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.

It was noted that Councillor Mrs J Hart was substituting for Councillor K Angold-Stephens and Councillor J Knapman was substituting for Councillor Mrs M McEwen.

Decisions required:

To confirm the minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 17 July 2012.

RESOLVED:

That the minutes of the last meeting of the Committee held on 17 July 2012 be agreed.

(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.

(1)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor J Knapman declared a non-pecuniary interest in the following item of the agenda by virtue of having been a Portfolio Holder when his issue had been discussed. The Councillor indicated that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• Item 8 Cabinet Review.

(2)        Pursuant to the Council’s Code of Member Conduct, Councillor D Wixley declared a non-pecuniary interest in the following item of the agenda by virtue of being a member of the Friends of Epping Forest. The Councillor indicated that he would remain in the meeting for the consideration of the application and voting thereon:

• Item 6 Presentation from the City of London Corporation.

To receive a presentation from Paul Thompson Superintendent of Epping Forest from the City of London Corporation on the management of Epping Forest.

Also in attendance will be Judy Adams, Chairman of  Friends of Epping Forest.

The Committee received a presentation from Mr P Thompson, Superintendent of Epping Forest of the City of London Corporation, on the management of the forest. He said that:

Epping Forest was 12 miles long and covered an area of 9.2 square miles. It was London’s biggest open space, was amongst the oldest forests in the country and had been a royal forest. The Epping Forest Acts of 1878 and 1880 had made the forest a public area providing commoner’s rights. The forest was currently administered by a committee of 16 members of whom 12 came from the City of London. The Corporation of London had invested £6.8 million in the forest of which £1.5 million had been spent on a visitor centre in Chingford to complement the Queen Elizabeth Hunting Lodge.

The forest received 4.3 million visitors per year, with 12,000 visitors per day. The forest protected rare habitats and hosted a wide range of recreational activities including walking, dog walking, cycling, riding, golf courses, cricket pitches, running events and football (58 pitches on Wanstead Flats and 77 in Waltham Forest). The corporation had implemented a new grazing strategy with invisible electronic fencing to control cattle, had invested £400,000 on Butler’s Retreat, Chingford (a refreshment kiosk), a new 40mph speed limit had been imposed in the forest and there was a major volunteer programme with 20,000 hours of volunteer time.

Mr P Thompson informed the committee that there was a Management Plan Public Consultation taking place with 40 themes, the consultation was asking participants to prioritise these 40 themes.

In attendance, by invitation, was Ms J Adams, Chairman of Friends of Epping Forest, introduced herself to the committee, the organisation had been established for 43 years and had 1,700 members. The organisation was a registered charity, its intention was to protect the forest, increase participation with a programme of guided walks. They consulted on planning applications and dog control. They attended fairs and events, and worked closely with the Conservators.

Questions from the Committee

(1)        Councillor D Wixley – Now that the new visitor’s centre, known as “The View,” has opened at Chingford what is the future of the visitor’s centre at High Beech as I understand that its opening hours have been reduced and have heard rumours that it may close?

Reply – Mr P Thompson advised that the new visitor centre at Chingford had better public transport access than the visitor centre at High Beech and with the new centre costing £130,000 to run, the corporation could not fund both centres. The option of maintaining the High Beech centre by the third sector was being explored through a tender exercise with the centre currently closed during this period.

(2)        Councillor Mrs H Kane – Are there any plans to re-instate the Forest Festival which always seemed very popular with the public?

Reply – The Forest Festival was attended by 30,000 people each year and cost £45,000 to stage. However due to significant cuts being made, the corporation could  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

(a)                 To consider the updated work programme

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

(b)               Reserve Programme

New Item for Work Programme - Councillor James Hart has submitted a new item of work (attached) for the Committee to consider.

The Committee were advised of the following:

(1)        Item 1 Scrutiny of London Underground Ltd

This item was now hoped to be scheduled for October 2012 and would include transport issues from the Olympic period.

(2)        Item 9 Broadband Access in the District

This item was scheduled for the October meeting.

(3)        Item 14 Review the new organisational make up of the PCT/West Essex Health Service

This item was connected to Item 16 Mental Health Services in the District. Members were interested in how the District Council would be involved in health provision. Officers suggested that joint scrutiny could take place with neighbouring councils.

(4)        Housing Scrutiny Standing Panel

The committee noted their current programme of work.

(5)        Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel

The Committee noted their current programme of work.

(6)        Safer Cleaner Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel

The Committee noted their current programme of work.

(7)        Planning Services Scrutiny Standing Panel

The Panel Chairman advised that the meeting scheduled for 11 September was cancelled due to lack of business. It was confirmed that the next Panel meeting was on 11 December.

(8)        Finance and Performance Management Scrutiny Standing Panel

The Panel had not met since the last Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting.

(9)        Overview and Scrutiny Review Task and Finish Panel

The Committee was advised that Democratic Services had recruited voluntarily an Undergraduate Intern, N Trower, who was assisting the Assistant to the Chief Executive with a review of scrutiny. A note would be placed in the Bulletin requesting members for their input into the review, and some members would be approached by N Trower for interviews.

(a)        Request by Member for Scrutiny Review 2012/13 Work Programme

Councillors J Hart and Mrs S Watson had submitted a Request for Scrutiny Review regarding a review of the Council’s licensing committee. The proposal was to consider licensing applications in a similar way to planning applications, these were:

(i)         Move the meetings to the evening so that Councillors with full time jobs could join the committee;

(ii)        Create south, east and west licensing sub-committees, so local councillors with local knowledge could decide the cases; and

(iii)       In cases where nightclubs, pubs or shops applied for changes to the hours in which they were licensed to sell alcohol, the relevant parish/town, district and county councillors and the nearest 50 residential properties to the application premises should be informed by letter to make them aware that an application had been submitted.

