Agenda, decisions and minutes

When the continuous alarm sounds you must evacuate the building by the nearest available fire exit. Members and visitors should proceed to the visitors’ car park at the front of the building and await further instructions (during office hours staff should proceed to their usual assembly point; outside of office hours proceed to the visitors’ car park). Please do not re-enter the building unless instructed to do so.

In the event of a fire any person with a disability should be assisted in leaving the building.

1.1             The evacuation procedure, as set out on the Agenda, was taken as read.

1.2             The Chair welcomed Councillor P W Awford, as Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, who was in attendance to observe the meeting.

2.1             Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Mrs G F Blackwell, R Furolo and J R Mason. Councillors Mrs P A Godwin, A S Reece and M J Williams would be acting as substitutes for the meeting.  

3.1             The Committee’s attention was drawn to the Tewkesbury Borough Council Code of Conduct which was adopted by the Council on 26 June 2012 and took effect from 1 July 2012.

3.2             There were no declarations of interest made on this occasion.

To approve the Minutes of the meeting held on 26 April 2017.

4.1             The Minutes of the meeting held on 26 April 2017, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.  

To receive any questions, deputations or petitions submitted under Rule of Procedure 12.

(The deadline for public participation submissions for this meeting is 1 June 2017)

5.1             There were no items from members of the public on this occasion.  

To consider the Committee’s Forward Plan.  

 That the Committee’s Forward Plan be NOTED.

6.1             Attention was drawn to the Committee’s Forward Plan, circulated at Pages No. 12-16. Members were asked to consider the Plan.

6.2             A Member questioned what was happening regarding the Spring Gardens/Oldbury Road regeneration and, in response, the Head of Finance and Asset Management indicated that this would be considered at the Executive Committee meeting in August; currently discussions were ongoing with a number of parties and the next phase of activity would be to put together a planning brief to take forward to the market which would set out what the Council wanted to do in the area - this was not underway at the moment.

6.3             Accordingly, it was  

To approve the Portfolio Holders and Support Members for the forthcoming Municipal Year.  

That the following Portfolio Holders and their Support Members be CONFIRMED:

Leader of the Council/Corporate Portfolio –

Councillor D J Waters.

Corporate Portfolio Support Member –

Councillor K J Cromwell.

Customer Focus Portfolio –

Councillor M Dean.

Customer Focus Support Member –

Councillor Mrs H C McLain.

Organisational Development Portfolio Holder –

Councillor Mrs G F Blackwell.

Organisational Development Support Member –

Councillor Mrs P A Godwin.

Finance and Asset Management Portfolio –

Councillor R Furolo.

Finance and Asset Management Support Member –

Councillor A S Reece.

Built Environment Portfolio Holder –

Councillor Mrs E J MacTiernan. 

Built Environment Support Member –

Councillor Mrs R M Hatton.

Clean and Green Environment Portfolio Holder –

Councillor J R Mason.

Clean and Green Environment Support Member –

Councillor M J Williams.

Community Portfolio Holder –

Councillor Mrs K J Berry.

Community Support Member –

Councillor Mrs P E Stokes.

Economic Development/Promotion Portfolio Holder –

Councillor R A Bird.

Economic Development/Promotion Support Member –

Councillor P D Surman.

Health and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder –

Councillor Mrs J Greening.

Health and Wellbeing Support Member –

Councillor Mrs J E Day. 

7.1             Attention was drawn to the document, attached to the Agenda at Page No. 17, which showed the Portfolio Holders and their Support Members for the forthcoming Municipal Year. Members were asked to confirm their appointment.

7.2             Accordingly, it was

To consider the Council’s financial outturn report.  

1.      That the General Fund outturn for 2016/17, the financing of the capital programme and the annual treasury management report and performance be NOTED.

2.      That the transfers to and from earmarked reserves be APPROVED.

8.1             The report of the Head of Finance and Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 18-40, highlighted the Council’s financial performance for the previous year and asked Members to consider the general fund outturn for 2016/17, the financing of the capital programme and the treasury management report and performance, as well as to approve the transfers to and from earmarked reserves.

