Agenda and minutes

*O&S 64

Apologies for absence for this meeting were received from Cllr C Kemp.

Committee Meeting held on 19 November 2019

*O&S 65         

The minutes of the Meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on 19 November 2019 were confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.

Members are invited to declare any personal or disclosable pecuniary interests, including the nature and extent of such interests they may have in any items to be considered at this meeting.

If Councillors have any questions relating to predetermination, bias or interests in items on this Agenda, then please contact the Monitoring Officer in advance of the meeting.

*O&S 66         

Members and officers were invited to declare any interests in the items of business to be considered during the course of this meeting and these were recorded as follows:-

Cllr K Ball declared a personal interest in agenda item 7: ‘A386/Rail Project’ (Minute *O&S 68 below refers) by virtue of being:

-      the Chairman of the Devon and Exeter Rail Forum;

-      the Vice-Chairman of the Okehampton Rail Forum; and

-      a fellow Devon County Council Conservative Group Member as the presenting lead Cabinet Member.

and remained in the meeting and took part in the discussion on this agenda item.

A period of up to 15 minutes is available to deal with issues raised by the public.   

*O&S 67         

The Chairman informed that one formal request had been received in accordance with the Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules from Mr Brian Lamb.  At this point, Mr Lamb read the following statement to the Committee:

“I have some rail knowledge having been a member of the Devon & Cornwall Rail Partnership for 20 years and I have also assisted members of Devon County Council Rail Planning Team. It is fortunate that the County Council have expended vast sums on land purchases, environmental assessments and engineering surveys for the Tavistock line.  Consequently it has been ready since 2016 to go forward for a Development Consent Order.

It is most encouraging that a National window appears to be opening with the Treasury £4.2 billion being allocated for the local public transport fund; a small part of which should support the reopening of the Tavistock and Okehampton Rail Lines.

However, this has to be supported by a business case, using the strength of Rail against car transport; the Tavistock draft timetables show journey times of under 30 minutes and this will bring in travellers to the new Dockyard Marine development and University (with about 22,500 students and staff,) it will still require bus connections at each end for other destinations.  It will also have a huge influence on tourism in Tavistock in a similar way to the reopening of the Border Railway.

The cost has increased but it still compares with other rail schemes in the UK.  For example, it will cost £30 million to repair two miles of embankment at Piddington, east of Bicester. Whether we need a track at the highest standard has been questioned, as has the expensive GRIP process of Network Rail, which can escalate costs.

I find it difficult to understand the track proposal, of a layer of tarmac, will take cycles and electric buses.  It would have to be rebuilt to road standards, which are more expensive than rail and you will still have to rebuild two bridges, Tavistock platforms and modify Bere Alston Station with the new farm road that has been planned. 

Changing vehicles at Bere Alston immediately loses all rail advantage. However, Light Rail or even use of the new ‘D’ trains (at half the normal cost should be investigated.) Remember the franchise document of GWR requires them to supply trains for both of our lines. It also means the use of local rail workshops with local replacements for vehicles out of action.

Madam Chair I am asking that you and your committee lead the Council, and the County Council, together with the Chamber of Commerce and aided by our M.P. who is already supporting both schemes, in a massive lobby to the DFT for allocation of the capital monies to the South West for our schemes.  Otherwise traffic congestion, health along the A386 corridor and pollution of our towns will require far more drastic steps in the future.

In conclusion, ‘we want our money and TAP27 is our slogan.”  ...  view the full minutes text for item *O&S 67

If any Member seeks further clarity, or wishes to raise issues regarding any future Hub Committee agenda item, please contact Member Services before 5.00pm on Thursday, 9 January 2020 to ensure that the lead officer(s) are aware of this request in advance of the meeting.

*O&S 68         

It was noted that no prior requests had been received for updates on any future Hub Committee agenda items at this meeting.

Nonetheless, officers proceeded to provide the following updates:

(a)    It was intended that the Homelessness Strategy would be added to the Plan for consideration by the Hub Committee at its meeting on 9 June 2020; and

(b)    The Wellbeing Strategy agenda item was to be deferred to the Hub Committee meeting on 21 April 2020 to enable for an all Member Workshop to be held before the draft Strategy was then formally presented to the Committee.

*O&S 69         

In light of the Committee decision at its meeting on 8 October 2019 (Minute *O&S 41 refers), Cllr Andrea Davis (Devon County Council (DCC) lead Cabinet Member for Rail) and lead DCC officers were in attendance to respond to Member questions on the A386 / Rail Project.

The Chairman welcomed the DCC representatives and advised that, in response to her request, 18 questions had been received in advance of this meeting (as attached at Appendix A to these minutes).

