Executive 22/11/11

Tonight has seen a meeting of the council's executive amongst the items up for consideration were two items that had been scrutinised by the corporate select committee around the council's finances and performance framework, followed by two items discussed by the community select meeting last night one confidential around CCTV the other not around the members initiative fund and community engagement.

Last up was another confidential report looking at the transactional services review that will play a significant part in helping the council to meet the financial savings that it needs to meet the cuts in funding. This item will now be reviewed by the corporate select committee early in December, followed by further consultation with staff and unions.

November Community Select

Tonight's meeting of the community select community managed to get quite efficiently through its lengthy agenda, with the themes of health, housing, CCTV and community engagement all been amongst the business.

The first item of note involved a presentation from the Tameside and Glossop Primary Care Trust around the current and forthcoming uses of the George Street Clinic. The presentation stemmed from questions that local councillors had raised and to a certain extent had been based on a recent presentation that had been given to GALOP (Glossop action for local order people).

The presentation was useful in terms of updating folk on how and what the clinic is been used for, but it did leave (at least with me) some concerns over how well it will be utilisied when the responsibility passes over to the GP consortium, who in the case of many of the Glossop GC surgeries already offer a number of the services that are or could be offered at the Clinic.

Next up continuing on the health theme was a discussion around deciding the council view on the proposals from the Derbyshire PCT on shutting the Corbur Birth Centre in Buxton. In a sense this was a follow up on the presentation from the PCT recived at the September meeting, when as was the case last night, there were still a variety of issues in particular around finance and service concerns if the centre was to shut.

After discussion the committee resolved unanimously that essentially the PCT had'nt conducted the process of consultation properly and that in addition to objecting to the proposal, that PCT should'nt make a decision itself and instead refer the decision to be made by the Secretary of State for Health.

Following on from that was a first look and consideration of issues around some of the possible changes to the council's housing allocation policy with some of the measurers contained both within the recently passed localism bill, along with the details annouced yesterday in terms of the Government's Housing Strategy paper.

After that was consideration of how the newly organised members initiative fund will work, along with consideration of how the council will look to engage better with local residents across the High Peak, including better working with some of the town and parish council's across the patch.

On the member initiative fund, there was some concerns which we will try to address around the process been very buracratic for the expected sums of monies that are involved, however on the other hand with that, the process has been drawn up by officers to take acount of all the various legal and financial requirements - but I expect there is some middle ground in which we can meet those needs along with making the process simple and efficent enough to get people using the funds to help in their wards.

Finally we had a confidential report around looking at the arrangements for how CCTV will be monitored within the borough, following the decision by High Peak Community Housing to stop doing that work.

The recommendation that was agreed goes to the council executive at its meeting on Tuesday night, which will consider and agree proposals around the service.

The week ahead (21st November)

This week starts off quite busy with a meeting of the Community Select Committee on Monday, followed by a meeting of the council's executive on Tuesday.

Wednesday sees the day start off bright and early for a trip to Matlock for the Community Safety Board, followed in the evening by this month's constituency Labour Party meeting.

Thursday sees this year Gamesley Community Awards with the week coming to a close in a meeting's sense with this month's shopper's surgery in the Glossop Market Arcade on Saturday.

Executive Portfolio's

Tonight saw the first meeting of the council's executive since the recent council elections. Amongst the items of business were the allocation of portfolio's (ie what area's each exec member will be responsible for) and the details of my portfolio as deputy leader and executive member for Community Services are as follows :


· Councillor Development
· Housing
· Customer Service
· Community safety
· Sport, leisure and playgrounds
· Parks
· Climate change
· Environmental protection
· Environmental policy
· Refuse and recycling
· Streetcare
· Grounds maintenance
· Public health
· Public toilets
· Licensing
· Children and young people
· Older people

In addition to myself and the Leader of the council Caitlin Bisknell, there are two other executive members on our 'slimmed' down executive - Ian Huddlestone executive member for Regeneration and Tim Norton executive member for Corporate Services. You can view details of the other portfolio's here

The red flag now flies here

Cllr Caitlin Bisknell with the new exec

Wednesday evening saw the first full council meeting of the new council since the recent elections and as opposed to the results of the last two High Peak Borough Council elections, which saw Labour fall short of the number to take control of the council, this time we had just enough to take minority control of the council.

