DRAFT by keara


									BASINGSTOKE AND DEANE BOROUGH COUNCIL At the meeting of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council held at the Civic Offices, London Road, Basingstoke on 15 February 2007 Present The Worshipful the Mayor Councillor Tony Jones in the Chair and the following Councillors:Cllr Mrs S Allen; Cllr Mrs P Baker; Cllr J Barnes; Cllr M Biermann; Cllr Mrs R Burgess; Cllr Mrs M Brian; Cllr K Chapman; Cllr Mrs A Court; Cllr J Curry; Cllr R Donnell; Cllr J Downes; Cllr T Faulkner; Cllr P Findlow; Cllr A Finney; Cllr Mrs J Frankum; Cllr P Frankum; Cllr R Gardiner; Cllr S Godesen; Cllr A Green; Cllr K Harkess; Cllr P Harvey; Cllr Mrs C Heath; Cllr P Heath; Cllr G Hood; Cllr R Hussey; Cllr Mrs L James; Cllr Mrs D Jones; Cllr S Keating; Cllr J Leek; Cllr D Leeks; Cllr J Lewin; Cllr W Lovegrove; Cllr S Marks; Cllr A McCormick; Cllr H Mitchell; Cllr Mrs C Morrison; Cllr Mrs C Osselton; Cllr S Parker; Cllr D Putty; Cllr Mrs P Read; Cllr K Rhatigan; Cllr Mrs G Richardson; Cllr H Robinson; Cllr Mrs S Rowland; Cllr M Ruffell; Cllr C Sanders; Cllr Mrs E Shaw; Cllr J Shaw; Cllr Mrs E Still; Cllr R Taylor; Cllr I Tilbury; Cllr G Traynor; Cllr Mrs M Tucker; Cllr J Wall; Cllr G Watts; Cllr S West Apologies for Absence: Cllr Mrs A Wall; Cllr B Gurden Link to Webcast 1. Minutes The Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 14 December 2006 were confirmed by the Council as a correct record and signed by the Mayor.


Declarations of Interest Councillor/Officer Cllr Keating Minute Number/Topic 7.5 Re Neighbour Care 8.1 Blue Badge Scheme/Disabled Parking 9/Appendix 9, Question 4 Sports Centre Pool Refurbishment

Cllr Mrs Frankum

Cllrs Putty and Heath



Public Participation No members of the public wished to address Full Council.


Resignations and Replacements for Committees and Outside Bodies 4.1 RESOLVED Cllr Traynor be appointed to the Personnel Committee. RESOLVED That the following were agreed: (1) Hampshire Building Preservation Trust Appointment Cllr Mrs Tucker (2) Basingstoke Music Festival Resignations Cllr Mitchell Replacements Cllr Parker and Cllr Putty (3) The Vyne Centre Appointment Cllr Barnes (4) Relate Appointment Cllr Taylor




Petition The following were presented to Full Council and referred as indicated: Topic Mr M Cookson – BDB 65185 291 Residential Units etc Land north of Churchill Way. Cabinet/Committee to which Petition referred Development Control Committee


Reports to Full Council Electoral Cycle RESOLVED In light of the late advice received from the DCLG (Department of Communities and Local Government), that the Report be noted, and the enactment of the proposed Local Government etc Bill be awaited before resolving on a course of action.


Recommendations from Cabinet/Committees (including Notice of Motion being referred back to Full Council) 7.1 Scrutiny Committee held on 18 January 2007 Scrutiny Constitution Working Party – Length of meetings/Use of External Consultants. Resolved (1) All Council and Committee meetings likely to be of a significant length have “Reserve Dates”; (2) The “Resign and Replace Procedure” should be used so that Councillors who attend potentially lengthy Committees can attend both the main meeting and also any Reserve Date;



It be noted that:(a) Whilst some recent meetings have been particularly long, this is the exception rather than the rule; and


Daytime meetings could be considered, but these would tend to disadvantage both those Councillors and also members of the public who cannot attend daytime meetings.


Cabinet ensures that full use is made of the Overview Committee process for consultation on issues where external consultants are involved; if this has been done, then a Call-in on the grounds of failing to seek the views of Overview Committees should be disallowed; When the Cabinet relies upon advice from Consultants the Overview Committee consultation process should automatically be used and the relevant Consultants must attend Overview Committee meetings. Consultants contracts should be written so as to ensure that the Consultant is available, at one month‟s notice, to attend all relevant Committees; and (Subject to paragraph (1) above) where the Signatories to a Call-in Notice certify that a particular named Consultant is required at a Call-in meeting, the period within which that Call-in meeting must be held should be extended to no more than 28 days from the date of receipt of the Call-in Notice.




