Agenda and minutes

An apology for absence was received from Councillors F Broadley and Mrs L Broadley.

None.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the following meetings be taken as read, confirmed and signed:

a)    Council held on Tuesday 21 April 2015; and

b)   Annual General Meeting held on 19 May 2015.

A Member stated that an e-mail received in his capacity as a County Councillor had been sent by a Mr Quinsee in respect of the matter regarding Bell Street advising that no site visit was to go ahead. The Member emphasised the need to consult on this as wide as possible.

A Member further stated that Mr Quinsee had been in further correspondence with her to advise that a consultation would first be undertaken with local businesses and business-owners and, whilst those first results were being returned, a second consultation was to  be undertaken with local residents and shoppers during the proposed temporary period.

RESOLVED: That the Action List be noted.

None.

None.

The Leader of the Council reported that a question had been received in relation to his statement on 25 May 2015 in the Leicester Mercury and agenda item 16a. He stated his willingness to respond to the said question however, due to the complex nature and difficult circumstances, would offer such a response in the latter part of the meeting when the private session commences. . He formally acknowledged receipt of the question and stated that he would write to the addresser and respond to Members later in the meeting.

The Leader of the Council explained the ordinary context of the Leader’s Statement insofar as welcoming new Members and addressing non-agenda items. He stated that the issue in the current meeting’s Statement was the move to a strategic authority.

The Leader of the Council informed Members that both Mr Hall and himself shall be attending a meeting with other Leicestershire district council leaders on 18 June 2015 to ascertain any commonality of purposes in view of a strategic move. He made reference to the Greater Manchester Authority as such an example with greater devolved powers. He cited The Rt. Hon George Osborne, First Secretary of State and Chancellor of the Exchequer, in defining the prerequisites to a strategic authority, namely: the existence of a local government organisation; and a directly-elected major.

In addressing whether the County and City Council(s) can work in partnership on strategic matters, the Leader of the Council cited local planning as a notable example and the complexity and difficulty arising at a micro-scale. He stated that matters of housing, transportation and education were currently being discussed. The outcome was said to be unknown to the Leader of the Council. He summarised the move as a simple equation insofar as if the resources required to be pooled by the Borough was greater than the resources accrued, then the move would not be beneficial and vice versa.

The Leader of the Council stated that the question was one which would be addressed in the terms of the greater good as opposed to a simple numerical equation and involving protection factors. He acknowledged that the discussions were to be long and complex, yet the outcome would guarantee the existence of the Borough in the years to come. He noted that the current climate indicated a move towards shared services for reasons of greater resilience.

The Leader of the Council said he was willing to report back any development to Members at the next meeting of the Council.

Mr Hall presented to Members the contents of the report for agenda item 10 (pages 9 - 22), outlining a draft of the Council’s Commitments for the period 2015-2019 with a recommendation to approve the overall scheme whilst acknowledging an opportunity for Members to consider and amend the detail in future committee meetings.

The Leader of the Council moved for the Commitments to be approved. He stated that it would have been ideal if a Corporate Plan was presented alongside the Commitments but explained that the reasons for not being able to do so would be addressed in the latter part of the meeting.

He further cited the Council Commitments from page 10 of the agenda item, with particular reference to the offering of choice and the principle contained therein, referring to an earlier occasion as an example whereby resident’s were given a choice as to whether to introduce wheeled refuse-containers; and the savings made through redesigned services, referring to the upcoming relocation of Customer Services to a more convenient location for residents at Bell Street. In respect of the latter, it was noted that service redesign equated to greater service-efficiently of existing services as opposed to a reduction in services provided. The Leader of the Council described the Commitments as tangible principles capable of being delivered as opposed to a vague concept.

A Member seconded the motion and praised the Council’s sound financial management in previous years, noting that the appropriate financial planning was in place in advance to deliver the aforementioned Commitments albeit subject to later detailing.

RESOLVED: That the report be approved by unanimous agreement.

Mr Hall presented to Members the contents of the report for agenda item 11 (pages 23 - 25) with a recommendation for Members to: confirm their continued commitment to the ICT Shared Service Partnership; the Council’s pro-active role in respect of a proposed joint procurement exercise to deliver further advancement and savings ahead of the contract ending in 2016; and acknowledge the Award Bid for ICT and e-Customer Services. He noted the marked improvement in ICT provisions since this Council’s accession to the partnership due its greater resilience and pooled expertise, with the service being delegated to Hinckley and Bosworth Borough Council and the subsequent joining of Melton Borough and Blaby District Councils. Harborough District Council is considering joining.

A Member moved for the said commitments to be given, stating that Members would continue to raise the bar in respect of this matter.

A Member questioned whether the recommendation given at 2.1 of the report would pre-determine the Council’s commitment to the new outsources contract in 2016 in addition to the continued membership of the partnership. The Member requested further clarification as to the recommendations capacity to enter in a contractual arrangement and whether there was opportunity for the Council to withdraw.