 8.2            The Head of Finance and Asset Management explained that the report before Members represented the financial position for 2016/17 and included five parts: the general fund and revenue outturn; the Council reserves; the capital programme; treasury management; and performance indicators.

8.3             In terms of the general fund outturn position for the full year, there was a deficit of £86,520 which represented a negative variance of 0.93% against the full year budget. Although no deficit was a satisfactory outcome, the Head of Finance and Asset Management was pleased to report a significantly reduced deficit and a close to break-even position for the Council for the whole financial year. He felt that this was particularly encouraging given the challenging financial position of local government and a number of significant external factors which had adversely affected the Council’s budget position such as losses on retained business rates. Table one at Page No. 20 of the report set out the overall position which showed that, if the business rates element was removed, the Council would have been in a surplus position. However, one of the other main reasons for the overspend was employees which was largely as a result of the requirement to bring in interim staff to cover vacancies and sickness. Additional staff had also been employed to meet service requirements and to fulfil the requirements of grant funding received. In addition, provision had been made to meet redundancy and pension payments which had been agreed as part of the management restructure. The overspend in supplies and services was in relation to the expenditure associated with running elections and referendum on behalf of the government; the financing rules meant that this had to be shown as an overspend because it was unbudgeted at the start of the year even though corresponding additional income had been received to finance the expenditure. There was a similar position in relation to One Legal as it recovered all money from clients – that overspend was shown under ‘payments to third parties’. Transfer payments related to the administration of housing benefit on behalf of central government – the outturn position showed a small increase in the quantum of housing benefit paid out during the year to claimants across the Borough but was offset by additional income through the housing benefit subsidy. In terms of income, targets had far exceeded expectation throughout the year – external income had boosted the overall position but this had also been helped by solid income streams in a number of areas with improved recovery of housing benefit subsidy having had a major impact. Commercial and treasury income had been boosted in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To consider the action plan which will enable the Council to achieve compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation and to approve the establishment of a post of Business Administration Manager subject to a recommendation to Council that ongoing funding be included in the base budget for 2018/19 and future years.

1.      That the action plan, which would achieve compliance with the General Data Protection Legislation, attached to the report at Appendix 1, be NOTED.

2.      That, subject to (3) below, a Business Administration Manager’s post be established in accordance with Section 4 of the report.

3.      That it be RECOMMENDED TO COUNCIL that ongoing funding for the Business Administration Manager post be included in the base budget for 2018/19 and future years.

9.1             The report of the Chief Executive, circulated at Pages No. 41-54, summarised the impact on the Council of the new General Data Protection Regulation, which would come into force on 25 May 2018, and the associated risks of non-compliance. Members were asked to note the action plan, attached at Appendix 1 to the report; to approve the establishment of the post of Business Administration Manager; and to recommend to Council that the ongoing funding for that post be included in the base budget for 2018/19 and future years.

9.2             The Chief Executive explained that the General Data Protection Regulation would come into force across the European Union (EU) on 25 May 2018 and would replace existing data protection laws. The Council had been advised that this would be in place as long as the UK formally remained within the EU but the government had also indicated that the Regulation would remain in place after the UK’s exit from the EU. The new Regulation would increase the rights of individuals over their personal data and tighten the obligations of all organisations to comply with the new rules concerning the management of personal information. The new Regulations would significantly increase the data protection obligations on the Council and, although existing data protection procedures were in place, those required extensive review and revision in order to achieve compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation framework. The most significant addition was the new ‘accountability’ requirement whereby organisations would need to be able to demonstrate compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation principles by, for example, maintaining documentation on decisions about why personal information was being processed. Another important change was the vastly increased fines for those organisations that failed to comply or permitted data breaches; for serious breaches organisations could be fined up to €20 million and for less serious breaches, or for failing to keep records, the fine could be up to €10 million.

9.3             Members were advised that, to demonstrate compliance, the Council must implement technical and organisational measures including data protection policies, staff and Member training and internal data processing audits; maintain relevant documentation on processing activities; appoint a Data Protection Officer which was a new statutory role; implement measures that met the principles of data protection by design including data minimisation, use of artificial identifiers and transparency; and implement data protection privacy impact assessments. The requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation were extensive and complex and, as such, it was felt that a dedicated resource was needed to lead and coordinate the associated activities. As the cost of the proposed Business Administration Manager post was outside of the budget its funding needed to be a recommendation to Council.