(8) That the revised procedure at Meetings of Scrutiny Committee dealing with Call-ins (attached as Appendix 1A) be adopted. (9) (Wherever possible, bearing in mind Proportionality Rules), when members of the Scrutiny Committee are also Signatories to a Call-in Notice, then the “Resign and Replace Procedure” should be used for Members to “resign and be replaced” on the Scrutiny Committee for the duration of the Call-in Meeting.


7.2 Scrutiny Committee held on 18 January 2007 Trusts Single Issue Panel RESOLVED That this matter be referred back to the Scrutiny Committee for reconsideration by the Single Issue Panel and the Constitutional Working Party (and, amongst other things, that the role of Observers be clarified). 7.3 Licensing Committee held on 23 January 2007 Gambling Act 2005 – Changes required to the Council’s Scheme of Delegation RESOLVED (1) Paragraph 5.1 of the Council‟s Constitution be amended (Licensing Committee and Delegations) by the addition of the following delegations after paragraph 13:“Delegated to Committee Licensing functions under the Gambling Act 2006 and regulations thereunder. Delegated to Head of Environmental Health, Licensing and Parking To determine all applications for authorisations under the Act to include the authority to grant, review, refuse and impose conditions on such authorisations except where Section 10(4) of the Licensing Act 2003 as applied to the functions under the Gambling Act 2005 by S1154(4) provide that such functions must be discharged by a Committee or Sub-Committee”; and (2) To give delegated power to the Head of Legal and Democratic Services to amend the Constitution to delete references to the functions under paragraph 3 of the Licensing Committee Delegations, which will be repealed when the Gambling Act 2005 comes fully into force.


7.4 Personnel Committee held on 22 January 2007 Compensation Regulations – Protection of Employment Policy RESOLVED (1) The revised Protection of Employment policy and discretionary compensation tables be approved and effective for all redundancy or other compensatory terminations from 1 April 2007, viz:(a) In redundancy cases:(i) To calculate the compensation and statutory redundancy payment on the employee‟s actual week‟s pay; To link compensation payments to the Government‟s statutory redundancy payment calculator, using a multiplier of 2.75; and Not to offset the statutory redundancy payment against pensions or lump sums which are aid from the Local Government Pension Scheme;




In cases where a joint appointment is terminated:(i) To calculate the compensation and statutory redundancy payment on the employee‟s actual week‟s pay; In redundancy cases, to link compensation payments to the Government‟s statutory redundancy payment calculator, using a multiplier of 2.75; and Not to offset the statutory redundancy payment against pensions or lump sums which are paid from the Local Government Pension Scheme; and




in efficiency cases:(i) Consideration be given to making a one-off payment, based on the merits of each


individual case, up to the maximum permitted under the new regulations (ie 66 week‟s pay calculated on a sum up to the employee‟s actual week‟s pay) taking into account continuous service with employees listed under the Redundancy Payments (Continuity of Employment in Local Government etc) (Modification) Order 1999); and (ii) Continue with the current policy (except in cases of agreed termination by compromise agreement) of awarding augmented service where the costs can be justified; and


Subject to the following minor amendments, on Page 11 of 14 of the draft Protection of Employment Policy, statutory and discretionary tables be approved:(i) Rewording into plain English the phrase in (c) “Any statutory redundancy payment made is in effect subsumed within the maxima allowed”; Replace the word least with worst in (b) of the Criteria for Applying the Regulations; and Avoiding the use of block capitals in the final paragraph “Avoiding Redundancy/Early Retirement”; and




That the policy be reviewed in a year‟s time following the finalising of the changes to the Local Government Pension Scheme currently in consultation.

7.5 Cabinet held on 30 January 2007 Council Plan 2007-2010 and Policy and Budget Framework 2007-8 – Budget Report RESOLVED (1) To approve the Council Plan 2007-2010 in conjunction with the associated Budget Report referred to below.



