Agenda and minutes

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

2.         The Chairman 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.

There were no substitute Members for the meeting.

(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.

There were no declarations of interest made pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct.

Decisions required:

To confirm the minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 12 July 2011.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 12 July 2011 be agreed.

The Chairman promised to add a short report to this set of minutes, updating members on minute item 21, on his meeting with Essex Scrutiny Chairmen, held on 29 July 2011 (attached).

To receive a presentation from Chief Superintendent Simon Williams, on the “Blueprint for Essex Policing”.  He will set out the proposals of the Chief Constable of Essex for the future structure of Policing within Essex and how these will affect this District.  County Councillor Anthony Jackson will also be attending the meeting to put the view of Essex County Council.  

This is a very important issue and all Members are invited to attend. The presentation will be of particular interest to members of the Safer, Cleaner and Greener Standing Scrutiny Panel and the Safer Communities Partnership.

The Chairman welcomed Chief Superintendant Simon Williams, Essex Police and County Councillor Anthony Jackson, Chairman of Essex Police Authority. They were there to inform the Committee on their ‘Blueprint for Essex Policing’, the future of policing in Essex.

The ‘Blueprint’ was to reconfigure the operational services across the force to improve productivity, increase availability and reduce cost. The changes were to be in place by March 2012.

They are tasked with making reoccurring revenue savings of approximately £41 million per year by 2014/15 and have already made savings of £20 million.  The main facts were that even though the plan was to have 388 fewer officers by 2014 with reorganisation it is envisaged that there will be about an extra 55 officers in the front line of the Local Policing Areas. Essex Police are also in collaboration in joint working practices with Kent Police. They have a joint IT department, procurement team, joint head of transport and plans to extend this to other support services. They are looking to make further savings in such area as uniforms and transport. Such a scale of savings would inevitably mean a reduction in the number of police officers and PCSOs and backroom staff.

The ‘Blueprint’ will put into effect five commands, these will be:

• Territorial Policing (delivering neighbourhood policing and community safety partnership workshops);
• Public protection (responsible for a wide range of area including domestic abuse, child protection, sex offender management and protecting vulnerable victims);
• Investigations (dedicated officers responsible solely for investigations);
• Operational Support (including response & patrol providing 24 hour response to emergency and priority calls); and
• Criminal justice (working with partners on integrated offender management).

Significant improvements can be made by borderless policing, better use of technology, better use of intelligence, better matching of resources to demand and reduced management costs (looking for 25% reduction in senior management costs).

Geographically, they will create three Local Policing Areas (LPAs); LPA North; LPA South and LPA West. Stansted Airport will have its own command. Each will be under the command of a Superintendant who will be responsible for neighbourhood policing, community safety and partnership working. This would provide focus, delivering high quality neighbourhood policing services and excellence in working with local authorities and other community safety partners. They would respond to general policing duty incidents and would create new Community Safety Units. New ‘Youth Officers’ will replace the Safer Schools Partnership officers and will be given a wider role in making early interventions to prevent costly enforcement later. The LPAs will be proactive in dealing with anti social behaviour in the community. New Community Safety Units will be created, headed by an Inspector with responsibility for the Youth Officers, Licensing, Crime Reduction Officers, Essex Watch, Anti-Social Behaviour Officers and other vital partnership functions.

Under the ‘Blueprint’ there will be dedicated officers responsible solely for investigations. These officers will be based locally but operate within a single force wide command. They will split into the following teams: Area Investigation Teams will investigate offences such  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

To consider the attached report.

The Director of Planning and Economic Development, John Preston, introduced the report on the government consultation on revising charges at the Dartford-Thurrock river crossing.

It was noted that the present bridge and tunnel had been paid for by 2003. The charges were originally set up as a Toll and has since 2003, been designated as a congestion charge.

The consultation concerned proposals for the short, medium and long term. In the short term, charges would be increased in November 2011 and then again in April 2012. Increase use of the Dart Tag would also be encouraged. In the medium term a free flow charging regime would be introduced, where the payment would be made electronically and not manually. In the longer term the Government was considering additional crossing capacity. Development of these options would be partially funded from the increased charges for the existing crossings.