9.4             During the discussion which ensued, a Member noted that the maximum annual cost of the new post would be £50,970 including on-costs and she questioned whether this could be achieved for any less. In response, the Chief Executive advised that the cost identified was the maximum cost  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

To approve the amended Economic Development and Tourism Strategy and amendments to the Business Grants Scheme as set out within the report.

1.      That the Economic Development and Tourism Strategy be ADOPTED.

2.      That the amendments to the Business Grants Scheme, as outlined in Paragraphs 3.3 to 3.5 of the report, be APPROVED.

10.1           The report of the Community and Economic Development Manager, circulated at Pages No. 55-73, outlined the progress of the Economic Development and Tourism Strategy Working Group in developing the new Strategy. Members were asked to adopt the Strategy and approve the proposed amendments to the Business Grant Scheme as outlined within the report. 

10.2           The Chair of the Economic Development and Tourism Strategy Review Working Group explained that economic development was one of the key priorities in the Council Plan and was essential to the support of business growth within the Borough. It did, however, also need to be understood that the Council’s resources in that area were limited and he felt the Council achieved far more than should be expected with the resources it had. The Working Group, along with Officers, had put in a lot of hard work to create the new Strategy which he felt was something to be proud of and he thanked everyone who had been involved. The Head of Development Services explained that the report before Members highlighted the progress made and asked the Executive Committee to adopt the new Strategy.

10.3           It was explained that the previous Strategy had reached the end of its life so a Working Group had been initiated to review it. The work had included the Council’s key partners and the employment land review, economic assessment and business survey had been the basis for the Strategy. The document before the Executive Committee had been considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and subsequently recommended to the Executive Committee for approval. Particular attention was drawn to the fact that one of the meetings of the Working Group had focused on business grants and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee had been keen to ensure this was detailed within the report to Committee and included in the resolution made by the Executive Committee as appropriate. Members were then provided with a brief presentation which showed that, in terms of the economy in Tewkesbury Borough, there were 43,000 jobs; unemployment was at 1%; the value of goods and services produced £2.23 billion per year; and there were 3,915 enterprises, including 3,445 micro-businesses. The Borough had a strong business survival rate and an annual tourism related spend of £125 million with 1.8 million day visits. The Borough was in a good location with excellent transport links and a high demand for employment land. There was also a diverse economy and an established centre for high quality manufacturing and world class high-tech aero engineering. It was felt that there was still an opportunity for more growth as there were a number of business which were known to want to locate themselves in the Borough which was great news. There were also a number of major tourism attractions including Tewkesbury Abbey, Sudeley Castle, the Great Western Railway, FlyUp417 and the Jet Age Museum. In terms of the new Strategy, it aimed to provide practical support for businesses in the Borough; promote the area to attract  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

To approve the Communications Strategy and action plan.  

That the Communications Strategy and action plan be APPROVED.  

11.1           The report of the Head of Corporate Services, circulated at Pages No. 74-86, attached a Communications Strategy and action plan which Members were asked to approve.

11.2           Members were advised that communications had a vital role to play in helping the Council deliver its vision, priorities and objectives to local people. It was responsible for a wide range of complex services so it needed a clear framework to communicate effectively. The Strategy and action plan was designed to be a simple, easy read document that looked at how the Council could grow its communications to meet its future aims until 2019 – it looked at digital communications but also took into account that some people did not want to engage in that way and still needed face-to-face and telephone options. The Communications Strategy identified key communication principles; what had been achieved so far; what people thought of the Council; what the Council wanted to achieve; and how it would achieve those objectives. It was suggested that the Strategy and action plan would be a ‘live’ document and would be reported to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee on an annual basis.

11.3           In response to a query regarding the Borough News being available online, Members were advised that the newspaper was already published on the Council’s website. However, there was currently a Tewksbury Borough News Review Working Group in operation and, from the first meeting of that group, it was understood that it needed to be more prominent. A Member referred to one of the actions to ‘increase video output where appropriate e.g. to encourage recruitment’ and she questioned what this meant. In response, she was advised that this was popular with many organisations and involved putting a short video on their websites to give a flavour of what it was like to work in a place so people could see what the environment was like.