This mean that for the first time since John Hallsworth was last leader of the council in 2002/3 a Labour councillor would hold the post of Leader of the Council and I was pleased to propose Stone Bench Councillor Caitlin Bisknell to the post, which she was subsequently elected to.

Shortly after that the new executive was announced and I was pleased to be appointed as Deputy Leader of the Council and Executive Member for Community Services.

Also appointed to the executive were New Mills Councillor Ian Huddleston as Executive Member for Regeneration and Chapel Councillor Tim Norton as Executive Member for Corporate Services.

The other Councillor Mckeown also gained a new role at the full council meeting as Vice Chair of the Development Control Committee.

There will be many challenges over the next few years, as we seek to involve, improve and ensure that the services offered by the council meet the needs of local residents both now and in the future, and I am privileged, proud and looking forward to the particular challenges that come with my new role as Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Community Services, as we seek with your help to be your voice in tough times.

Full Council – The rest

In addition to consideration of issues around the budget, the full council considered a number of other issues, starting off with two questions from members of the council one around concerns over lobbying by developers on planning applications, the other around New Mills Town Council.

Following on from that were four recommendations from the council’s audit and regulatory committee, one around changes to council’s committee structure which will reduce and refine the current number of select committee, a second on the council’s rules around the ‘regulation of investigatory powers act’ (essentially when and how the council can spy on you), the third on the council treasury management strategy and the first on the code of corporate governance review for 2010 / 11.

In addition to the budget report there was also a recommendation from the executive around updates to the housing allocation policy to bring it fully into line with current legislation.

Last up in the public businesses of the meeting were other motions, one from the Lib Dems over the sale of forests which was withdrawn and one welcoming the proposals of Bolsover and North East Derbyshire on setting up a strategic alliance, followed by a report around the forthcoming elections and the connection with voting referendum.

I say in the public business of the meeting, because there was one final confidential report around the current management restructure proposals, the details of which whilst highlighted as supported by the unions at the council still leave me with some concerns particularly around how some of the service responsibilities will be grouped together in the future.

Full Council – Budget setting

Tonight saw a meeting of the full council to effectively finish off this years budget process with the approval of the council’s budget process.

As is traditional at the budget meeting, a certain amount of the debate is one side calling the other, which is not entirely productive when national issues are flagged, but it is a certain part of the process, and unfortunately this evening at least in my view (and from the reaction of others) at least one of the controlling group member went a little two far.

That said aside from that one little blip, the general content of the debate was good, and in contrast to previous years we were able to make the controlling group see sense and instead of imposing a charge on residents to call for ‘rats’ to be dealt with there was no charge introduced.

In general terms because of the size of the cuts from government the scope for changes to this years budget was limited and whilst there are a variety of elements that will need detailed and careful review as the year goes forward, if we had have being in control of the council we may well not have much room for alternatives.

That said, the net effect of the budget passed tonight means that there will be no change to the borough’s council tax, but there will be on average a 5.91 % rise in the cost of renting a council house, in line with the governments determination on rents.

Some of the other impacts of the budget passed tonight though will have a more concerning effect that at current (in my view at least) cannot be fully reviewed with the effects of increase to fees and charges, the 15.2% cuts to the management fee being paid to High Peak Community Housing being of particular concern.

Regeneration Select – Glossop special

Tuesday evening saw the second trip of the week over to Buxton.

This time for a meeting of the Regeneration Select Committee, which although taking place in Buxton the agenda for the meeting consisted largely of items about Glossop, with reports on the design and place making strategy, and the review of Glossop parking.