In responding to each of these questions, the DCC representatives made particular reference to:-

(a)   approximately 90% of the proposed rail line currently being within the ownership of DCC.  However, there were a number of challenges associated with acquiring the remaining 10%;

(b)   a copy of a paper entitled: ‘Tavistock Rail Reinstatement – Summary of Cost Estimate from Options Report July 2016’ was circulated to the meeting.  In considering this paper, the Committee was informed that Central Government normally sought between 10% and 20% of the total project costs from local contributions, which would require between £15 and 20 million to be generated locally towards the delivery of this project;

(c)   the escalating costs.  The Committee was informed that, the greater the level of discussions that had taken place between DCC and the rail industry, the more complicated it was proving to be to re-establish the Tavistock to Bere Alston rail link.  For example, the routes to Bere Alston and Gunnislake were proving to be particularly difficult;

(d)   the ‘Beeching Reversal Fund’.  DCC representatives confirmed that they were intending to submit a Bid (once the guidance had been produced) to the ‘Beeching Reversal Fund’ that had been created by the Department of Transport.  Members proceeded to pledge their support to help with the submission of this Bid.  By way of caution, the Committee acknowledged that the £500 million fund was likely to be oversubscribed and, whilst this rail line was the top priority for DCC from this fund, there were still no guarantees that the Bid would be successful;

(e)   a potential cycle route between Yelverton and Roborough.  The DCC representatives recognised that this was a good idea.  However, DCC had virtually no funding for such schemes and its priorities were to ensure the completion of the current list (which this route was not part of).  Some Members stressed both the importance of providing routes for ‘commuter’ cyclists (rather than just ‘hobby’ cyclists) and the dangerous nature of the A386.  The representatives recognised these views and highlighted that there were potential alternative options available through the use of Section 106 funds and/or progressing dialogue with Plymouth City Council (in light of the potential health and wellbeing benefits to the residents of Plymouth).  In addition, since cycle routes were not within her portfolio area of responsibility, the lead Member gave a commitment to brief her relevant DCC Cabinet colleague;

(f)     relationships between DCC and the rail industry.  The lead Member expressed the view that  ...  view the full minutes text for item *O&S 69

O&S 70          

The Committee considered a report that sought consideration of the draft Revenue Budget proposals for 2020/21.

During the ensuing debate, the following points were raised:-

(a)   It was confirmed that the proposal to recruit a temporary Climate Change Policy Officer would be on a shared (50/50 basis) with South Hams District Council;

(b)  In respect of the modelling work that was to be undertaken on car parking fees, it was confirmed that the Council would consult with its key stakeholders as part of this process.  Also, the Leader advised that it was intended that this modelling would look at sites on a place by place basis;

(c)   With regard to the proposed Economy post, officers advised that it was intended that one of the key roles of the postholder would be to write and submit bids in order to obtain external grant funding;

(d)  When questioned, officers gave an assurance that they would continue to lobby Central Government in order to ensure that legislation was changed whereby business rates were no longer payable on public conveniences;

(e)   Members were informed that the result of the 2019 Pension Actuarial Valuation would also be considered by the Audit Committee at its meeting on 21 January 2020;

(f)     The Committee discussed the proposal to introduce a premium planning service and, whilst the intention of the initiative was recognised, the majority of Members did not feel it appropriate to introduce it at this present time;

(g)   Before the Council made a final decision to implement a pricing scheme for the use of the Electric Charging Points that were situated at Kilworthy Park, Tavistock, the Committee requested that the current usage of these Points be established.  Also, Members asked that an answer be provided as to whether or not the current Points would need to be replaced in order to be able to charge users.

It was then:

RESOLVED

That, as part of the 2020/21 Budget Setting process, the Hub Committee take into account that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee support:

1.     the proposed increase in Council Tax for 2020/21 of £5 (Band D of £236.63 for 2020/21 – an increase of 10 pence per week or £5 per year – equates to a 2.16% increase);

2.     the proposed financial pressures of £638,500 (as shown in Appendix A of the presented agenda report);

3.     the proposed contributions to Earmarked Reserves of £87,500;

4.     the proposed savings of £535,000 (as shown in Appendix A of the presented agenda report);

5.     the proposed use of £200,000 of New Homes Bonus funding to fund the 2020/21 Revenue Budget (as set out in Section 2.20 of the presented agenda report);

6.     the proposal to maintain the deficit recovery period of the Pension Deficit at 17 years (as per Section 2.26 of the presented agenda report);

7.     the inclusion of an Economy post (to be shared with South Hams District Council) within the staffing establishment, as set out in Section 1.7 of the presented agenda report;

8.  ...  view the full minutes text for item *O&S 70

*O&S 71         

Members considered a report that set out the Capital Bids to the 2020/21 Capital Programme and a suggested way that these Bids could be funded.