The South East Local Enterprise Partnership has considered the consultation and objected to the proposals for a number of reasons, that:

• the charges create congestion in their own right and should be dispensed with as soon as possible.
• in any event adjustment to increases charges cause substantial delays at the booths and a two stage increase is therefore twice the problem (very few such journeys are by locals)
• 10 miles of queues before freeing up the booths was too high a threshold representing in the order of 2 hours to get over the river.
• fast track technology was essential before any increase.
  .

On consideration the Committee amended the draft response in the report to read:

1. It is our preferred preference that all congestion charges in respect of this crossing should be ceased as soon as possible. This would reduce the environmental impacts of queuing traffic, reduce congestion, and assist businesses.
2. That, if a new further crossing needs to be designed with new technology, and has new tolls to pay for its construction, then this is acceptable.
3. If the Government will not cease charges, then charges should only rise after new technology allowing free flowing use of the crossing is introduced, (which could allow up to 1800 vehicles per lane per hour) and that any further increases in such charges should be introduced infrequently thereafter, and not in such frequent successive stages.
4. That variable message signs, rather than fixed signs indicating what the charges are should be introduced.
5. That, if for any reason the queue associated with the crossing reaches Junction 30 southbound or Junction 2 northbound, that the charges should be suspended until the queue has reduced to Junction 31 southbound and Junction 1 northbound.
6. That the three local Members of Parliament, the Local Enterprise Partnership and the Federation of Small Businesses are copied this Council’s response.
7. That as soon as information is available that there is a problem on the crossing that the variable message signs, in particular on the M11 approaching the M25 southbound, should indicate this so that drivers can choose a different route so that they are better informed to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 28.

The Government has recently published proposals for the introduction of single voter registration. These proposals are open for comment both within and outside Parliament and the Chairman of this Committee has asked for this to be submitted to this meeting to establish whether members have any comments.

A extract of the proposals is attached for consideration. The Assistant to the Chief Executive (who is also the Registration Officer) will give a brief outline orally of current Government plans.

Ian Willett, the Assistant to the Chief Executive and Returning/Registration Officer introduced the Governments proposals for single voter registration. The White Paper proposes that each elector register to vote individually rather than as households as happens at the moment. It will also mean that voter registration would become a matter of voter’s choice, and that it was the responsibility of the voter to let us know of any changes.

The new system will make it easier for voters to register by looking to modernise the system of registration. The current system had not kept pace with technological advances and is largely paper based. It is hoped that the new system will be more accurate and help reduce fraud and it will also give the Police more time to investigate fraud from one year to two years, This system is due to come into effect by 2015 with transitional arrangements in place before the next general election.

In registering, the voter will have to produce identification such as a NI Number and Date of Birth. After registration the NI Number would be deleted from the system, but the Date of Birth would continue to be held.

The annual householder canvas will continue for the time being to capture any changes in households.

The total costs to move to Individual Electoral Registration (IER) was estimated at  £108million; this had been funded as part of the spending review settlement and includes £85million resource funding in 2014/15 to fund registration officers to make contact with each potential elector to invite them to register in 2014.

After 2015 only IER voters would be on the register, voters who have not registered under IER by 2015 are removed from the register. However, safeguards will be put in place for the General Election in 2015 so that existing electors who fail to register under IER in 2014 are not removed.

The Committee noted that no recommendations had been attached to this report; the government had set out their plans and would get these changes through parliament, as a District Council we have to concentrate on how we implement these changes and leave it to the government to sort out the details.

The Chairman asked how many forms are sent out each year and was told that 54,000 householder forms were sent out annually. He asked if the Government paid for this and was told that that we had to pay for this annual canvass.  And, with this extra paperwork for IER coming our way, would we still have to pay, Mr Willett replied that the government had created a ‘fighting fund’ we could draw on, to help bring these changes in; this would be proportional to our electoral roll. It would cost more for us in the long run, but the costs would come after the transition period.

The Chairman asked if the initial data matching would need people authorised to do it. He was told that it would.

Councillor Sartin asked why the table of figures  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

(Councillor D Stallan – Chairman, Constitution and Members Services Scrutiny Panel) To consider the attached report.

Councillor Stallan the Chairman of the Constitution and Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel, introduced their report proposing the amendment to Council procedure rules on reports on Outside Organisations and the future work programme for the Panel. The constitution did not stipulate if a report given on outside bodies should be written or oral. The Panel thought that the reports should be in writing and circulated with the Council agenda in advance of the meeting so that other Councillors could ask questions without notice. The Committee agreed; they also noted the Panels additions to their work programme.

