de Lacey accepted this amendment to his original amendment.

Councillor Ray Manning, Leader of the Council, said that the Council’s policy on affordable housing was included in other documents and that it would not be appropriate to include such reference within this high level Corporate Plan.  He also reminded Members that the Council’s policy in respect of affordable housing was 40%, subject to viability.  Councillor Simon Edwards, Deputy Leader and Finance and Staffing Portfolio Holder, supported this view and felt it would be unwise to commit to a value for affordable housing in the Corporate Plan.  Councillor Topping agreed that this level of detail was not appropriate for inclusion in the Plan.

Councillor Anna Bradnam proposed removing the paragraph in relation to affordable housing from the amendment, which Councillor de Lacey accepted.  The substantive amendment therefore became to add the words ‘in line with the Council’s emerging Local Plan’ after the words ‘secure the delivery of a wide range of housing to meet the needs of existing and future communities’ in respect of the ‘homes for our future’ objective.

Voting on the substantive amendment, with 17 votes in favour and 34 votes against, the amendment was lost.

Enough Members as prescribed in Council’s Standing Orders requested a recorded vote.  Votes were therefore cast as follows:

In favour

Councillors Henry Batchelor, Anna Bradnam, Nigel Cathcart, Jose Hales, Philippa Hart, Tumi Hawkins, Peter Johnson, Sebastian Kindersley, Douglas de Lacey, Janet Lockwood, Cicely Murfitt, Robin Page, Deborah Roberts, Bridget Smith, Edd  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8b

Cabinet RECOMMENDED to Council that:

(a)        The General Fund Capital Programme and the associated funding up to the year ending 31 March 2021, as set out in Appendix A1 of the report is approved as submitted.

(b)        The revenue estimates for 2016-17 are approved as submitted in the General Fund summary, as set out in Appendix B1 of the supplementary report.

(c)        The precautionary items for the General Fund, as set out in Appendix B2 of the report, are approved.

(d)        The Medium Term Financial Strategy for the General Fund, as set out in Appendix B3 of the report in the supplementary agenda, is approved based on the assumptions set out in the report.

(e)        The fees and charges proposed for 2016-17, as set out in Appendix B4 of the report, are approved.

(f)        The Executive Management Team be instructed to identify additional income/ savings of £300,000 in 2016-17, rising to £930,000 from 2017-18.

(g)        The Council Tax requirement for 2016-17 is £7,852,090.

(h)        The Council sets the amount of Council Tax for each of the relevant categories of dwelling in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 on the basis of a District Council Tax for general expenses on a Band D property of £130.31 plus the relevant amounts required by the precepts of Parish Councils, Cambridgeshire County Council, the Cambridgeshire Police and Crime Commissioner and the Cambridgeshire Fire Authority, details of those precepts and their effect to be circulated with the formal resolution required at the Council meeting.

(i)         The Housing Revenue Account revenue budget, summarised in the Housing Revenue Account Summary Forecast 2015-16 to 2020-21, as set out in Appendix G of the Housing Revenue Account budget setting report, in the context of the updated 30 Year Housing Revenue Account Business Plan, is approved.

(j)         Subject to paragraph (x) below, council dwellings rents for existing tenants be reduced by 1%, in line with legislative requirements, anticipated to be introduced as part of the Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015, with effect from 4th April 2016.

(k)        The inclusion of an ongoing savings target for Housing Revenue Account services for the period from 2017-18 to 2020-21, at the initial rate of £250,000 per annum, recognising the financial constraints placed upon the Housing Revenue Account by changes in national housing policy, is approved.

(l)         Inflationary increases of 1.4% in garage rents for 2016-17, in line with the base rate of inflation for the year assumed in the Housing Revenue Account Budget Setting Report, is approved.

(m)      Proposed service charges for Housing Revenue Account services and facilities provided to both tenants and leaseholders, as set out in Appendix B of the Housing Revenue Account budget setting report, is approved.

(n)        The charge for the cost of the provision of the alarm service in sheltered housing is set at £3 a week.

(o)        The latest budget, spend profile and funding mix for each of the schemes in the new build programme, as set out  ...  view the full agenda text for item 8c

Council:

(a)        APPROVED the General Fund Capital Programme and the associated funding up to the year ending 31 March 2021, as set out in Appendix A1 of the report as submitted.

(b)        APPROVED the revenue estimates for 2016-17 as submitted in the General Fund summary, as set out in Appendix B1 of the report.

(c)        APPROVED the precautionary items for the General Fund, as set out in Appendix B2 of the report.

(d)        APPROVED the Medium Term Financial Strategy for the General Fund, as set out in Appendix B3 of the report, based on the assumptions set out in the report.

(e)        APPROVED the fees and charges proposed for 2016-17, as set out in Appendix B4 of the report.