11.4           Having considered the Strategy and action plan, it was  

To approve the Management of Occupational Road Risk Policy and Guidelines; and to delegate authority to the Head of Finance and Asset Management to make minor amendments to the Policy following Union consultation.

1.      That the Management of Occupational Road Risk Policy and guidelines be APPROVED.

2.      That authority be delegated to the Head of Finance and Asset Management to make minor amendments to the policy, if necessary, following Union consultation.  

12.1           The report of the Head of Finance and Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 87-97, sought to extend the current arrangements for the checking of business travel and formalised the approach so that the Council was able to demonstrate it was discharging its duties. Members were asked to approve the Management of Occupational Road Risk Policy and Guidelines and to delegate authority to the Head of Finance and Asset Management to make minor amendments to the Policy, if necessary, following Union consultation.

12.2           The Head of Finance and Asset Management explained that the Policy, as attached to the report at Appendix A, would apply to all officers and Members of the Council, Council volunteers and a number of additional roles. The framework would organise the Council’s current approach to the administration of business travel and provide consistency across the organisation. The Policy was designed to be comprehensive and effective yet simple and quick for management and employees to instigate. In summary, the Policy required annual checks against car insurance, driving licence, MOT certification and road tax. Individuals would be required to provide hard copy information for certain elements whereas in other areas the government’s website and central database could be used. Managers would be expected to sign a declaration once they had checked the documents and that would be passed to Human Resources for recording on personnel files. Should an employee not have the correct insurance and/or documentation for themselves or their vehicle they would be suspended from undertaking business travel until the issue was resolved.

12.3           During the discussion which ensued, a Member questioned how many of the Council’s business users were under 25 years old and whether any of them were required to use a telematics box (also known as a black box) for insurance purposes as this could make it cheaper. In response, the Head of Finance and Asset Management explained that, in terms of age, he could not be absolutely sure but he would imagine the vast majority of such users would be over the age of 25. The cost of an individual’s insurance was none of the Council’s business as it was the individual employee who paid for the insurance so it was up to them whether or not they had a box fitted. In terms of the number of claims made against the Council none had been received in the past five years but the Council’s new insurance provider had still requested that the arrangements be made to ensure the Council was in the best position possible.

12.4           There followed a brief discussion about why the Policy applied to Members. In response, the Borough Solicitor indicated that, if a Member was involved in an accident, but for some reason was inadequately insured, the Council could be pursued as being vicariously liable as the Councillor was travelling in order to conduct Council business. The Council was trying to protect its insurance provision by ensuring all checks were carried out and that no employees or  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.

To consider withdrawing the current offer to transfer Oakhurst and Shamrock Close play areas, Churchdown.

That Officers continue negotiations with a view to transferring the play areas at Oakhurst and Shamrock Close, Churchdown to Churchdown Parish Council on the basis of the original offer made in 2010 with the proviso that negotiations be concluded by the end of December 2017.

13.1           The report of the Head of Finance and Asset Management, circulated at Pages No. 98-101, advised the Committee of the current situation regarding the transfer of play areas to Churchdown Parish Council. Members were asked to agree to withdraw the current offer to transfer Oakhurst and Shamrock play areas in Churchdown at nil cost along with the grant of £20,000 to maintain them. 

13.2           The Head of Finance and Asset Management explained that, in April 2010, the Executive Committee had agreed to transfer, at nil value, three play areas in Churchdown in order to rationalise the Council’s asset holdings and bring them in line with resource and capacity availability. In the seven years since that decision, one play area had been transferred to Churchdown Parish Council leaving the other two in Borough Council ownership. In that time, the Borough Council had managed and maintained the play areas. Given the lapse in time from that original decision, the current management arrangements, the current maintenance programme and the future anticipated expenditure on the sites, it was felt that the original terms of transfer on offer, including a grant of £10,000 per play area, did not represent the most efficient solution for the Borough Council. With this in mind reduced terms had been offered to the Parish Council but it had declined; it was therefore recommended that the offer to transfer the play areas be withdrawn.