            RESOLVED:

(1)        That Council Procedure Rule 2 be amended by substituting the existing paragraph (ix) with the following:

“(ix)      receive from Council representatives written reports circulated in advance with the agenda for the meeting concerned on the business of joint arrangements and external organisations and to receive answers to any questions on those bodies which may be put without notice “

and by adding the following new rule (to be numbered (x)):

“(x)  request written reports from representatives on joint arrangements and external organisations for future meetings;

and that the following sub paragraphs of Rule 2 be renumbered accordingly.

(2)        That the Committee noted that the Panel intended to conduct further reviews during the current Council year on:

(a)        outside organisations on which the Council is represented; and

(b)        arrangements for circulation of written material to Councillors.

(a)               To consider the updated 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, and then time will be allocated to the items contained in the reserve work plan.

(a)        Work Programme

(i)         Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Noted that item 3, Scrutiny of Epping Forest Local Strategic Partnership, had been deferred to the October meeting.

(ii)                           Housing Standing Panel

Noted their work programme was on target.

(iii)       Constitution and Member Services Standing Panel

Noted that this had been dealt with by the previous agenda item.

(iv)      Safer Cleaner Greener Standing Panel

Noted that there was a cross Panel item under section 10 of the Planning Services work programme on ‘Environment Agency Consultation’.

(v)       Planning Services Standing Panel

Noted that the Panel was reviewing their terms of reference  and that a report would be brought to a future meeting of the main O&S Committee.

(vi)      Finance and Performance Management Standing Panel

Noted their work programme.

RECOMMENDATION:

To appoint a representative to the meeting on 15 September 2011.

The Council has been invited to engage in discussions on the proposed merger of Barts and The London, Whipps Cross and Newham NHS Trusts, at a meeting to be held on 15 September. They propose to:

• Provide and overview of the vision for the merger, including the benefits and opportunities for patients and staff;
• Provide an opportunity to discuss the proposal and raise questions directly to senior clinicians and managers from the three hospitals;
• Seek our views on how we can continue to engage with key stakeholders in the next stages of planning for the new organisation; and
• Outline the next steps and approval process.

The meeting will take place on Thursday, 15 September 2001, starting at 10am until 12pm. The venue will be West Ham United Football Club.

Before we attend this proposed review, we need to appoint a representative and the Committee is asked to do so. That representative should report back to the next O&S Committee on the outcome and any future consequences for the District.

The Committee noted that the Council had been invited to engage in discussions on the proposed merger of Barts and the London, Whipps Cross and Newham NHS Trusts at a meeting to be held on 15 September. They also noted that a representative had to be appointed to attend on behalf of the Council and that this representative should report back to the next O&S Committee on the outcome and  on any future consequences for the District.

            RESOLVED:

That Councillor K Chana be appointed the Council representative to the meeting on the proposed merger of Barts and the London, Whipps Cross and Newham NHS trusts.

(Assistant to the Chief Executive) to consider the attached report.

The Committee noted that the Council meeting on 26 July 2011 passed a resolution relating to the contract to the previous Chief Executive saying:

“That the Council refers for review by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee the detail of procedures for reporting such complex and sensitive contacts to Councillors and the procedure to be followed in the event that the Council is considering entering into such contracts.”

The Committee agreed that a Task and Finish Panel be set up to review these procedures. They agreed that it should be a small, forward looking Panel, working quickly and reporting back by the end of this year. They noted that the Audit and Governance Committee would also need sight of this report.

            RESOLVED:

(1)               That a Task and Finish Panel be established to review the procedures for the granting of a fixed term employment contract for a future Chief Executive;

(2)               That the following Councillors be appointed to the Panel: Councillors K Angold-Stephens (Chairman), A Grigg, Jon Whitehouse, R Bassett and D Stallan; and

(3)               That the Panel should report back to the Committee by the end of 2011 if possible.

RECOMMENDATION:

To consider any items to be raised by the Chairman at the Cabinet meeting on 12 September 2011.

(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 12 September 2011 Cabinet agenda (previously circulated) to see whether there are any items that they wished to be raised at the Cabinet meeting.

The Committee reviewed the Cabinets agenda for their 12 September meeting but there were no specific items that the Committee wanted to be brought to their attention.