To approve:(a) The revenue estimates and capital programme, as summarised in Appendices 1 and 2 and supported by the detailed proposed budget book, including the contributions to and from reserves That for the purposes of section 35(2)(d) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, any expenses incurred by the Borough Council in the financial year 2007/08 in performing functions in a part of the district which elsewhere in the district are performed by a Parish Council, shall not be special expenses of the Borough Council That the requirement for Council Tax for Borough purposes be £96.75 band D equivalent as set out in Appendix 3b. The formal resolution based on Appendix 3a and 3b, setting the Council Tax for Borough purposes together with various amounts for parish requirements In accordance with Part 1 of the Local government Act 2003 that, (a) The authorised borrowing limit for 2007/08 be £10 million as set out in Appendix 4 The Prudential Indicators be set as detailed in Appendix 4







That the Chief Finance officer‟s statutory report regarding the robustness of the estimates and the adequacy of reserves detailed in Appendix 5 be noted. NB (1) Councillors Harvey, Watts and Keating wanted their vote against “The vote be put” recorded A recorded vote was requested in respect of an amendment to the Recommendation – Please see Appendix 7




Councillor Green requested a recorded vote in respect of Resolution 7.5 (2) (b) above – Please see Appendix 8

7.6 Cabinet held on 30 January 2007 Treasury Management Strategy 2007/08 RESOLVED To approve the Treasury Management Strategy for 2007/08 as set out in Appendix 6.


Notices of Motion (1) Blue Badge Scheme/Disabled Car Parking Referred to Sustainable Communities Overview Committee.


Police Community Support Officers Referred to Sustainable Communities Overview Committee.


Questions under FCPR 3.18 Detailed in Appendix 9.



Proceedings of committees (1) Minutes for Report & Noting Committee Environment Overview 11 Jan 2007 3 Jan 2007 309-313 Meeting Date Pages

Sustainable Communities Overview Economic & Community Development Overview Scrutiny


9 Jan 2007 18 Jan 2007 6 Dec 2006 17 Jan 2007 23 Jan 2007 22 Jan 2007 30 Jan 2007

318-321 323, 328-330

Development Control Development Control

331-343 344-345






354-355 372-385


The following Councillors asked questions of the relevant Chairman of Committee/Cabinet Member:Cabinet/Committee and Topic Date of Cabinet or Committee 3 Jan 2007

Name of Councillor


Sustainable Communities Overview – Private Sector Housing Renewal Policy – Cleanliness Standards of New Properties 395


Scrutiny Committee Community Wardens – thanks for assistance given by them during the recent snowy period Scrutiny Committee – Community Wardens – How best to contact Community Wardens – via notices and telephones? The Wardens Community Activity as important as patrolling.

18 Jan 2007

Mrs Rowlands

18 Jan 2007


Termination of Meeting The meeting terminated at 23.07 hours.

__________________________ Mayor

Chris Guy, Solicitor Head of Legal & Democratic Services





Introductions (1) The relevant Portfolio Holder, the Leader/Deputy Leader or other Member of Cabinet representing them (“The Decision Taker”) should present a 5 minute Opening Statement “setting the scene” for the Decision that has been Called-in (“the Decision”). The Signatories to the Call-in Notice should appoint one of their number to be their Spokesperson (“the Spokesperson”) and the Spokesperson should present a 5 minute Opening Statement “setting the scene” for the Call-in1. The Opening Statements referred to above shall be submitted in writing to the Chairman of the Scrutiny Committee meeting at least 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting, and copies should be available for members of the Scrutiny Committee and for the Public.




Clarification of Call-in Topics (1) Following the Opening Statements, the Chairman will clarify those issues to be the subject of the following procedures (“the Topics”). The topics can be fewer than those referred to in the original Call-in Notice but they must not go beyond the scope of that Notice.



Publication Participation and Visiting Councillors2


Where the Call-in Notice includes a variety of concerns not common to all the Signatories, then the 5 minute opening statement should be shared between the Spokesperson and other signatories.

Whilst the length of the time allowed for each Public Participant/Visiting councillor (and the overall time of this step in the procedure) is at the discretion of the chairman (taking into account all the circumstances), as a starting point each Public Participant/Visiting councillor should expect to speak for no more than 4 minutes.


APPENDIX 1A Continued 4 The Decision Taker’s Case (1) The Decision Taker may call such witnesses as he/she considers necessary to assist with an understanding of, and the thinking behind, the Decision. The Decision Taker (and any witnesses of the Decision Taker) can be questioned by the Spokesperson and/or by such members of the Scrutiny committee as are not Signatories (“Ordinary Scrutiny Members”). A six monthly report be received by the performance Board outlining the performance status of each Trust funded to a significant degree by this Council; and A further report be brought to the Scrutiny Committee, if required, due to any consultation outcomes.