(f)         RESOLVED that the Executive Management Team be instructed to identify additional income/ savings of £300,000 in 2016-17, rising to £930,000 from 2017-18.

(g)        RESOLVED that the Council Tax requirement for 2016-17 is £7,852,090.

(h)        RESOLVED that the Council sets the amount of Council Tax for each of the relevant categories of dwelling in accordance with Section 30(2) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 on the basis of a District Council Tax for general expenses on a Band D property of £130.31 plus the relevant amounts required by the precepts of Parish Councils, Cambridgeshire County Council, the Cambridgeshire Police and Crime Commissioner and the Cambridgeshire Fire Authority, details of those precepts and their effect as set out in the statutory resolution below.

(i)         APPROVED the Housing Revenue Account revenue budget, summarised in the Housing Revenue Account Summary Forecast 2015-16 to 2020-21, as set out in Appendix G(1) of the Housing Revenue Account budget setting report, in the context of the updated 30 Year Housing Revenue Account Business Plan.

(j)         AGREED, subject to resolution (x) below, council dwellings rents for existing tenants be reduced by 1%, in line with legislative requirements, anticipated to be introduced as part of the Welfare Reform and Work Bill 2015, with effect from 4th April 2016.

(k)        APPROVED the inclusion of an ongoing savings target for Housing Revenue Account services for the period from 2017-18 to 2020-21, at the initial rate of £250,000 per annum, recognising the financial constraints placed upon the Housing Revenue Account by changes in national housing policy.

(l)         APPROVED inflationary increases of 1.4% in garage rents for 2016-17, in line with the base rate of inflation for the year assumed in the Housing Revenue Account Budget Setting Report.

(m)      APPROVED proposed service charges for Housing Revenue Account services and facilities provided to both tenants and leaseholders, as set out in Appendix B of the Housing Revenue Account budget setting report.

(n)        APPROVED the charge for the cost of the provision of the alarm service in sheltered housing being set at £3 a week.

(o)        APPROVED the latest budget, spend profile and funding mix for each of the schemes in the new build programme, as set out in Section 5 and Appendix E of the Housing Revenue Account budget setting  ...  view the full decision text for item 8c

Councillor Simon Edwards proposed recommendations (a) to (x) as set out in the agenda, subject to Appendix G in recommendation (i) referring to Appendix G(1), together with the wording of the statutory resolution in respect of the Council Tax for 2016/17 that had been circulated in the revised supplement.

Councillor Edwards highlighted the following aspects of the proposed budget to Members, which had been produced following significant changes announced as part of the Local Government Finance Settlement:

·         the Revenue Support Grant would reduce by 48.7% from 2015-16 to 2016-17, by a further 75.2% in 2017-18 and to nil in 2018-19.  The reduction to nil had been anticipated, but not as early as 2018-19;

·         the basic principles of retained business rates would remain, however, an adjustment to the tariff deduction imposed by the Government would be introduced in 2019-20;

·         the Government was proposing changes to the New Homes Bonus scheme and modelling in the report outlined the scheme changing from a six year scheme to a four year scheme from 2017-18.  The Government was consulting on other reforms to New Homes Bonus, including:

-       withholding new New Homes Bonus allocations in areas where no Local Plan had been produced;

-       reducing payments for homes built on appeal;

-       only making payments for delivery above a baseline representing ‘deadweight’;

·         beyond 2017-18 it was possible that some of these other reforms could have adverse implications for the amount of New Homes Bonus that the Council may receive;

·         £5 million of New Homes Bonus funding as a contribution towards the A14 infrastructure improvement scheme was still allocated in the Council’s budget for 2020-2021;

·         all Councils had the ability to raise Council Tax by £5 as opposed to increasing Council Tax by any amount up to 2% without triggering a referendum.  Three options for the District Council in terms of Council Tax increases had been set out in paragraphs 19, 20 and 23 of the original report, with each having a different impact on the savings or additional income that the Council would be required to make.  The table in paragraph 19 of the original report summarised the impact of the different options that had been modelled.  The option proposed was an increase in Council Tax of £5 this year and for every year of this parliament, with an increase of 2% year on year thereafter;

·         significant savings had already been achieved in some areas, such as those through the shared waste service;

·         the successful pilot of Ermine Street Housing Ltd had seen the company provide an income stream for the Council, with other projects such as the commercialisation programme anticipated to provide other sources of income;

·         the Rural Services Grant had been increased from £32,261 to £129,850 in 2016-17 and from £46,457 to £104,848 in 2017-18.  A new Transition Grant would also be available of £75,842 in 2016-17 and £75,575 in 2017-18;

·         of the precautionary items listed in Appendix B2 of the report, specific reference was made to an increase of £250,000 for homelessness  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8c

The Swavesey Byways Advisory Committee RECOMMENDED to Council:

(a)        That it maintains the current level of byeway maintenance for the period 2016/17.

