Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors T Eynon, J Legrys and T J Pendleton.

Members are reminded that any declaration of interest should be made having regard to the code of conduct.  In particular, members must make clear the nature of the interest and whether it is 'pecuniary' or ‘non pecuniary'.

Councillors R Adams and S Sheahan declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 7 – Motions, as members of UNISON.

Councillor M Specht declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 10 – North West Leicestershire Local Plan, as Chairman of Coleorton Parish Council.

Councillor R Johnson declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 10 – North West Leicestershire Local Plan, as Chairman of Hugglescote and Donington le Heath Parish Council.

Councillor J Cotterill declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 10 – North West Leicestershire Local Plan, as Deputy Chairman of Coleorton Parish Council.

Councillor R Adams was advised that he was not required to declare an interest in item 13 – Leisure Services Project, as a member of Whitwick Parish Council.

The Chairman highlighted numerous events he had attended since the last meeting of Council, including the Rainbows open day, the Coalville Colour Run, the Ashby Statutes event for special needs children, the Poppy Appeal, the Rural Achievement Awards which saw Measham receive an award, various charity events, the Remembrance Day service and the opening of the Famous 50 exhibition.

The Chairman announced that a Civic Carol Service would be taking place this year for the first time in a number of years.

Members are reminded that under paragraph 11.1 of part 4 of the Constitution, questions can be asked of the Leader and Cabinet Members without notice about any matter contained in any address.  Questions shall be limited to five minutes in total for each announcement.

Councillor R Blunt welcomed Paul Sanders, the new Head of Community Services, to the Council. 

Councillor R Blunt announced that he was honoured to sign the Dying to Work charter on behalf of the Council last week.  The charter reinforced the Council’s commitment to staff who had been diagnosed with a terminal illness.  He recognised that it was only possible for the people who work for us to be able to put the customer at the heart at everything they do when they felt valued.  One way this could be done was by ensuring that, at a time when one or our employees was rocked by life-changing news, such as a terminal diagnosis, that they knew one area or their life would be constant, in terms of support and concern tor their wellbeing.  He added that work mattered to people, as in addition to providing an income, work also provided meaning, a sense of identity, structure and a feeling of being part of a team.  Whilst some employees with a terminal illness may choose not to work, for others there may actually be comfort, a sense of security and a feeling of normality in continuing to work.  The Council would aim to honour the wishes of employees and to provide support and understanding at a dif?cult time in their lives rather than generating additional stress and avoidable anxiety.  He felt that the charter would make a real difference to people’s ability to have a choice, at a time when they feel there is no choice.

Councillor R Blunt announced that on Friday 24 November the Council would open its doors to around 60 children and young people for the first time to take part in the Children's Commissioners annual event aimed at giving a voice to young people and an insight into the different jobs within the Council.  The pupils will go behind the scenes at both the Council Offices and at Hermitage Leisure Centre for a day of inventive and interactive fun designed to help them learn more about the world of work.  Students from Belvoirdale Primary School, King Edward VII College and lbstock Community College will take on a number of challenges and scenarios set by the Council's various services.  Amongst other things, the students will help to manage Hermitage Leisure Centre for the day, inspect a kitchen suspected of failing in food hygiene, create an emergency plan and respond following a local crisis, investigate a fly tip, spotting the clues and catching the culprit, decide on a planning application, and hold a planning committee to make the final decision, and take over the Council's social media accounts and write a press release about the day.

This is the first time the Council has taken part in the Takeover Challenge, which has been hugely successful on a national scale in helping children to learn new skills, get creative and gain confidence.  He felt that the Council could learn a lot from the day too, as young people  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

To receive questions from members of the public under procedure rule no.10.  The procedure rule provides that members of the public may ask members of the Cabinet any question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the District, provided that three clear days’ notice in writing has been given to the Head of Legal and Support Services.

