Agenda item

(i)         Hub Committee

            Meeting held on 7 June 2016                                                                  

Unstarred Minute to agree

            Members are recommended to agree:

            HC 03 Options for Future Garden Waste Service

Design

RESOLVED to RECOMMEND that, at the time that the waste services contract be formally procured:

1.    An opt-in financially sustainable garden waste recycling service with collection from reusable sacks be approved;

2.    Concessions to the service be applied for residents on low incomes;

3.    A comprehensive publicity campaign be delivered highlighting the positive messaging around the retention of the service despite budgetary cuts and that the Council has considered the fairest method for residents;

4.    A structured campaign be delivered to promote home composting (as the best environmental option) along with community composting; and

5.    Any changes considered necessary to the terms as highlighted be delegated to the Lead Specialist Waste Strategy (Strategy and Commissioning) in consultation with the lead Hub Committee Member for Commercial Services.

HC 06 Planning Obligations Threshold

RESOLVED to RECOMMEND that:

1.     In areas with special designations, planning obligations to provide Affordable Housing in accordance with the Core Strategy will be sought from planning applications for 6 or more units of residential accommodation; and

2.     In Tavistock and Okehampton, if the planning site does not fall within a designated special area, planning obligations will be sought on 11 units or more.

HC 07 Transitional Resources Report

RESOLVED to RECOMMEND that:

1.     The use of temporary, fixed term transitional resources be approved to improve service levels and customer satisfaction;

2.     The use of £215,522 of unused New Homes Bonus funding (as shown in Section 5 of the presented agenda report to the Hub Committee) be approved to fund the temporary transitional staffing resources (as set out in Appendix A of the agenda report presented to the Hub Committee);

3.     The remaining £58,478 (of the £274,000 unused New Homes Bonus funding as shown in Section 5 of the presented agenda report to the Hub Committee) be allocated as a contingency budget for Disabled Facilities Grants; and

4.        The Overview and Scrutiny (Internal) Committee be asked to undertake an interim review of the T18 Programme, with the Terms of Reference for this Review being agreed by the Executive Director (Strategy and Commissioning) in consultation with the lead Hub Committee Members for Customer First and Economy.

CM 21                                                                

a     Hub Committee – 7 June 2016

It was moved by Cllr P R Sanders, seconded by Cllr M J R Benson and upon being submitted to the Meeting was declared to be CARRIED and “RESOLVED that the Minutes of the 7 June 2016 meeting be received and noted, with the exception of Unstarred Minutes HC 03, 06 and 07”.

In respect of the Unstarred Minutes:

i HC 03 Options for Future Garden Waste Service Design

In introducing the Hub Committee recommendations, the lead Member for Commercial Services made particular reference to:-

-       the huge amount of work that had been undertaken by officers and the Working Group to get to this point;

-       these recommendations being driven by the significant budgetary pressures facing the Council;

-       neighbouring local authorities currently considering similar initiatives;

-       the proposed charges (albeit only an indicative figure at present) being lower than comparable local authorities who already levied a charge for the service; and

-       the proposals ensuring that the Council would be able to sustain an excellent garden waste service.

The lead Member proceeded to move the Hub Committee recommendations (as outlined below):

That, at the time that the waste services contract be formally procured:-

1.  An opt-in financially sustainable garden waste recycling service with collection from reusable sacks be approved;

2. Concessions to the service be applied for residents on low incomes;

3. A comprehensive publicity campaign be delivered highlighting the positive messaging around the retention of the service despite budgetary cuts and that the Council has considered the fairest methods for residents;

4. A structured campaign be delivered to promote home compositing (as the best environmental option) along with community composting; and

5.  Any changes considered necessary to the terms as highlighted be delegated to the Lead Specialist Waste Strategy (Strategy and Commissioning) in consultation with the lead Hub Committee Member for Commercial Services.

In seconding these recommendations, the Leader of Council advised that he did so with a degree of reluctance.  It was noted that this reluctance was borne out of his opposition to the concept of charging for the Garden Waste Service.  However, this opposition had to be balanced against the serious long-term financial budget pressures that were facing the Council.

In the ensuing discussion, the following points were raised:-

(a)   Some Members highlighted the level of local opposition to these proposals that they had been made aware of by their respective constituents;

(b)   In support of the recommendations, a Member was of the view that local residents would prefer to pay for a service than lose it altogether.  Furthermore, some Members were of the view that the indicative charges were not excessive and represented good value for money for such an excellent service;

(c)    Some Members also expressed the view that the administrative, bureaucratic and other unforeseen costs associated with the proposals were likely to be much higher than anticipated;

(d)   In addition to the reputational risks to the Council, the potential for the proposals to lead to neighbour disputes was also emphasised by a Member;

(e)   In light of the budgetary climate, a number of Members repeated the views of the proposer and seconder and stated the need for such difficult decisions to be made in order to preserve the long-term sustainability of the Council.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 19(5), a recorded vote was then called for on the motion and was subsequently recorded as follows:-

For the motion (9):            Cllrs Cheadle, Edmonds, Kimber, Musgrave, Pearce, Roberts, Sampson, Sanders and Sheldon

Against the motion (18):  Cllrs Ball, Benson, Cann OBE, Cloke, Davies, Jory, Leech, McInnes, Moody, Mott, Moyse, Oxborough, Ridgers, Samuel, Sellis, Stephens, Watts and Yelland.

Abstentions (0):            

Absent (4):                          Cllrs Baldwin, Evans, Hockridge and Parker.

and the vote was therefore declared LOST.

i.    HC 06 Planning Obligations Threshold

It was moved by Cllr P R Sanders, seconded by Cllr M J R Benson and upon being submitted to the Meeting was declared to be CARRIED and “RESOLVED that:

1.  In areas with special designations, planning obligations to provide Affordable Housing in accordance with the Core Strategy will be sought from planning applications for 6 or more units of residential accommodation; and

2.  In Tavistock and Okehampton, if the planning site does not fall within a designated special area, planning obligations will be sought on 11 units or more.”

ii.   HC 07 Transitional Resources Report

In reply to a question arising from the report, officers confirmed that they would circulate to Members the cost breakdown figures in relation to Disabled Facilities Grants.

In support of part 4 of the proposed recommendation, a Member stated that the intention was not to apportion any blame to individuals as part of this review, but to undertake an open and transparent enquiry to ensure that lessons could be learned for the future.

It was then moved by Cllr C Edmonds, seconded by Cllr R J Oxborough and upon being submitted to the Meeting was declared to be CARRIED and “RESOLVED that:

1.  The use of temporary, fixed term transitional resources be approved to improve service levels and customer satisfaction;

2.  The use of £215,522 of unused New Homes Bonus funding (as shown in Section 5 of the presented agenda report to the Hub Committee) be approved to fund the temporary transitional staffing resources (as set out in Appendix A of the agenda report presented to the Hub Committee);

3.  The remaining £58,478 (of the £274,000 unused New Homes Bonus funding as shown in Section 5 of the presented agenda report to the Hub Committee) be allocated as a contingency budget for Disabled Facilities Grants; and

4.  The Overview and Scrutiny (Internal) Committee be asked to undertake an interim review of the T18 Programme, with the Terms of Reference for this Review being agreed by the Executive Director (Strategy and Commissioning) in consultation with the lead Hub Committee Members for Customer First and Economy.”