The Spokesperson’s Case (1) The Spokesperson may call such witnesses (including other signatories) as the Spokesperson considers necessary to assist with an understanding of, and the thinking behind, the Call-in Notice3. The Spokesperson (and any witnesses of the Spokesperson) may be questioned by the Decision Taker and/or by Ordinary Scrutiny Members.



Questions during Procedures 4 and 5 above All questions should be focussed on the Topics.


Closing (1) The Spokesperson shall present a 5 minute “Winding Up” Speech, identifying those Topics which still remain of concern ( and why). The Decision Taker shall present a brief 5 minute “Winding Up” Speech responding to such remaining concerns.



Debate amongst all Scrutiny Committee Members

In circumstances when Footnote 1 above applies then whilst there should still be only 1 Spokesperson, Signatories with differing concerns and views must be called by the Spokesperson as witnesses.


APPENDIX 1A Continued 9 Resolution as to whether:(1) (2) To take no further action on the Call-in Notice. To refer the Decision to Full Council (and Best Practice/Guidance is that this should only be done in respect of Non-Executive Decisions that the Scrutiny Committee is concerned about). To request the Decision Taker to reconsider the Decision in the light of the committee‟s concerns (as recorded in writing) (and best Practice/Guidance is that that should be the normal route for Executive Decisions that the committee is concerned about).




The exact procedure to be followed at any particular Call-in meeting of the Scrutiny Committee shall be determined at the start of the meeting by the Scrutiny Committee (paragraph 9.10(3) of the Main Constitution). (1) In order to ensure that Called-in matters are fully and properly considered, with fairness to all concerned, in most cases it is necessary to adhere to the procedures determined at the start of the Scrutiny Committee meeting held to consider a Call-in. In particular, in most cases, motions to deal with the issues under consideration should not be moved and debated until the “debate amongst Scrutiny Committee membership” stage of the agreed Call-in procedure has been reached (eg Part 8 of this Appendix).










APPENDIX 3A Continued

The following parishes have not requested a precept for the financial year 2007/08:

Parish Council Hartley Wespall Herriard Steventon Parish Meeting Bradley Farleigh Wallop Litchfield and Woodcott Popham Stratfield Turgis Tunworth Weston Corbett and Weston Patrick Winslade




APPENDIX 3b continued


APPENDIX 3b Continued




APPENDIX 5 18. Chief Finance Officer’s (Corporate Director and Returning Officer) report to the Council Part II of the Local Government Act 2003 places a duty on the Chief Finance Officer to report on the robustness of the budget and adequacy of reserves. The budget has been constructed following a detailed process involving Cabinet, budget holders and finance staff, starting with the budget strategy formulation and refined by the final estimates. Expenditure and income estimates have been carefully considered during the budget process which included a review of the implications of last year‟s outturn as well as a zero base budget approach in a number of areas. Account has been taken of financial issues identified during the current year and of new legislative requirements such as concessionary fare changes. Realistic budget assumptions have been made and key risks identified. These risks are managed through a comprehensive and timely in year budget monitoring process and by the financial policies put in place by Council. The proposed capital programme to 2009/10 includes funding to support the asset management plan and is fully financed from identified resources and revenue contributions with no external borrowing. An estimated balance of £3.1m is unallocated to fund future new priority capital schemes. The budget proposals have been prepared with regard to the CIPFA Prudential Code and the prudential indicators identified in Appendix 4 demonstrate that it is prudent and sustainable. The general fund balance is forecast to remain at £1.5m (10% of net expenditure), the interest risk reserve at £1m and the rent risk reserve at £0.5m during the period of the medium term forecast. There is no planned use of reserves to fund ongoing revenue expenditure. The overall budget therefore has capacity to meet unforeseen costs or a reduction in planned income. Challenging but deliverable targets have been set as part of the budget strategy for 2008/09 and 2009/10 and realistic assumptions about the timing and amount of new property sale receipts have been made. The Council will need to continue to develop and implement a longer term budget strategy to ensure that the budget beyond this period is sustainable. The budget proposals have been reviewed by Strategic Management Team and the budget strategy process by the Audit and Governance Committee. The above and the other relevant sections of this report support my advice to Council that the 2007/08 budget is robust and is supported by adequate reserves.














