Agenda and minutes

1.         This meeting is to be webcast. Members are reminded of the need to activate their microphones before speaking.

2.         The Chief Executive will read the following announcement:

“This meeting will be webcast live to the Internet and will be archived for later viewing. Copies of recordings may be made available on request.

By entering the chamber’s lower seating area you consenting to becoming part of the webcast.

If you wish to avoid being filmed you should move to the public gallery or speak to the webcasting officer”

The Chairman reminded everyone present that the meeting would be broadcast live to the Internet, and that the Council had adopted a protocol for the webcasting of its meetings.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To report the appointment of any substitute members for the meeting.

It was noted that Councillor K Chana had substituted for Councillor A Green.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). To declare interests in any items on the agenda.

In considering whether to declare a personal or a prejudicial interest under the Code of Conduct, Overview & Scrutiny members are asked pay particular attention to paragraph 11 of the Code in addition to the more familiar requirements.

This requires the declaration of a personal and prejudicial interest in any matter before an OS Committee which relates to a decision of or action by another Committee or Sub Committee of the Council, a Joint Committee or Joint Sub Committee in which the Council is involved and of which the Councillor is also a member.

Paragraph 11 does not refer to Cabinet decisions or attendance at an OS meeting purely for the purpose of answering questions or providing information on such a matter.

Councillor K Angold-Stephens declared a personal interest in item 6 of the agenda by virtue of being one of the members that had called this report in. He would relinquish his role as the Vice Chairman for this part of the meeting.

Councillor J Knapman declared a personal interest in item 6 of the agenda by virtue of being the County Councillor for the Broadway, Loughton.

Decisions required:

To confirm the minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 9 July 2009.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 July 2009 be taken as read and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.

To consider a call-in of the Legal and Estates Portfolio Holder’s report to Cabinet on the consideration of rent deferment scheme for shops in Loughton Broadway. (C-014-2009/10). Call-in papers and report are attached.

This report was called-in separately by two sets of Councillors, both call-in papers are attached.

The Committee were asked to consider the call-in of the Legal and Estates Portfolio Holder’s Cabinet report (C-014-2009/10) regarding the consideration of rent deferment for the shops in Loughton Broadway. The report was called in by two different sets of councillors.

Councillor Angold-Stephens, the lead member of one of the call-ins, vacated his position as Vice Chairman of the Committee for the duration of the consideration of this item. The Chairman then informed the meeting of the protocol for the handling of a call-in.

In accordance with the Overview and Scrutiny procedure rules, the representative of the first group of members to call-in the report, Councillor Angold-Stephens, outlined their concerns, which were summarised in the call-in notification. He noted that the LRA had supported the decision made by the Cabinet affecting the plight of the traders and that supporting them was untenable. However, no other shopping parade had their whole road closed which meant that the footfall fell away dramatically during this period. An added problem of the refurbishment was the bus stops that were taken out had still not been reinstated. Many traders had described themselves as being on their knees, and about half are behind on their rent. Five were on instalment plans and four were seriously struggling, although the council was not pressing hard to collect their arrears.  Business was down by between 25% and 40%. It would be helpful if their business rate could be reduced by 20% or 25% and backdated. It should be noted that business had still not recovered fully as shoppers had developed new habits, although you could exclude pubs, garages, post offices and banks as they did not rely on passing trade. According to his calculations it would cost the council from about £28k to a maximum of £38k. With a rent rebate of about £630 it would be just enough to ease the burden on traders. He noted that his figures were just estimates, so a cap should be put on the rebate of about £40k. Officers could provide accurate figures to the Cabinet. He recommended that the Committee refer this decision back to the Cabinet for further consideration.

Councillor Wixley added he hoped that the Cabinet members agreed that this was sensible and affordable. A petition had also been collected and this would be submitted later. If businesses fail then that would affect unemployment and jeopardise the buoyancy of the shopping centre. If shops failed it would not be easy to get replacements, the Council would then lose rent revenue, so it could be seen as an investment in the future. These businesses needed a kick start and he recommended that the Cabinet be asked to reconsider its decision.

The representative of the other group of members to call-in the report, Councillor Mrs P Richardson outlined their concerns. She said that a few years ago, shops in a similar situation had been let off paying their rent for a short while. It was short sighted for the Council not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

To consider a call-in of the Leisure and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder’s report to Cabinet on the feasibility study on the construction of a new sports hall at the site of the Waltham Abbey Swimming Pool (C-012-2009/10). Call-in papers and report are attached.

The Committee were then asked to consider the call-in of the Leisure and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder’s Cabinet report (C-012-2009/10) regarding the provision of a sports hall at the Waltham Abbey Swimming Pool.