The Councillors added that it was not unusual for Councillors drawn from rural parts of the district to decide upon licensing applications that had an impact upon residents living in places like Loughton or Buckhurst Hill. Some Councillors deciding these cases may not have visited these places on weekend nights and lacked essential local knowledge. Many Councillors had full time occupations and were thus prevented from joining or attending these committees which met in day time. It was felt that Members of working age were being dis-enfranchised  ...  view the full minutes text for item 27.

RECOMMENDATION:

To consider any items to be raised by the Chairman at the Cabinet meeting on 10 September 2012.

(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 10 September 2012 Cabinet agenda (previously circulated) to see whether there are any items that they wished to be raised at the Cabinet meeting.

It was noted that Direct Action at the Old Foresters site, Theydon Bois was being processed as a Portfolio Holder Decision. It was hoped that this would take place before the forthcoming Cabinet meeting.

To  consider the attached report of the Constitution & Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel

The Committee received a report from the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel regarding the Terms of Reference of the Audit and Governance Committee (AGC).

The Constitution of the Audit and Governance Committee was set out in Article 11 of the Constitution. Previously the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel had looked at the question of whether Portfolio Holder Assistants should be able to serve as members of the Audit and Governance Committee. The Committee also indicated that Article 11 should be reviewed. The report before the Overview and Scrutiny Committee resulted from consideration of the Audit and Governance Committee’s ideas.

RECOMMENDED:

That a report be submitted to Council recommending:

(1)        That the following alterations to the Terms of Reference of the Audit and Governance Committee as set out in Article 11 of the Constitution be approved:

(a)        removal of the requirement for the three seats for councillors on the Committee to be allocated according to pro rata rules;

(b)        inclusion of new membership requirements for the three Councillor seats, namely:

(i)         that the seats should be allocated so they are not all drawn from one political group and are also open to Councillors who are not affiliated to any political group;

(ii)        that the three Councillors concerned should be appointed on the basis of experience, aptitude and interest on the recommendation of the Council’s Appointments Panel;

(iii)       that formal attendance standards be operated in respect of the three Councillor members when re-appointment is under consideration by theCouncil’s Appointments Panel;

(iv)       that the Chairman and co-opted members of the Audit and Governance Committee be consulted informally about the appointment or re-appointment of Councillors at the appropriate time;

(c)        appointment of the Chairman and Vice Chairman to be the responsibility of the Committee rather than the Annual Council meeting;

(d)        the offices of Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Committee to be open to Councillors or co-opted members on an equal basis provided that where the Chairman is a Councillor, the Vice Chairman shall be one of the co-opted members and vice versa;

(e)        co-opted members of the Committee to be subject to the same informal attendance and performance standards as apply to Councillor members of the Committee during their terms of office as set out in paragraph (b)(iii) above;

(f)         co-opted members to serve for overlapping terms of three years subject to the following conditions:

(i)         a maximum of two consecutive three year terms as of right  subject to the attendance review set out in (e) above on an annual basis; and

(ii)        re-appointment for a third and fourth term to be allowable subject to success in open competition following a public advertisement at the conclusion of the second three year term;

(g)        determination of starting dates for the new three year terms of office for the existing co-opted members to be delegated to the Audit and GovernanceCommittee;

(2)        That the revisions to Article 11 of the Constitution relating to the Audit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 29.

To  consider the attached report of the Constitution & Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel

The Committee received a report from the Chairman of the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel regarding the Member Complaints Panel – Limits of Jurisdiction.

The Member Complaints Panel (CP) was responsible for considering complaints at Step 4 of the Council’s complaints procedure. Certain types of complaints fell outside the jurisdiction of the Panel and could not therefore be considered at Step 4.

RECOMMENDED:

That a report be submitted to Council recommending:

(1)        That revisions to the limits of jurisdiction of the Complaints Panel be approved; and

(2)        That a report be submitted to the Council recommending that Annex 1 (section 1) to the Terms of Reference of the Complaints Panel be amended as set out in paragraph 3 and published in the Constitution.

To  consider the attached report of the Constitution & Member Services Standing Scrutiny Panel

The Committee received a report from the Chairman of the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel regarding Substitutions at Meetings.

The District Council’s Constitution allowed for the nomination of substitutes for Committees, Sub-Committees, panels, Boards and Groups.

At the Constitution and Member Services Scrutiny Standing Panel in July 2012, members discussed the review of the substitution process and were satisfied with the current procedures. It was advised that the generic email “Democratic Services” for Group representatives to use when notifying Democratic services officers of substitutions, had not always been used. Members recommended that Operational Standing Order 14 – Non Executive Bodies should be amended, as paragraphs 1 and 3 were no longer needed, it was for the Chief Executive to undertake these tasks.

RECOMMENDED:

That a report be submitted to Council recommending that Operational Standing Order 14 (Non Executive Bodies) be amended as shown in the Appendix to this report as follows:

(a)        by deleting existing paragraphs 14 (1) and (3);

(b)        by re-numbering existing paragraph 14 (4) as paragraph (1); and

(c)        amending paragraph 14 (2) to read as shown in the Appendix.

(Safer Cleaner Greener Standing Panel) - To consider the attached report.

The Committee received a report from the Chairman of the Safer Cleaner Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel requesting an amendment to the Panel’s Terms of Reference.

The Committee agreed to the amended Terms of Reference.

RESOLVED:

That the amended Terms of Reference for the Safer Cleaner Greener Scrutiny Standing Panel be agreed as set out in the appendix to these minutes.