Agenda and minutes

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Remote Meeting using Microsoft Teams

Contact: Democratic Services  01530 454512


No. Item


Apologies for Absence


Apologies for absence were received from Councillor D Tebbutt.



Declaration of Interests

Under the Code of Conduct members are reminded that in declaring disclosable interests you should make clear the nature of that interest and whether it is pecuniary or non-pecuniary.


Councillor S Sheahan declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 5 – Items for Inclusion in Future Work Programme and Item 7 – Budget Proposals 2021/22 as a Leicestershire County Councillor and a property owner affected by HS2.  He confirmed that if any discussion took place regarding HS2 he would leave the meeting.


Councillor M B Wyatt declared a non-pecuniary interest in item 7 – Budget Proposals 2021/22 as a Coalville business owner.  He confirmed he would leave the meeting if discussions were had on anything directly related to his businesses.



Public Question and Answer Session

To receive questions from members of the public under rule no.10 of the Council Procedure Rules. The procedure rule provides that members of the public may ask 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.


There were none.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 227 KB

To approve and sign the minutes of the meeting held on 2 September 2020


Consideration was given to the minutes of the meeting held on 2 September 2010.


It was moved by Councillor J Hoult, seconded by Councillor E Allman and by affirmation of the meeting was




The minutes of the meeting held on 2 September 2020 be approved as a correct record.



Items for Inclusion in the Future Work Programme pdf icon PDF 454 KB

To consider any items to be included in the work programme. The plan of forthcoming Cabinet decisions and the current work programme are attached for information.

Additional documents:


The Chairman referred Members to the Committee’s Work Programme and the Cabinet’s Executive Decision Notice.


Members were invited to make requests for additional items to be included.  No comments were made.


The Strategic Director informed Members that as the December meeting had only one item scheduled, it had been agreed by the Chairman to cancel this meeting and defer the item to the January meeting.


By affirmation of the meeting it was




The Future Work Programme be received and noted.



Exclusion of Press and Public

The officers consider that the press and public should be excluded during consideration of the following items in accordance with Section 100(a) of the Local Government Act 1972 as publicity would be likely to result in disclosure of exempt or confidential information.  Members are reminded that they must have regard to the public interest test and must consider, for each item, whether the public interest in maintaining the exemption from disclosure outweighs the public interest in making the item available.


It was moved by Councillor J Hoult, seconded by Councillor N Smith and




In pursuance of Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the remainder of the meeting on the grounds that the business to be transacted involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Act and that the public interest in maintaining this exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.


Budget Proposals 2021/22

Report of the Head of Finance


The Corporate Portfolio Holder advised Members that for the second year, the Corporate Scrutiny Committee were being asked to have an early input into the draft budget proposals and all comments would be fed back to individual portfolio holders prior to consideration by Cabinet in December.   He thanked the Head of Finance and her team for the hard work undertaken on the budget proposals under very difficult national circumstances. 


Members were reminded that in accordance with the usual budget setting process, a further budget report would be brought to committee for more detailed scrutiny in January.


The Head of Finance presented the report to Members.  She explained that the report reflected the budget changes for the next financial year but was still very much in draft as there was a lot of work still ongoing in relation to staffing, value of small (below £5,000) budget changes, general fund funding position and the impact of capital grants on revenue.  The Head of Finance referred Members to an error in Appendix B of the report in relation to the self-sufficiency fund, there should be no change at all from last year and should not be included. 


The following responses were given to a number of questions from Councillor S Sheahan:


-     The allocation of £100,000 from the self-sufficiency reserve for engaging external expertise to assist in the delivery of savings was questioned; as it was felt it could be put to better use elsewhere.  The Portfolio Holder explained that this allocation fell under the ‘invest to save’ banner and as NWLDC was a small local authority with lots of pressures, it would be beneficial for an external view to help generate the savings missed out on this year.  The Head of Finance also stressed the benefits of external expertise.  She explained that it would also assist with officer capacity, as there had been a shift in focus in response to the national issues.


-     In relation to the proposed investments in both Marlborough Square and Memorial Square, it was asked what benefits the community would receive, as there was little detail.  The Interim Regeneration Project Manager explained that the investment formed part of a bid that if successful would bring £18million to the area.  Members were reminded that the full project plan had been to Cabinet and was available if required.  It was added that more plans were subject to Cabinet approval and a further report would be considered in the near future.  The Portfolio Holder was very hopeful that the bid would be a success and believed it could be a turning point for Coalville.  He stressed that the regeneration of Coalville was a priority and he felt that the project was aspirational.


-     The decision to fund the Breedon Gate installation was questioned due to the high level of expenditure on an asset not owned by the Council.  The Portfolio Holder was closely involved in the issue as it fell under his County Council constituency.  He explained that there  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16.