A Member stated that the Council was a member of a partnership which has a contract with a third-party IT supplier. The said recommendation invited Members to approve the Council’s continued membership to that partnership and not to the contract.

Mr Hall advised Members that it was an open-ended partnership arrangement for which a recommitment was being sought. He noted that although there was opportunity for the Council to withdraw from the partnership, the alternative option(s) to not continue to be a member would not be as beneficial. He stated that there was no contractual obligation, but a commitment to undergo a procurement process with other council partners commencing April 2016.

A Member seconded the proposal for the said commitments to be given, stating that it was necessary to engage in the procurement process with the other council partners. The Member noted that if there was any later dissatisfaction, the Council could withdraw.

A Member enquired as to whether there were sufficient levels of ICT staffing onsite given the difficulties the Member had experienced in requesting assistance regarding the set-up of new ICT equipment.

A Member advised that the ICT support contract currently in place was a telephony and remote-access service with a number of members of ICT staff present on-site. It was requested that any outstanding difficulties be relayed to the Member for progressing.

RESOLVED: That the report be approved and said commitments be given by unanimous agreement.

The Mayor submitted that agenda item 13 be considered before Members ahead of agenda item 12 citing logistical reasons in respect of the latter.

The Chief Executive confirmed the same and presented the contents of agenda item 13 (pages 29 - 30), citing Members’ preference to constitute a new, single Change Management Committee for the purposes set forth at 3.2.1 of the report with the recommendation that Members consider and adopt the generality of the terms of reference of the new committee. He stated that the report might well be the subject of Members’ discussions in the following agenda items and that neither Mrs A Court nor he would be party to those later discussions.

A Member moved the recommendation, citing the recent significant changes in staffing as an important reason for the new Committee to scrutinise the changes, workings, advantages and disadvantages of the Council.

Members were prompted to refer to the terms of references which continued overleaf on the agenda.

A Member sought clarification in respect of: (at page 30), the origin and meaning of the ‘CR6 Regulatory Governance’ cited under ‘Risk’; and, at 3.2.of the report, why the terms of reference did not contain any provision to the empanelment of the two requisite Designated Independent Persons (DIP’s) as cited at 3 of the report for agenda item 12 at pages 26 - 28.

The Leader of the Council advised that Mr Hall could not comment on the agenda item for which he was required to vacate the Council Chamber. He stated that the report had been examined by external legal professionals and invited the support of all Members so to ensure the proper and prompt work of the Committee. He noted there were relevant questions that required addressed and that there would be opportunity for the terms of reference to be considered and amended at a later stage.

The Member opined that the involvement of external legal professionals was unexpected. The Member again questioned why no provision was made at 2 of the report in the terms of reference in respect of the empanelment of DIP’s. The Member sought further clarification as to whether the ordinary rules pertaining to the changing of committee membership and substitutions would apply in the absence of any provision(s) contained in the terms of reference.

The Leader of the Council reiterated the need for the terms of reference to be approved in order for the Committee to operate and the plentiful opportunity for amendment. He noted that such approval would not preclude the need for a significant addition of work to be undertaken. He stated that he was willing to address the Member’s point in the latter part of the meeting.

In response to the question the Leader said  that if the Member wished to change the Committee’s membership, then the Member could do so. The Member stated that he understood the advice of the Leader of the Council to be a commitment on the same.

A Member sought clarification as to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

The Mayor submitted that agenda item 12 now be returned to and considered before Members.

The Statutory Officers present, to which the agenda item and report referred respectively, vacated the Council Chamber.

The Leader of the Council proceeded to present to Members the contents of report for agenda item 12 (pages 26 - 28), adding it was a government report the Council was obliged to accept. He noted the Local Government Association did not consider the report to make much sense and that there was no option open to Members.

A Member raised concerns regarding the completeness of the report and the hurried Parliamentary process in respect of the legislation, in the hope that Parliament would rights the wrongs. The Member further stated that the report raised questions as to a conflict of interest(s) between Committee membership and the Full Council.

The agenda item was moved and seconded for approval.

RESOLVED: That the report be approved by unanimous agreement.

RESOLVED: That the common seal of the Council be affixed to all contracts, orders, deeds and other documents arising out of the minutes and reports referred to in the foregoing items.

None.

The Press and Public are likely to be excluded from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Section 100 (A)(4) of the local Government Act 1972 (Exempt Information) during consideration of the item below on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information, as defined in the respective paragraph of Part 1 Of Schedule 12A of the Act and the public interest in maintaining the exempt items outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information.

The Press, Public and remaining Officers present were excluded at 19:48 from the remainder of the meeting in accordance with Section 100 (A)(4) of the local Government Act 1972 (Exempt Information) during consideration of agenda item 16a on the grounds that it involved the disclosure of exempt information, as defined in the respective paragraph of Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act, and the public interest in maintaining the exempt items outweighed the public interest in disclosing the information.

Members had a discussion in camera regarding staffing.