Mr D Bigby put the following question to Councillor A V Smith:

“Many in our Community are concerned that, in order to finance a new Coalville leisure centre, it is proposed to outsource operation of this new facility and Hood Park Leisure Centre in Ashby to the private sector for at least the next 25 years. One major aspect of concern is the ceding of public accountability over these important community services for a very long period.

Whilst much financial detail of the proposed Project has been kept Confidential, the information that has been made public suggests that the main area of potential saving lies in exemptions from Business Rates and VAT available to an independent trust.

I understand that the Cabinet has recently agreed to a joint bid with the other Leicestershire authorities to take part in a pilot for 100% local retention of Business Rates. Also, in July, the European Court of Justice upheld Ealing Borough Council’s appeal that they should be treated in the same way as not-for-profit bodies regarding exemption from VAT for the provision of sporting services and the Government has not yet determined how it will respond to this ruling.

I would therefore ask the following question;

How do these taxation developments affect the Council’s business case and wouldn’t a combination of 100% Business Rate retention and the potential for either VAT exemption for Council provision of sporting services or the possibility of the new provider losing VAT exemption, negate the main financial justification for outsourcing management of the leisure centres with the associated loss of democratic accountability?”

Councillor A V Smith gave the following response:

“The market for the management of leisure centres on behalf of local authorities in the UK is largely delivered by charitable trusts and NWLDC will, in line with best practice, have a number of strict legal controls in place with a new operator including a contract, lease and service specification that will ensure the highest levels of public accountability throughout the contract period. The Council will also retain a key function to monitor the contract and its performance which will be reported accordingly to the Cabinet and Council.  User and stakeholder meetings will also be held at each centre to ensure local accountability for service standards. An indication of the controls that the Council will have includes protection and minimum standards in a number of areas including the following:

• Prices
• Protection for existing user groups
• Opening hours
• Customer care
• Maintenance
• Performance and quality

There are a number of financial benefits to outsourcing the leisure centres which are not derived from Business Rates and VAT exemptions. These will be tested by the tender process itself but in summary operational savings can be attributed a number of areas including the following:

• Increased usage and income from larger more fit for purpose facilities e.g. larger sports hall, swimming pool and gym
• A more commercial approach to operating the leisure centres by an operator that is experienced in maximising revenues  ...  view the full minutes text for item 43.

To receive members’ questions under procedure rule no.11.  The procedure rule provides that any member may ask the chairman of a board or group any question on any matter in relation to which the Council has powers or duties which affect the District, provided that three clear days’ notice in writing has been given to the Head of Legal and Support Services.

Councillor D Everitt put the following question to Councillor R D Bayliss:

“A cleaning service for the shared enclosed access to flats has been introduced to tenants of flats in NWLDC including Woodside estate Thringstone. They were sent a letter and a form asking for them to state if they would like to receive the cleaning service at a charge of £5.98 a week.  It was stated correctly and made clear that housing benefit will cover the charge for those in receipt of housing benefit.  The letter also stated that if tenants chose not to reply that would count as agreeing to accept the cleaning service. There are however many reasons why a tenant might not reply but still not want the service. This resulted in tenants who are working and not receiving housing benefit who have always kept the area of their front doors clean and tidy and chose not to receive the service being forced with a threat of eviction to accept it.  They are being made to pay for a service when other tenants who did not want the service have received a letter stating they would not be required to receive it. On the other hand disabled and other residents who may benefit from this service may find it is denied to them. It is in fact a rent increase as stated in the second letter, for some and not others. This is both undemocratic and unfair for this council to presume to know the views of those tenants who did not care or were unable to reply and use them to influence the result.

Does the Portfolio holder agree with me?