13.3           A Member indicated that the play area in Shamrock Close, which was located at the rear of Coriander Drive in Churchdown, was quite large and in an appalling state - even surrounded by razor wire - and it really needed a lot of attention to bring it up to standard. She was aware that Churchdown Parish Council had already taken on other play areas from the Borough Council and they were all maintained to a very high standard. She felt it was a real shame that, in comparison, the play areas in the Borough Council’s ownership did not appear to be maintained at all. In terms of the Shamrock Close play area, she felt, given its location in an area of deprivation in the Borough, it was unacceptable that it should be left in such an awful state. She understood there was an issue in that no sooner had the play area been checked than the equipment was broken again but she was of the view that this was even more reason to transfer it to the Parish Council, with the original grant of £10,000 per area, as it would be able to look after it more effectively.  A number of Members agreed that it would be a mistake for the Council to hold onto the play areas given the high costs which were involved in maintaining them. Accordingly, it was proposed and seconded that the play areas at Oakhurst and Shamrock Close be transferred to Churchdown Parish Council with a grant of £20,000 to maintain them. The Head of Finance and Asset Management advised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

To consider the use of urgency powers in relation to the provision of workshop equipment for maintaining the Council’s vehicle fleet.   

That it be NOTED that the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Lead Members for Clean and Green Environment and Finance and Asset Management, used his urgency powers as allowed under the Constitution for the purposes of expending £44,420.60 for the purchase of workshop equipment.

14.1           The report of Head of Community Services, circulated at Pages No. 102-106, advised the Committee of an urgent decision made by the Chief Executive, in line with the powers delegated to him within the Council’s Constitution, in respect of the purchase of workshop equipment for maintaining the Council’s new vehicle fleet. Members were asked to note the information provided in respect of the decision.

14.2           The Head of Community Services explained that the Council had recently purchased a new fleet for the collection of waste and recycling etc. Unfortunately, during that procurement process, there had been no consideration or budgetary provision made for the replacement of the workshop. The decision of the Chief Executive had been made on an urgent basis as the equipment needed to be procured and installed prior to the arrival and operation of the new vehicle fleet.

14.3           During the discussion which ensued, Members raised some concerns with the way the contract the Council had with Ubico worked. In response, the Chief Executive explained that the Council paid for a service from Ubico and therefore it would always be meeting the costs of the collection of bins and grounds maintenance etc. This was confusing due to the fact that the Council was constantly increasing the number of houses it serviced due to development which in turn increased its costs to Ubico. He indicated that Members were due to have a seminar about Ubico during July and this would aim to cover a lot of the concerns that Councillors had expressed including the costs paid to Ubico; the differences in fleet sizes of the Member authorities; those decisions which were delegated and those that were not; and when, and on what basis, other partner authorities had joined Ubico. In terms of the report currently before the Committee, Members were asked to note the action that had been taken under the Council’s urgency procedures; the Council had a large vehicle fleet and had to provide the tools and space needed to service those vehicles.

14.4           In response to a query regarding decisions on the waste collection service, the Chief Executive advised that many of those decisions were made by the Council rather than being delegated to Officers in consultation with Lead Members i.e. the contract with Ubico, the vehicle purchase and the additional funding for the purchase had all been Council decisions. In addition, performance was monitored by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee so there was a lot of Member oversight which he felt was helpful. In terms of the charges for the waste service, i.e. garden waste, those had been discussed at length with the Transform Working Group and the final decisions were made by the Council as part of the budget process. In respect of the role the Council played in Ubico, the Chief Executive explained that the Council had a seat on the Board which was fulfilled by the Deputy Chief Executive and the Chief Executive was a shareholder. The Borough Council’s role was  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

15.1           The Chair proposed, and it was

RESOLVED          That, under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items on the grounds that they involve the likely discussion of exempt information as defined in Part 1 of Schedule 12(A) of the Act.

To approve the separate Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 26 April 2017.

16.1           The separate Minutes of the meeting held on 26 April 2017, copies of which had been circulated, were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.