Following a brief discussion on the moveable swimming pool floor at Parklands Leisure Centre, it was then:

RESOLVED

That, as part of the 2020/21 Budget Setting process, the Hub Committee take into account that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee support approval of:

1.     the Capital Programme Proposals totalling £910,000 (as set out in Appendix A of the presented agenda report);

2.     the Capital Programme Proposals totalling £140,000 (as set out in exempt Appendix C of the presented agenda report); and

3.     the proposed funding of the 2020/21 Capital Programme of £1,050,000 be funded as set out in Section 4 of the presented agenda report.

*O&S 72         

The Committee considered the annual review of Safeguarding and that recommended approval of the revised Safeguarding Policy.

In the ensuing debate, an additional recommendation was PROPOSED and SECONDED to read as follows:-

‘That the Member Development Steering Group be tasked with adding a Safeguarding related Member training session to the Learning and Development Plan and consider the merits of whether or not Members should be subject to DBS Checks.’

When put to the vote, this addition was declared CARRIED.

It was then:

RESOLVED

1.     That the Committee continue to review Safeguarding on an annual basis;

2.     That the Hub Committee RECOMMEND to Council that the revised Safeguarding Policy (as attached at Appendix A of the presented agenda report) be adopted; and

3.     That the Member Development Steering Group be tasked with adding a Safeguarding related Member training session to the Learning and Development Plan and consider the merits of whether or not Members should be subject to DBS Checks.

*O&S 73         

The Committee considered a report that presented the initial views of the Member Development Steering Group on the review into the 2019 Induction Programme.

In discussion, the following points were raised:-

(a)   In support of the proposed way forward, the Chairman of the Steering Group advised that the next meeting had been scheduled to take place on 18 February 2020 and there was still time for Members to provide their views on the 2019 Member Induction Programme;

(b)   In thanking lead officers for their work on the Member Learning and Development agenda, Members were of the view that the 2019 Induction Programme was a vast improvement on the equivalent Programme in 2015.

It was then:

RESOLVED

That the Committee notes the initial views of the Member Development Steering Group on the 2019 Member Induction Programme (as set out in Section 3 of the presented agenda report) and has been given the opportunity to make formal representations on the Programme for the Steering Group to consider at its next meeting.

*O&S 74         

On behalf of the lead Hub Committee Member, the Chairman made reference to a number of key documents that were currently subject to a public consultation exercise.

(a)  Leisure Review: Concluding Report                            - To follow

*O&S 75         

(a)   Leisure Review: Concluding Report

A report was considered that presented the conclusions of the Task and Finish Group review into the Council’s Leisure Contract with Fusion Lifestyle.

In discussion, reference was made to:-

(a)  the work of the Group Members.  The Committee paid tribute to the Group Chairman and Members for their hard work and efforts in undertaking such an excellent review.  Furthermore, thanks were also extended to the lead officer and the Fusion Lifestyle staff who had been instrumental in the review;

(b)  the recommendations arising from the Review.  The Committee endorsed each of the recommendations arising from the Review and felt that it was very important for these findings to be forwarded to Fusion Lifestyle representatives before they gave their annual presentation to the Committee on 25 February 2020;

(c)    the wish to re-convene the Task and Finish Group in a further three years’ time was noted;

(d)   community engagement levels.  In reply to a question, the lead officer advised that community engagement levels were on an annual upward trend and this point had been reinforced by the Fusion Lifestyle Community Development Team during the Review.

It was then:

RESOLVED

That the conclusions arising from the review be noted and the Committee request that these findings be forwarded to Fusion Lifestyle representatives in advance of their presentation to the Committee at its next meeting on 25 February 2020.

This document can be made available in large print, Braille, tape format, other languages or alternative format upon request. Please contact the Committee section on 01822 813662 or email darryl.white@swdevon.gov.uk

*O&S 76         

The Committee considered the latest version of its Work Programme for the remainder of the 2019/20 Municipal Year. 

In discussion, the Committee asked that, with regard to the ‘Planning Enforcement: Verbal Update’ agenda item that was to be considered at its next meeting on 25 February 2020, all Members take a Borough wide view of the Service and refrain from focusing on issues within their own local Wards.

*O&S 77         

In her concluding comments, the Chairman asked that the thanks and well wishes of the Committee be passed on to the Democratic Services Specialist, who was about to embark on a twelve month secondment opportunity with the Local Government Association.