1. That it is unacceptable that tenants are being forced to accept a service the neither need or want following a consultation decided by misappropriating the views of non-participating neighbours?
2. There are 10 blocks of 3 flats on the Woodside estate. How many of these tenants returned the form?
3. How many tenants replied yes?
4. How many replied no?
5.  How many did not reply?
6.  Do you accept that this council’s desire to provide a service for old and disabled tenants who cannot clean the communal area themselves is to be applauded, however the way it has been implemented in Woodside has left some old and disabled without the service but provided it where it is neither needed nor wanted?
7. Is this a service charge as described in the letter offering the service, or is it a rent increase as described in the letter demanding payment for some and not others, damaging tenant cohesion and bringing this council into disrepute?”

Councillor R D Bayliss gave the following response:

“In May 2017, we wrote to 255 tenants who live in flats at 52 blocks across the District advising them that we were considering introducing a communal area cleaning service to help improve the general upkeep and appearance of the estates.  The cost of the service would be recovered through the introduction of a new service charge  ...  view the full minutes text for item 44.

To consider the following motion submitted by Councillor S Sheahan:

“(a)     That this Council:

i.              notes the National Joint Council (NJC) pay claim for 2018, submitted by UNISON,GMB and Unite on behalf of council and school workers and calls for the immediate end of public sector pay restraint with claims referred to an appropriate sector pay review body;

ii.             recognises the sacrifice made by public sector workers during seven years of wage restraint and the ongoing cuts to local government funding and calls on the Government to provide additional funding to fund a decent pay rise for NJC employees and the pay spine review.

(b)      That this Council therefore resolves to:

i.              call immediately on the LGA to make urgent representations to the Government to fund the NJC claim and the pay spine review and notify us of their action in this regard;

ii.             write to the Prime Minister and Chancellor seeking additional           funding to fund a decent pay rise and the pay spine review;

iii.            meet with local NJC union representatives to discuss the pay          claim and the pay spine review.”

Councillor S Sheahan moved the following motion:

“(a)     That this Council:

i.              notes the National Joint Council (NJC) pay claim for 2018, submitted by UNISON,GMB and Unite on behalf of council and school workers and calls for the immediate end of public sector pay restraint with claims referred to an appropriate sector pay review body;

ii.             recognises the sacrifice made by public sector workers during seven years of wage restraint and the ongoing cuts to local government funding and calls on the Government to provide additional funding to fund a decent pay rise for NJC employees and the pay spine review.

(b)      That this Council therefore resolves to:

i.              call immediately on the LGA to make urgent representations to the Government to fund the NJC claim and the pay spine review and notify us of their action in this regard;

ii.             write to the Prime Minister and Chancellor seeking additional           funding to fund a decent pay rise and the pay spine review;

iii.                meet with local NJC union representatives to discuss the pay          claim and the pay spine review.”

Councillor S Sheahan stated that the motion was part of a national campaign by the Trade Unions and he was pleased to put it forward.  He added that the same motion had been put to Leicestershire County Council and he understood a very similar amendment would be put forward later in the debate.  He summarised that austerity had gone on for a very long time, wages had not kept pace with inflation and the Council had a moral duty to recognise the sacrifice made by its staff. 

The motion was seconded by Councillor N Clarke.  He stated that there was a growing appetite in the country towards a decent pay rise for council and school workers and supporting this motion in its entirety would help give the government more confidence to make the right decision.  He believed people were realising the benefits to all by giving a decent pay rise to public sector workers, which would boost retention rates, morale and performance. He concluded that the benefits outweighed the costs and he urged all members to support the motion.

Councillor R Blunt moved the following amendment to the motion:

“That this Council:-

            i.          notes the National Joint Council (NJC) pay claim for 2018, submitted by UNISON,GMB and Unite on behalf of council and school workers and calls for the immediate end of public sector pay restraint with claims referred to an appropriate sector pay review body;

            ii.          notes the sacrifice made by public sector workers during seven years of wage restraint and the ongoing cuts to local government funding;

            iii.         calls on the Government to fully fund any agreed pay rise for NJC employees and the pay spine review to avoid further reductions in services”.