(b)        That it levies a rate at £1.10 to fund the required maintenance for the period 2016/17.

Council RESOLVED:

(a)        That it maintains the current level of byeway maintenance for the period 2016-17.

(b)        That it levies a rate at £1.10 to fund the required maintenance for the period 2016-17.

Councillor Brian Burling, having declared a disclosable pecuniary interest in minute number 2, left the meeting during the consideration of this item.

Councillor Robert Turner, Portfolio Holder for Planning, proposed the recommendations contained within the report.  The proposal was seconded by Councillor Nick Wright, Portfolio Holder for Economic Development.

Council unanimously RESOLVED to:

(a)        Maintain the current level of byeway maintenance for the period 2016-17.

(b)        Levy a rate at £1.10 to fund the required maintenance for the period 2016-17.

To appoint a Member of the Conservative Group onto the Scrutiny and Overview Committee to fill a vacancy.

Council APPOINTED Councillor Graham Cone onto the Scrutiny and Overview Committee.

Councillor Ray Manning, Leader of the Council, proposed that Councillor Graham Cone be appointed onto the Council’s Scrutiny and Overview Committee.  Councillor Simon Edwards, Deputy Leader and Finance and Staffing Portfolio Holder, seconded the proposal.

Councillor Manning took this opportunity to thank Councillor David Whiteman-Downes, who had resigned from the Committee due to work commitments, for his contributions.

Council unanimously APPOINTED Councillor Graham Cone onto the Scrutiny and Overview Committee.

To receive the attached advice note.

Council ENDORSED the advice note on elected Member involvement in the Greater Cambridge City Deal.

Councillor Francis Burkitt, Portfolio Holder for the Greater Cambridge City Deal, proposed that the advice note on elected Member involvement in the Greater Cambridge City Deal, as included within the agenda pack, be endorsed. 

Councillor Ray Manning, Leader of the Council, seconded the proposal.

Councillor Bridget Smith, Leader of the Opposition, could not support the advice note which she felt essentially said that the District Council had no special position as a consultee on City Deal projects.  She had originally understood that the Council would be a ‘super-consultee’ as a City Deal partner and said that the advice note now made it clear that the Council had no greater voice on City Deal issues than anyone else.  Councillor Smith felt that the Council had been misled and that the protocol as suggested in the note was undemocratic.  She therefore requested that it be sent back to the Executive Board for further work as, in her view,  it was currently not fit for purpose.

Councillor Aidan Van de Weyer referred to the Notice of Motion agreed by the Council at its meeting on 26 November 2015, where it requested a protocol as to how Members individually, and the Council as a body, should respond to City Deal consultations.  He did not feel that the advice note described how the Council as a body could respond to City Deal consultations.  Referring to the advice note itself, paragraph 2.4 stated that Members of the partner Councils were fully involved in the City Deal programme.  He did not agree with this statement.  The note also suggested that Members could lobby individual officers and he therefore requested a list of officers and their contact details.  Councillor Van de Weyer was of the opinion that this document was not a protocol for how the Council as a body interacted with the City Deal and supported Councillor Smith’s suggestion of sending it back to the Executive Board for reconsideration.

Councillor Nigel Cathcart, particularly in view of the next Local Development Plan, felt that the voting arrangements for the City Deal should be reconsidered.  He suggested a system where only those Members of South Cambridgeshire District Council should vote for issues affecting the South Cambridgeshire area in order to safeguard the district.

Councillor Robin Page agreed with the comment that the City Deal was undemocratic and was concerned that it’s projects would ruin South Cambridgeshire’s countryside.  Councillor Deborah Roberts had the same view in respect of the countryside and was unsure as to what exactly the City Deal would provide for the people of South Cambridgeshire.  She made the point that the City Council Member on the Board gained more coverage in the local press than any other Member. 

Councillor Sebastian Kindersley raised concerns regarding the establishment of Local Liaison Forums, as referred to in paragraph 3.5 of the document.  He said that some of the City Deal transport infrastructure scheme projects would have significant impacts on a wide ranging area, so it was likely that some  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

A period of up to 30 minutes will be allocated for this item, to include those questions where notice has been provided (as set out on the agenda below) and questions which may be asked without notice.

Members wishing to ask a question without notice should indicate this intention to the Democratic Services Team Leader prior to the commencement of the item.  Members’ names will be drawn at random by the Chairman until there are no further questions or until the expiration of the 30 minute time period.

“The Gold Investors in People Award was to be celebrated.  However, of late, training opportunities for Members have been in short supply.  What plan does the Portfolio Holder have to reverse this trend and become more proactive in addressing Member training and development needs, including those that Members may not actually be aware of themselves?”