Image via Wikipedia

The Glossop design and place making strategy, started off proceedings and essentially this document is the condensed views of the various folk that attended workshops earlier this years to give their views on the general direction of Glossop in ‘planning terms’ no doubt (the cynic in my thinks) as it fits into the view from the consultants hired to put the strategy together.

The reason the cynic in me thinks this, is to a certain extent the end output of this process is get a document that will be used as ‘supplementary planning guidance’, so to a certain extent, aside from the specific details relating to location etc, a certain amount of the details relate to more generic planning terms, rather than a clear general vision for Glossop.

Anyway the next step is for the ‘strategy’ is to go back out for public consultation, and it will be interesting to see, how many of the folk who attended the earlier workshops will view the ‘strategy’ as having met the views they fed in.

This next stage of the ‘consultation’ will be mainly online with copies of the strategy being sent to those who attended the workshops along with various local, regional and national organisations.

If you want you can get an early preview, of the strategy by viewing the committee report which was circulated as part of the agenda and includes a copy of the strategy at : http://www2.highpeak.gov.uk/council/agenmin/regen/part1/20110118/05.pdf

One element a number of the Glossopdale members in attendance (well the Labour one’s anyway) flagged was the need for the two ‘missing’ or not ready yet reports covering the Glossop Town Hall Complex and Wood’s Mill to be circulated amongst Glossopdale Councillor’s for comments before going to be ‘rubber stamped’ for approval by the executive, rather than the original recommendation which was for the executive member to approve them without other Councillor’s having seen them.

Next up was a consultation on the draft Derbyshire Local Transport Plan from 2011 to 2026, which to some extent for any actions to improve local transport in Glossopdale essentially relies on the Longdendale Integrated Transport Strategy (sometimes referred to as bypass 2.0) as put together by Tameside Council to by passed and implemented for anything to happen with limited explanation on any measures that the County Council will take to make improvements in the Glossopdale area should the LITS plan not go ahead or have it’s funding reduced.

Also missing on a slightly wider High Peak view was any consideration of measures to implement many of the issues that were identified for transport improvement as part of process we went through to consider the failed Greater Manchester Congestion Charge Process, a number of which (in my view at least) could well be implemented in these difficult financial times at little cost to either of the council’s.

Also as part of the local transport plan were the proposals for the Gamesley Station, which again unfortunately along with most of the actions for Glossopdale seems to have being left to Tameside Council and the LITS process to solve rather than a proactive lists of actions from the County as to how they will take steps to try and get any of these actions to happen.

Last up on Glossop night, was a report on the Glossop Area Parking Review, which aside from highlighting that on the whole there is enough car parking spaces available in the centre of Glossop owned by council, didn’t really tell you that much, it did however give the opportunity for several Councillor’s to raise concerns with issues tied into parking but necessarily directly under the control of the council, mainly around problems with taxi parking outside some of the taxi offices in the centre of Glossop.

Housing Walkabout

Last Friday afternoon saw a walkabout on the estate with the alliances new head of housing Ian Young.

Mr Young is one of the new raft of managers following the management restructure that took place over the summer, and is from a more traditional housing background, than the manager that previously held the overview for housing within the council.

It was an interesting opportunity to highlight a variety of issues across the estate, and it will be interesting to see what progress can be made on fixing some of them.

One concern (amongst the many on the theme of the alliance) is that the setup for things in Staffordshire Moorlands for council housing is different with them getting rid of their council housing by way of stock transfer some time ago, along with different services been retained by the council, that in the High Peak setup are under the responsibility of High Peak Community Housing, and I hope that there is little time spent on fixing things that are not broke just so that they better match the setup over the hill.

However not to appear too negative, that more specific housing focus will I hope bring a clearer focus and some possible additional suggestions to work been done within HPCH to improve services.

Waste and recycling sub committee

Last Thursday also saw the inaugural meeting of the waste and recycling subcommittee.