In accordance with the Overview and Scrutiny procedure rules, the representative of the Councillors calling in the decision, Councillor Mrs P Brooks, outlined their concerns, which were summarised in the call-in notification. She noted that they were supportive of the new sports hall. It would enhance the facilities for the area when the council withdrew from the Waltham Abbey Sports Centre. They however, had concerns about the gap between the closing of the sports centre and the opening of the new hall. What was in place to take up the slack?

Councillor Jon Whitehouse, another signatory of the call-in added that the Council would make substantial savings by withdrawing from the Sports Centre, and the Cabinet had decided to take that savings and not reinvest it in the Sports Hall. Also, the council need to look to Sports and Leisure Management (SLM) not charging more in their management fees, as there would be a greater footfall through the new hall. The council should be prepared to use some of the savings for the people of Waltham Abbey. He requested that the Committee ask the cabinet to reconsider this decision.

The Leisure and Wellbeing Portfolio Holder, Councillor B Rolfe replied that the Council did not own the Waltham Abbey Sports Centre site, it joint managed it with King Harold School. There was no suggestion that the school would not continue with the site. They have given no indication so far, either way, whether they want to proceed with running the centre or not. The school would not discuss this with the Council. The Council is fully conscious of the gap between 2010 and 2011 and would be happy to help the school. King Harold School could still run the sports centre and allow people to continue to use it. The Waltham Abbey Sports Centre was the most expensive centre in the district compared with the other centres. The savings had already been taken into account and had been factored into the Council’s Medium Term Financial Forecast, and the £206k had been budgeted for.

Councillor Knapman said he was struggling with the concept of the call-in. The District will end up with a new sports hall, and will make a saving while offering more facilities. This should not have been called-in. The idea of making saving was to get the Council Tax down or to do other things that we could not do before.

Councillor Mrs Haigh said it was a good idea to have a new sports hall, but her concern was for the period in between. Waltham Abbey was a deprived area. Councillor Whitehouse alluded to negotiating with SLM, was there any likelihood of doing so? The transport links were not as good in the evening and local people would have the Sports Centre taken away with  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

(Councillor Mrs M. McEwen) To consider a report of the Constitution & Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel.

The Chairman of the Constitution and Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel, Councillor Mrs McEwen, took the meeting through the Election report. The Panel had reviewed the recent elections held in June 2009. 

The Committee noted the arrangements made for the elections and the resulting issues raised by candidates and agents after the elections for improving future elections.

RESOLVED:

That the report on the review of the elections held in June 2009 was noted by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

(Councillor Mrs M. McEwen) To consider a report of the Constitution & Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel on officer delegation in respect of planning applications which are the subject of representations by Parish and Town Councils

The Chairman of the Constitution and Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel, Councillor Mrs McEwen, introduced the report on Officer Delegation - Planning Applications: Comments by Town and Parish Councils and Single Rear Extensions.  The Panel had been requested by the Council to reconsider the proposal not to change officer delegation in relation to comments by Parish Councils.

The proposal originated from Councillor Knapman who wished the Panel to consider that the delegated powers should not be used if the Head of Planning and Economic Development intended to refuse a planning application where a local council had indicated a measure of support in its response and that such cases should stand referred to the relevant Area Plans Sub-Committee.

Councillor Knapman said he was happy to go along with the recommendations made by the Constitution and Member Services Standing Panel.

Councillor Mrs Wagland, as Chairman of the Planning Services Standing Panel expressed concern on how to achieve something that could be understood by the constituents, as there was a need to explain it to them. The terminology used was not particularly clear. She said it needed to be consistent and clear as difficulties could occur. She was happy to have the report come to her Planning Scrutiny Panel so it could be considered in depth.

Councillor Knapman seconded this proposal saying he was happy for this to happen. Councillor Mrs Haigh supported this proposal as well.

            RESOLVED:

That the Planning Services Standing Panel receives and considers the Constitution and Member Services Standing Panel report on ‘Officer Delegation – Planning Applications’.

            RECOMMENDATION:

1.                  That two Conservative members be appointed to the Safer Cleaner Greener Standing Panel; and

2.                  That a new Chairman be appointed for the Safer Cleaner Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel.

Two vacancies have occurred following the resignation of Councillor B Rolfe from the Safer Cleaner Greener Standing Panel and the death of Councillor Bateman. Due to the pro-rata requirements, these vacancies falls within the membership of the Conservative group.

As Councillor Rolfe was also the Chairman of this Panel, a new Chairman should also be appointed by this Committee to the SCG Standing Panel.