Councillor R Blunt stated that he was very sympathetic to the impact of pay restraint over the past 7 years.  He reminded members that every 1% pay increase added an additional £190,000 to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 45.

To receive petitions in accordance with the Council’s Petition Scheme. 

No petitions were received.

To confirm the minutes of the meeting of the Council held on 12 September 2017.

Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2017

It was moved by Councillor V Richichi, seconded by Councillor J Clarke and

RESOLVED THAT:

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2017 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

Report of the Interim Strategic Director of Place

Presented by the Leader

Councillor R Blunt presented the report to members and was pleased that Council was asked to formally adopt the Local Plan as it had been a long time in the making.  He reminded members that the plan allocated land to meet the district's development needs during the period up to 2031.  This would give the Council an element of control over where new development happens, and would help prevent inappropriate or unsustainable development. He highlighted that the Council was currently winning many more planning appeals than previously, and that was because independent inspectors were taking the new plan, and the very healthy supply of housing land with planning permission, into account when deciding appeals.  He added that the healthy housing land supply, in particular, had been hard won.  He acknowledged that Planning Committee Members had been asked to make tough choices over the last few years, and those difficult decisions were now translating into new homes on the one hand, and a healthy five year supply to allow the Council to defend appeals on the other.  He emphasised the importance of maintaining housing land supply and urged members not to be complacent as this hard won position of strength was very easily lost, and once lost, was doubly difficult to regain.

Councillor R Blunt stated that the up to date Local Plan gave the Council a reputation as an authority that had delivered and this track record would help us bid for funding for better infrastructure to support our growth.  He added that North West Leicestershire was a district that was open for business and would continue to support developers of new homes, jobs and infrastructure in our shared ambitions for the district.  However the plan would help ensure quality homes were built in the right place.  Local people and businesses would benefit, and new residents and businesses would be attracted to the area.  He added that the Local Plan recognised the need to ensure planning contributes to enhancing the natural environment by making best use of green spaces for recreation and leisure, providing routes for walking and cycling, supporting wildlife and helping manage flooding. 

Councillor R Blunt explained that the Local plan would continue to protect the green wedge between Coalville and Whitwick.  Inspectors accepted the argument that to allow the unwanted and unnecessary housing development within the area of separation would be tantamount to precluding the south east Coalville major urban extension.  He reported that viable, implementable planning permissions were within reach to deliver the flagship sustainable urban extension.  He added that the growth in Coalville provided an opportunity for further regeneration within the town centre with the increased spending power new residents would bring to the town.  He acknowledged however the importance of continuing the drive to improve the offer Coalville provides through leisure activities, night-time economy and the retail offer.

Councillor R Blunt reminded members that the Local Plan was not only about Coalville, but was about each and every community across the district, all of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

Report of the Chief Executive

Presented by the Chairman of Policy Development Group

Councillor M Specht presented the report to members as Chairman of the Policy Development Group.  He thanked all members of Policy Development Group for their sterling cross-party work and input over the last 12 months.  He stated that he met regularly with senior officers to consider the work programme.  He added that Policy Development Group had a clear purpose with clarity on call-in arrangements and made reference to the terms of reference set out in the report.  He also mentioned the proposal to increase the number of meetings from 4 per annum to 6.  He outlined the issues considered by Policy Development Group in the last year as set out in the report. 

Councillor J Geary stated that the Labour Party had always been in favour of strong and meaningful scrutiny.  He expressed concerns in respect of the call-in arrangements which allowed a maximum of 4 call-ins per year and prevented a member from signing a further call-in request for a period of 3 months.  He understood that the reason for these restrictions were to prevent abuse of the call-in process, however there had been no record of this taking place.  He felt that these restrictions detracted from open scrutiny and he would like to see them removed in future. 

Councillor R Blunt expressed thanks to Councillor M Specht and his ability to chair the meeting and command respect from both sides.  He referred to the point raised by Councillor J Geary in respect of the restrictions on call-in and said that he was not aware of a reason for these restrictions. 