The committee will be looking to help develop the council’s waste strategy for the period up to 2015, in addition the committee will also be having a partial review of how well the current system of boxes and bins is working and I would welcome any comments on this.

In particular one of the things that it will be useful to see is how many people may have been put off using any of the recycling options that are available either because of previous problems with the set-up or problems that are occurring now.

Some of the things that the strategy will consider will be around how waste and recycling will be collected in the future, and whether some of the current methods such as the plastic bottle bring sites is the best way of doing it.

All in all it should be an interesting subcommittee with the options to look both at how well (or otherwise) things are been done now, and how things will be done in the future.

Audit and regulatory

Last Thursday evening saw a meeting of the audit and regulatory committee amongst the items considered were the annual governance report from the audit commission, along with reports on international financial reporting standards, freedom of information, annual internal audit report and risk management.

As I have done previously I expressed my concerns to the audit commission on the problems of accurate monitoring of progress in some areas of the council’s work that is monitored by the audit commission due to their continual changing of the audit commission’s standards. However this year I was assured that the standards at least for next year, should remain the same as was used this year, hopefully giving us the chance to monitor progress or otherwise.

On data protection it was good to hear that hear that the council had had no data protection issues or loses of any sort, but on freedom of information it was intriguing to hear that the 178 freedom of information requests so far received this year, along with those received previously, now means that work on the freedom of information act is meaning that around 1 day a week is been spent by a member of staff in the democratic services section dealing with these enquiries, in addition to whatever time is taken up by the various services on the council in responding to these enquiries.

A late report in terms that a further heavily amended version was emailed round to members of the committee the night before saw me along with other members of the committee objecting to even considering the report on the council’s joint delegation scheme, because whilst it may be essentially the same as the existing scheme which essentially gives officers the permission to carry out various duties on behalf of the council, we can’t be considering reports on good management and that we have considered all issues on a report when you’ve only received it the night before – especially as the report is over 30 pages long.

In the end a comprise was achieved and the report was deferred to an extra meeting of the committee to take place before the full council meeting.

Forthcoming meetings

Next Tuesday (1st September) evening sees a meeting of the corporate select committee, amongst the items for consideration are financial and performance monitoring, reports from the joint alliance scrutiny panel, ICT options, and reports on partnership working.

Coming up...

Next Monday (24th August) sees a meeting of the council’s development control committee. Amongst the items for discussion are two more or less in the centre of Glossop, one been a hotly contested application for two houses on North Road, the other for the conversion in to 16 apartments of the former Methodist Church and School on Shrewsbury Street.

Also meeting this week on Thursday (20th August) evening is the campaign to Save the Woodhead Tunnel / Re-open the Woodhead Line in Glossop Labour Club in Chapel Street [SK13 8AT] Glossop at 7.30pm.

Planning Democracy - Update

Just an update to last week’s piece on planning democracy, an email was sent round by the executive member apologising profusely and promising that changes will be subject to appropriate consultation prior to implementation and that it was hoped that people wouldn’t respond negatively to possible other enthusiasm by one of the officers.

Planning Democracy

Yesterday evening a training session for members of the Development Control Committee took place at the council’s offices in Chinley, and whilst I wasn’t there myself, the other Councillor Mckeown was and the handout’s from the training session reveal a number of proposed changes the some would say indicate the direction that the alliance is going in.

I say direction because whilst the changes may appear minor, so far to date there has been no consultation with the member of the committee concerned or with the exception possible of the executive no consultation with any other members of the council regarding the changes.

The changes include switching the development committee from meeting on a Monday to meeting on a Thursday, from meeting every three weeks to every four, reductions in the length of time available for ward members to speak on an application before the committee, no questions from members of the committee to speakers on any applications, and by the look of it further complications to the process in Councillors been able to ‘call in’ applications to appear before the development control committee and be decided by elected members rather than officials.