It should be noted that nominations to Chairman (and Vice Chairman) of these Panels are excluded from the calculation required under the Council's protocol regarding allocation of Chairman and Vice-Chairman positions between the political groups.

The Committee resolved to appoint the following members to the Safer Cleaner Greener Standing Scrutiny Panel and also appointed the new Chairman and Vice Chairman.

            RESOLVED:

1)                  That Councillors A Boyce and A Clark be appointed as members to the Safer Cleaner Greener Standing Panel.

2)                  That Councillor G Pritchard be appointed as the Chairman to this Panel; and

3)                  That Councillor A Boyce be appointed as the Vice Chairman.

Recommendation:

To endorse the terms of reference for the Pitt Review on Flooding Task and Finish Panel.

The Committee is asked to consider and endorse the terms of references for the new Pitt Review Task and Finish Panel considered at their first meeting.

The Committee received and approved the terms of reference from the newly formed Pitt Review on Flooding Task and Finish Panel.

            RESOLVED:

That the terms of reference for the Pitt Review on Flooding Task and Finish Panel be endorsed.

(a)               To consider the attached Work Programme

The current Overview and Scrutiny work programme is attached for information.

(b)         Reserve Programme

A reserve list of scrutiny topics is required to ensure that the work flow of OSC is continuous.

OSC will ‘pull out’ items from the list and  allocate them accordingly once space becomes available in the work plan following  the completion of  existing reviews.

Members can put forward any further suggestions for inclusion in the reserve list  either during the meeting or at a later date.

Existing review items will be dealt with first, then time will be allocated to the items contained in the reserve work plan.

(c)               Referral from Cabinet: Sustainable Communities Act 2007

      RECOMMENDATIONS:

To consider how to this Committee wishes to handle the cabinet proposal

to consider the Sustainable Communities Act 2007. The Committee can:

(1)   Add it to their work programme;

(2)   Add it one of the Standing Panel’s work programmes;

(3)   Create a Task and Finish Panel to consider the issues and report back; or

(4)   Create a sub-committee of this Committee to consider the issues.

The Cabinet at their meeting on 13 July 2009 had asked that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee consider the report (attached) on Sustainable Communities Act 2007. They would like this Committee to consider how schemes are to be found and what arrangements are to be made for setting up relevant panels of affected people. This item of work would, by its nature, cut across a lot of the established Standings Panel’s terms of reference.

O&S Work Programme.

The Senior Democratic Services officer, Simon Hill, took the Committee through their work programme. The Committee noted that:

Item 1:Scrutiny of Essex Police - now to go to the Safer Cleaner Greener, Crime and Disorder Panel and to take it off the O&S programme.

Item 6:West Essex PCT – Joint Scrutiny - officer have had discussions with the County Council who are responsible for health scrutiny. They are considering more formal scrutiny arrangements on an area basis.

Item 14:Presentation from the Fire and Rescue Service – noted that this would take place at the October meeting.

An additional item was to be added to the work programme. A review of the Youth Council; they came last year requesting funding and to report on their proposed work for the year. They are to come back in November 2009and make a further pitch for future funding.

Standing Panels.

Councillor Jacobs reported that the Finance and Performance Management Standing Panel met on 25 August 2009, when they considered the financial monitoring, looked at the KPIs and reconvened the sub committee looking at Value for Money.

Referral from Cabinet: Sustainable Communities Act 2007

The committee decided that the best way to deal with this item of work was to create a Task and Finish Panel specifically to consider the issues involved with the Sustainable Communities Act (2007).

It was agreed that Derek Macnab would act as the lead officer.

            RESOLVED:

(1)               That a Task and Finish Panel be established to consider the Sustainable Communities Act 2007;

(2)               That Councillor J Philip be appointed as the Chairman to this Panel;

(3)               That an item be placed in the Members Bulletin asking for volunteers to sit on this Task and Finish Panel.

RECOMMENDATION:

To consider any items to be raised by the Chairman at the Cabinet meeting on 7 September 2009.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive). Under the Overview and Scrutiny rules the Committee is required to scrutinise proposed decisions of the Executive. The Chairman is also required to report on such discussions to the Cabinet.

The Committee is asked to consider the 7 September 2009 Cabinet agenda (previously circulated) to see whether there are any items that they wished to be raised at the Cabinet meeting.

Councillor Mrs Grigg asked the Committee to comment on Cabinet agenda item 24, the Former Parade Ground site at North Weald. Councillor Mrs Grigg asked that if the Cabinet were minded to transfer the land, that conditions be placed upon it to remain as open public space.