APPENDIX 6A Continued


APPENDIX 6A Continued


APPENDIX 6A Continued


APPENDIX 7 Date of Meeting: 15 February 2007 Minute No. 7.5 (2)

Subject: Policy and Budget Framework 2007/08 Motion/Amendment: Labour Group Amendment. That through efficiency savings to be made next year, the cuts in the graffiti and pest control services amounting to £113,000 be not made. Seconder: Abstn Member of Labour Group For Agst 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 8 13 16 14 30 7 6 13 Abstn

Mover: Voting Mrs Allen Mrs Baker Barnes Biermann Mrs Brian Mrs Burgess Chapman Mrs Court Curry Donnell Downes Faulkner Findlow Finney Mrs Frankum Frankum Gardiner Godesen Green Gurden Harkess Harvey Mrs Heath Heath Hood Hussey Ms James Tony Jones Doris Jones Keating

Cllr P Harvey For Agst 1

Voting Leek Leeks Lewin Lovegrove Marks McCormick Mitchell Mrs Morrison Mrs Osselton Parker Putty Mrs Read Rhatigan Mrs Richardson Robinson Mrs Rowland Ruffell Sanders Mrs Shaw Shaw Mrs Still Taylor Tilbury Traynor Mrs Tucker Mrs Wall Wall Watts West

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 14 6



In view of some misheard responses, this voting record has been checked against, and “synchronised” with, the Webcast (approx at the 2 hours 56 minutes mark)


APPENDIX 8 Date of Meeting: 16 February 2006 Agenda Minute No: 7.5 (2)

Subject: Policy and Budget Framework 2006/07 Motion/Amendment: That for the purposes of section 35 (2) (d) of the Local Government Finance Act 1992, any expenses incurred by the Borough Council in the financial year 2007/08 in performing functions in a part of the district which elsewhere in the district are performed by a Parish Council, shall not be special expenses of the Borough Council. Mover: Cllr John Leek Voting Mrs Allen Mrs Baker Barnes Biermann Mrs Brian Mrs Burgess Chapman Mrs Court Curry Donnell Downes Faulkner Findlow Finney Mrs Frankum Frankum Gardiner Godesen Green Gurden Harkess Harvey Mrs Heath Heath Hood Hussey Ms James Tony Jones Doris Jones Keating For 1 Seconder: A member of the Conservative Group Agst Abstn 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 1 12 Voting Leek Leeks Lewin Lovegrove Marks McCormick Mitchell Mrs Morrison Mrs Osselton Parker Putty Mrs Read Rhatigan Mrs Richardson Robinson Mrs Rowland Ruffell Sanders Mrs Shaw Shaw Mrs Still Taylor Tilbury Traynor Mrs Tucker Mrs Wall Wall Watts West For 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16 14 30 0 1 1 10 12 22 Agst Abstn 1






The Cabinet Member for Planning & Transport and the Chairman of the Development Control Committee

From: Councillor Marks Question 1 under FCPR 3.18 “What procedures are in place, or will be in place, to properly consider the infrastructure needs of new development. Particularly the main services of clean water, electric, gas, dirty water, roads and parking, bearing in mind the flooding of recent weeks and the likely flooding when we have rain. Please also consider that it is generally accepted that climate change is occurring with the resultant good and bad effects on this issue?” Reply “Councillor Marks is right to question the extent to which the necessary infrastructure is in place to support the level of development we need let alone the level we might be expected to support. I‟m responding because the main issues are to do with policy, but the DC Committee does have an important role, which may get even more difficult if we get to the point of having to refuse developments on infrastructure grounds. As regards infrastructure in general, including not only the aspect Cllr Marks has mentioned but other critical things such as education and health facilities, we along with I believe all other authorities have made it clear that the level of development anticipated in the SE Plan cannot be achieved unless investment in infrastructure is assured ahead of development, rather than being vaguely promised. We continue to make this case very strongly in our representations to the Examination in Public. Sadly, many people are sceptical about this process – they believe whatever we say the Government will try to push us towards inappropriate levels of development. The time may well come when we will need to ask all Members to join forces in facing down demands that would seriously harm the future for the borough. As regards flooding, its now widely accepted that one outcome of climate change will be an increase in the number and extent of severe weather incidents, as well as a general increase in levels of rainfall during winter. Some areas of the borough already suffer from flooding at times of heavy and persistent rainfall, including at St Mary Bourne in my own ward, where we had serious flooding just a week or so ago despite assurances that measure had already been taken to prevent this. That flooding was nothing to do with new development. As part of our emerging climate change strategy I anticipate that our new climate change champion will work with 417