Councillor Bridget Smith asked the following question:

“The Gold Investors in People Award was to be celebrated.  However, of late, training opportunities for Members have been in short supply.  What plan does the Portfolio Holder have to reverse this trend and become more proactive in addressing Member training and development needs, including those that Members may not actually be aware of themselves?”

Councillor Peter Topping, Portfolio Holder for Corporate and Customer Services, took issue with Councillor Smith’s assessment of sessions for Members being in short supply and said that it depended on what her interpretation of a training and development session was.  He referred to a Healthwatch briefing held prior to this meeting which had attracted a relatively large number of Members and, although was not a traditional training session, did broaden the knowledge of those in attendance on a key subject. 

Councillor Topping also referred to externally facilitated training sessions and said that he had often approved Members to attend upon request, on the proviso that it was within budget and the Member provided an update as to what they learnt as a result of attending. 

In terms of attracting Members to attend sessions, he reflected on a Digital by Default seminar that he had tried to set up last year which had to be cancelled due to a lack of interest.  He said that he would give some consideration as to how sessions were promoted in the future but closed by saying that Members also had to take some responsibility to attend sessions that were put on for them.

Councillor Bridget Smith did not ask a supplementary question but made the point that training for the Scrutiny and Overview Committee, for example, used to be very comprehensive whereas, in her view, it was clear that the same level of training was now not being undertaken.

“With this Council's initiatives to provide for more truly affordable housing now in tatters as the result of Government policy changes, can the Portfolio Holder tell me what plans we are making to deal with a rising tide of homelessness and overcrowding that we seem powerless to prevent?”

Councillor Hazel Smith asked the following question:

“With this Council's initiatives to provide for more truly affordable housing now in tatters as the result of Government policy changes, can the Portfolio Holder tell me what plans we are making to deal with a rising tide of homelessness and overcrowding that we seem powerless to prevent?”

Councillor Mark Howell, Portfolio Holder for Housing, acknowledged that the changes imposed by Government had provided some challenges in this respect.  He said, however, that the Council was still seeking to build as many homes as it could, with 364 new homes scheduled to be built until 2019. 

Councillor Smith, as a supplementary, asked how the Council would be prioritising discretionary housing payments in order to support those individuals in need and also asked whether any additional support could be given to related charities who were also under significant pressure.

Councillor Howell listed the different categories of people that were entitled to housing support, outlining how complex this area was and the difficult task the Council would have in prioritising support, which he said needed to take place.  He added that, unfortunately, this would mean no additional support could be offered to charities and acknowledged the difficult position they were also in as a result of these changes.

“This Council holds personal and sensitive information on our residents, and that information in the wrong hands could leave our residents vulnerable.  Can the Leader confirm that this authority is doing all it can to prevent any cyber attacks, and that we have the best and up to date systems for dealing with any threats.”

Councillor Ben Shelton asked the following question:

“This Council holds personal and sensitive information on our residents, and that information in the wrong hands could leave our residents vulnerable.  Can the Leader confirm that this authority is doing all it can to prevent any cyber attacks, and that we have the best and up to date systems for dealing with any threats.”

Councillor Peter Topping, Portfolio Holder for Corporate and Customer Services, confirmed that there were multiple systems in place to scan all inbound emails.  It was noted that the average daily message volume for the Council was just over 20,000 messages and in the last three months 26 viruses had been blocked as a result of the Council’s scanning. 

Councillor Topping added that the Council would always protect against known vulnerabilities but would continue to need all users to be vigilant and careful when opening email attachments.   

Councillor Shelton, as a supplementary, asked whether the ICT shared service would have any impact on the level of attacks or how the Council would be safeguarding against any such occurrences in the future.

Councillor Topping said that the shared service was already operational and a joined up approach to this important issue was in place.

Councillor Bridget Smith, Leader of the Opposition, asked for clarification as to whether there was any chance of the current Local Plan not being adopted in view of the next Local Plan scheduled for 2019.  She asked, if so, at what stage this would be acknowledged in order that officers could focus their resources on the development of the new Plan.

Councillor Robert Turner, Portfolio Holder for Planning, said that the schedule of work in respect of the Local Development Plan had been confirmed and that the Council had to respond to any issues raised by the Inspectors at the relevant time.  A number of modifications to the submitted Local Plan had been proposed in response to the letter received by the Inspectors last year, which had been the basis of a recent consultation.  The outcomes of this consultation were scheduled for consideration at his Portfolio Holder Meeting on 14 March 2016, prior to the extraordinary meeting of Council on 23 March 2016.  He clarified that work would not cease on this Local Plan until the Council had been instructed to do so by the Inspectors.  Councillor Turner closed by saying that he still believed that this Plan would be adopted. 

To note that no Notices of Motion were received. 

No Notices of Motion had been received. 

To note the following engagements attended by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman since the last Council meeting:

Those engagements attended by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman since the last meeting, as set out in the agenda, were noted.