Now on paper some of the changes are not that much of a big issue, and all are been done in the name of efficiency the lack of consultation on some measures including those that have already recently been rejected by members following early changes to the development control process show what I hope has been an error on the part of those concerned with full consultation taking place shortly or if not is this a sign of how things will be following the recently completed management review.

Coming up – Development Control

Next Monday (20th April) sees a meeting of the council’s development control committee.

There are 7 applications for consideration including the reconsideration of plans from Lidl for a supermarket at the former Wild and Hallam Showrooms on the A57 at Brookfield.

The application which was originally submitted last year and withdrawn in January, has had some changes made to it, but not enough apparently to satisfy the planners who are still recommending it for refusal.

As I commented previously I have no personal preference on whether the application is approved or not, and since the last application no one has contacted me with strong views either way.

However I’m still slightly concerned that once again in the current financial climate a scheme that could provide jobs in the hear and now is been recommended for refusal in part on the grounds of loss of employment land.

Although the recommendation is currently against it will be interesting to see whether the prospect of jobs now will change the view of the development control committee and override the issues currently against the proposal.

Coming up – Executive Committee

This Tuesday evening (17th March) sees a meeting of the council’s executive will consider reports on disposals of surplus land, investors in people profile, revisions to performance indicators, and amendments to the street trading policy.

Standard Committee - Protocol for Development Control Committee

Although the standards committee is not one that I serve on or often attend, it does consider a wide range of issues around standards for councillors.

Last Wednesday’s meeting which I wasn’t at, considered a report on reviewing / establishing a protocol for Land Use Planning Matters and Development Control Committee.

The aim of the protocol is to ensure that all persons contacting the council over planning issues should have confidence that the conduct of all councillors and officers involved in the process is consistent and fair to all persons involved. The protocol also ensures that all councillors and officers know what is expected of them.

Some of the main changes been put forward in this change don’t make complete sense to me at current, particularly the one around effectively removing the development control sub committee which currently has a role in discussing with applicants or objectors applications prior to them going to the full development control committee, something which whilst I can see has the aim of improving transparency may make the committee less efficient than it currently can be, with more detailed issues having to be dealt with in full committee rather than a more concentrated sub committee hearing.

Other changes include the introduction of an officer code of conduct, along with a mandatory requirement for committee members to attend site visits if scheduled or to ensure they view any sites under consideration from a public viewpoint.

The report that went to the standards committee is unclear as to how much consultation has gone on with either committee members and or office in the development control service and it will be interesting (if the proposals were approved by the standards committee) as to the views of development control committee members if approved.

Coming up – Executive Meeting

Unfortunately I didn’t get to last weeks Corporate Select Committee, but the executive meeting that will consider the deliberation made including a recommendation from the controlling group’s members of the committee for the council tax rise to be only 2.5% instead of the recommended 3 %

As well as considering the council tax rate, the meeting will also consider fees and charges for various services which as flagged up previously are set to rise by huge amounts with the charge for bulky waste collections going from £10 to £16, and the cost for fridges from £10 to £21, something which I hope will be reconsidered giving the current financial circumstances.

The meeting will also consider reports on the Council’s Corporate Plan, performance and financial review, equality standards for local government, the regeneration strategy, the development plan core framework and the HPCH management agreement.

Environment Select

Last Tuesday evening saw a meeting of the Environment Select Committee.

Items up for discussion included an update on the Binnovation scheme
including details on some forthcoming improvements to some of the recycling
sites within Glossopdale, reports on partnership working, prescribed
processes, the food service plan, arrangements for a forthcoming tour and
details on a partnership with the police over Environmental Enforcement
Notices.

As highlighted last week the partnership with police will lead to Police
Community Support Officers (PCSO's) been able to issue fines for a number of
issues such as graffiti, littering, dog fouling, fly tipping etc.

Interestingly at the meeting there was a mixed view across the committee
with some members concerned that this may not be the right role for PCSO's,
with concerns that some of the issues they can deal with at a low level now,
they may not be able to deal with in the same way with this additional
power.