me to challenge whether the relevant authorities are doing enough to respond to this. I believe all members should be sensitive to this since climate change will affect all our existing homes and businesses not just new development. As regards water supply, we are assured by the water authorities that supply will not be the main constraint on new development. However, that leaves serious concerns for this borough. We already have problems of water quality in our streams and rivers. If we continue to build at the current rate, let alone any higher rate the Government may seek to push us towards, and the water authorities provide all the necessary water, the water has to go somewhere after its been used for washing the clothes and the dishes and the car and even in some households – or so I‟m given to understand – been used for such extravagant purposes as bathing and showering. For Basingstoke and Deane the quality and quantity of waste water is a much more serious issue than clean water supply. In Tadley the other evening a resident complained that he has already suffered the results of inadequate sewage capacity for at least ten years. I sat on a DC meeting where we were persuaded to approve new houses in our second largest town with cess pits for water disposal because the sewers are at full capacity. We are working very actively on these issues. We‟ve already given evidence on water supply and disposal issues to the SE Plan inquiry and we are leading a significant research project with the Environment Agency and Water Companies on the same subject, which will report after the end of the Inquiry but we are assured will be taken into account. On transport we are working with the Highways Agency and the County to look in more detail at strategic transport issues, in relation to Junction 6, 7 and 8 of the M3, as well as congestion on our local transport network including the infamous traffic problems on the A339, the A340 and the B3400, not to mention the many black spots round the town itself. Through the SPD on farm diversification we seek to prevent the kind of development that leads to heavy goods traffic on our country lanes. I mentioned education and as an example of how all these issue tie together I‟ve made it clear to our own officers and to the County that we urgently need to sort out proper access to QMC, which is a strategic asset for the Borough but which cannot continue expand at the expense of insufferably parking and traffic problems for local residents. And Members with a keen ear for detail will have noted that I didn‟t even mention the Pack Lane humps!”  To: The Leader of the Council

From: Councillor Mrs Baker Question 2 under FCPR 3.18 “Vue cinemas have confirmed that they have arranged a special viewing of the Al Gore‟s film „An Inconvenient Truth‟ on 27 February at 6:30pm at their Basingstoke Cinema. 418

Unfortunately, this coincides with the February meeting of Cabinet. Will the Leader of the Council consider changing the date or time of the Cabinet meeting?” Reply “It is disappointing that the showing of the film “An Inconvenient Truth” at the Vue Cinema will now clash with the next Cabinet meeting. However I am sure Cllr Mrs Baker will understand that it would be difficult to change the time of the Cabinet meeting at such short notice. The good news is that, as she is aware, very few Members attend the Cabinet meeting so they should be free to watch the film. For those who do not have this choice then I am delighted to advise you that the Council owns a copy of a DVD recording which can be made available to Members and, better still, if you have not got a DVD player we are happy to arrange a showing in the Council offices.” 



The Cabinet Member for Environment & Community Services

From: Councillor Tilbury Question 3 under FCPR 3.18 “Could the Portfolio holder advise me how many tonnes of chewing gum have been recycled in this Borough since the introduction of the gummy bins?” Reply included “The main purpose of the gummy bins is to be prevent gum being deposited on the pavement. Our Local Environmental Quality Surveys demonstrate that the gummy bins are reducing the amount of gum on the pavement in the town area. The recycling of the gum is a secondary but very welcome benefit of the bins. At the present time, we are currently experiencing contamination of the contents of the gummy bins. The cause appears to be smoking related litter and officers are investigation the feasibility of fitting ashtrays and/or stubber plates to the to the litter bins in top of the town to stop this contamination.”  To: The Cabinet Member for Sport & Leisure

From: Councillor Shaw Question 4 under FCPR 3.18 “Please will the Cabinet Member give Full Council a verbal update on current progress on the Sports Centre pool refurbishment?” Reply included “The complexity of the project to replace all the equipment and update the main 25 metre and learner pools in the underground section of the sports centre has led to a frustrating level of delays since works commenced early last year. I am therefore pleased to inform you that at a meeting on site yesterday it was confirmed that practical completion will be achieved on Monday. The Sports Centre will then complete their training requirements and a short period of opening to members only before providing full public access in early March. I look forward to announcing this opening date next week. I have visited the pool on a number of occasions and am very pleased with the quality of the work which has totally transformed the pools. I expect that swimmers of all ages will think that the refurbishment is well worth the wait.”