Councillor N Clarke thanked Councillor M Specht for chairing the meetings well. 

Councillor M Specht suggested that the restrictions on call-in could be considered by Policy Development Group at a future meeting.

It was moved by Councillor M Specht, seconded by Councillor J Geary and

RESOLVED THAT:

The Annual Report be received and endorsed.

Report of the Head of Legal and Support Services

Presented by the Corporate Portfolio Holder

Councillor N J Rushton presented the report to members.  He stated that the proposals would facilitate an increase in the number of Policy Development Group meetings, and would amend the definition of a Key Decision to increase the amount of decisions taken on contracts considered as business as usual.  He commented that this was not a significant change and the Contract Procedure Rules would be amended to reduce bureaucracy.

Councillor T Gillard felt that the proposals were good for scrutiny.

Councillor A C Saffell made reference the page 77 of the agenda and at the meeting of Policy Development Group he had pointed out the Constitution itself was very bloated and with every alteration it became longer.  He added that some of the repetitive items needed to be removed.  The Deputy Monitoring Officer had invited him to highlight those parts which should be removed and he was in the process of doing so.

It was moved by Councillor N J Rushton, seconded by Councillor T Gillard and

RESOLVED THAT:

a)    The amendments to the Constitution be approved as set out in paragraph 3.6, 4.8 and 4.12 of the report and as set out in appendices 1-3 of the report to Policy Development Group.

The Head of Legal and Support Services be authorised to make the agreed amendments and any consequential amendments to the Constitution and re-issue the document.

Report of the Interim Strategic Director of Place

Presented by the Community Services Portfolio Holder

Councillor A V Smith presented the report to members, emphasising the scope and scale of the project, the approval of which would require the highest level of oversight, as it would undoubtedly have an impact upon the Council’s budget and service delivery for years to come.  She added that it also triggered the Head of Paid Service’s duty under Section 4 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989 to report to all members of the Council on changes to the exercise of Council functions. She made reference to report to Cabinet on 1 November and the decisions and recommendations made at that meeting.  She stated that it would not come as a surprise to members of council or the general public to hear that a project the scale and size of the leisure project represented a significant financial investment for the council and a considerable amount of time and resources had been expended on making sure the figures stacked up.  She added that due to the commercially sensitive nature of the financial implications associated with the outsourcing business case, it was necessary that the detailed financial information regarding the project’s affordability modelling, funding proposals and impact on the council were restricted and as such they were presented in the confidential Appendix A which accompanies the report.

Councillor A V Smith advised that in arriving at a decision to proceed with the A511 site, Cabinet had regard to information from detailed site investigations and surveys carried out by the specialist building consultancy group CBRE, which included intrusive ground investigations, ecological assessments, traffic surveys and highways and vehicular access.  Cabinet had commissioned this work to provide confidence to the Council in making the next key decisions in the project.

Councillor A V Smith stated that the reasons for building a new leisure centre were many and varied but in short the existing 40 year old leisure centre at the Hermitage site, whilst popular and well used, was increasingly unable to meet the expectations as well as the current and future demands of the 21^st century leisure user.  The sports hall, swimming pool and the fitness suite were all too small to meet current demand and an increasing number of customers were becoming frustrated at the difficulties they were experiencing when trying to book facilities which had resulted in some users moving to use facilities elsewhere.  The proposed new leisure centre with its enhanced facilities and services on offer would not only address the issue of current and future demand but would also play a critical role in achieving the Council’s vision, contributing to delivery of the Council's five priorities as set out in its Corporate Delivery Plan as well as being a major contributor to the outcomes of the Council's emerging Health and Wellbeing Strategy.

Councillor A V Smith commented however that the proposed outsourcing was not just about building a new facility and she drew members' attention to the fact that the Hood Park Leisure Centre in Ashby was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 51.