 To: The Leader of the Council

From: Councillor Biermann Question 5 under FCPR 3.18 “In view of the abrupt demise of the Hampshire Highways & Transport Advisory Committee and the North Hampshire Transport Strategy Panel, can the Leader of the Council shed any light on when there might be meaningful opportunities for elected members of the borough council to meet with county council colleagues to discuss issues of common interest? Furthermore, in view of the strong indicators in the Local Government White Paper that central government is seeking to communicate directly with only one tier of local government (likely in our case to be Hampshire County Council), does he agree that we have failed this council and its electorate by not seeking to bid for unitary status?” Reply “Hampshire County Council has recently established a Basingstoke and Deane Hampshire Action Team (HAT). This aims to bring the work of the County Councillors to a more local level where they can focus together on their local areas and communities in relation to a range of county council services and activities, including Transport and Highway issues. In the light of this, the Hampshire Highways & Transport Advisory Committee and the North Hampshire Transport Strategy Panel have been disbanded. The Basingstoke and Deane HAT comprises all Basingstoke and Deane county councillors and is chaired by County Councillor John Maxwell. The HAT will always be inviting two Borough Council member representatives, with officer support, to the Highways meetings as main participants. At the first meeting, held in December 2006, the two representatives were Cllr Horace Mitchell and Cllr Mrs. Paula Baker. As Cllr Biermann will hopefully appreciate, it is early days in the life of the HAT and the best way of engaging with the public and with borough councillors is still emerging. However, I have received the following information from the County Council which I hope will address Cllr Biermann‟s concerns.  At the next meeting of the HAT in early March, there will be clarification around how the County Council collects information regarding highways issues, problems and potential schemes; and an explanation of how borough councillors will be able to raise issues and have them added for consideration.  The HAT is at the moment trying to gain an initial and fairly wide ranging understanding of the issues that they should be focussing on in Basingstoke and Deane, and are very keen to hear from the Council about issues. The HAT felt that an appropriate channel would be through the LSP, of which the borough council is obviously a key partner. They will be running a “listening event” for 421

LSP partners at the end of March - and representatives from the Borough will certainly be invited to this. However if the Council would also prefer a more 'direct route' which involves just borough councillors, an approach which I would endorse, then this is something that I am happy to talk to the HAT Chairman about.  The HAT Chairman has made it clear that if there is an item on the agenda that relates to a specific ward and the relevant ward Councillor wishes to attend, then this would be welcomed. Borough Councillors are also welcome to put forward suggestions for the agenda through the two representatives.  The HAT dates and times for the whole of 2007 are published on the HATs website - http://www3.hants.gov.uk/hats.htm with an explanation of whether the meetings are open for public participation and who to contact if members of the public wish to speak at the meeting. The agendas for all meetings are also published on the website in advance - so one can see which issues are coming up.  Over time HATs will develop different mechanisms for getting feedback about what their priorities should be, and as each starts to put these in place the approaches they choose will be publicised.

Members may also find it helpful to know that Hampshire County Council has been reviewing how it undertakes its Transport and Highways function and is now in the process of setting up area teams covering Transport Policy, Engineering and Traffic Management – this includes a team which will specifically focus on north Hampshire. It is hoped that this will provide improved communication and coordination between the work of the County Council and Borough Council on Transport matters. The Local Government White Paper sets out to empower citizens and communities; create stronger and more visible leadership and proposes a new framework within which local authorities and their partners can work. This will apply to both single tier and two tier areas. In Hampshire this will mean building on the already very successful partnership work with the County Council and our many other partners to help shape our communities and provide better local services. I believe the decision taken by this council to build on these successful relationships rather than seek unitary status will deliver real improvements for our borough. Work is already underway with a meeting last week of all Hampshire district council leaders and chief executives together with the County Council to jointly agree how we need to work together to deliver both district level priorities and the wider Hampshire priorities. I intend to ensure that Basingstoke and Deane not only benefits from such arrangements but that we will also play a leading role in influencing both regional and national level decision makers that impact on our future and our ability to deliver quality services.”  422

To top