Agenda and minutes

Members to note any apologies and substitution.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Ifty Choudary (Vice Chair) and Councilor Judith Lill.

Members to approve the minutes of the meeting held on 12 October 2009

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 October 2009 were signed by the Chair as a true record.

The Chair to note public address requests.

The public can speak on any agenda item for a maximum of three minutes per speaker per item.  You are not required to register your intention to speak in advance but should arrive at the meeting a few minutes early, complete a Public Address Protocol and notify the Scrutiny Officer of your intention to speak.

Al Bell, Community Matters, Elizabeth Percival, Parklands Community Centre, Toby Birch, Alliston Gardens Community Centre, Keith West head, Kingsheath Residents Association, Joyce Smith, Abington Community Centre, Eric Atkins, Duston Community Association, Sandra Bell, Doddridge Centre and Stephen Richards, Alliston Gardens Community Centre addressed the Committee on agenda item 13(a) – Community Centre Task and Finish Group.

Councillor Tony Clarke addressed the Committee on agenda items 6 – Planning Consent PFI schools and 13(a) – Community Centres Task and Finish Group.

Members to state any interests

Councillor Brendan Glynane declared a prejudicial interest as a member of the Southern Community Group in agenda item 13(a) – Community Centres Task and Finish Group.

The Committee to receive details of the consultation regarding the five-year Review of WNDC

David Kennedy, Chief Executive, referred the Committee to a paper issued from the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) that gave details of the outcome of the Quenquennial review of the three Urban Development Corporations (UDC).  David Kennedy commented that this brings an end of the Quenquennial review of the West Northants Development Corporation (WNDC).  The outcome of the Review has a number of positive outcomes, which include: WNDC becoming more accountable and WNDC returning planning responsibilities to the local Planning Authorities.  WNDC is currently responsible for applications of 50 or more homes as well as most applications in the centre of Northampton.  It is intended that from April 2011 it will concentrate on planning applications for schemes of 200 homes or more and major commercial schemes across the area.

David Kennedy went on to comment that other Local Authorities and Public Agencies had responded to the consultation on the quenquennial review.  The response of Northampton Borough Council was similar to that of Daventry District Council and South Northants but differed from the response of NCC, therefore a joint submission was not made.

WNDC will now concentrate on strategic delivery of key projects with more joint working with partners, who will release efficiencies, find new ways of working and savings across organisations.  The paper issued by the DCLG advises that it would like to see a new type of local partnership take forward and deliver the work that WNDC has started.  WNDC’s natural life comes to an end in 2014.  This is the date that the Government is expecting everyone to work to.  It does not appear that this date will be extended. In the interim there is scope for WNDC to become a more strategic delivery focused organization working closely with other Agencies and partners.  The Minister’s statement says that the first stage of the transfer is that WNDC will only deal with larger applications and to return all other applications to the boroughs and districts, which includes all the applications with central area planning. It is expected that this will take effect from April 2011. Discussions have started with WNDC, which have indicated that there is an appetite for it to move more quickly than that.  If the new joint working arrangements can happen more quickly it will enable the Government to review this more quickly than 2014. 

The Committee asked questions, made comment and heard: -

·        The number of Local Authority representatives on the board will be preserved and the link with non Local Authority representatives will be strengthened.

·        A clear definition of how Local Authority members and other nominees to the board will be replaced was requested, David Kennedy confirmed that a full explanation will be given to full Council in March 2010.

·        It is expected that substantial cost reductions will be made of around £20 million by 2013/14 – if arrangements can be sorted at local level, further savings could be made. Whatever is undertaken at local level needs to be more cost effective.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Committee to receive details of the Planning Consents for PFI Schools

Sue Bridge, Head of Planning, and Emma Arklay, Planning Policy Officer, reminded the Committee that this issue had been discussed at the October 2009 meeting of this Committee and it had become apparent that there were still issues that the Committee required details on.

Sue Bridge referred to her briefing note explaining that the County Council submitted applications in 2004/05 as part of the school review to change education in Northampton from a three tier to a two-tier system.  35 applications were considered and approved.  Of these, eight schools contained specific provision for community use agreements including sports development plans to be submitted and approved by the County Council.  The other schools in the PFI project do not have this condition attached.   

Sue Bridge added that as far as the remaining PFI schools are concerned, community access arrangements are as set out in the report to this Committee on 12^th October 2009 and the letter from Northampton Schools Ltd dated 18^th May. 

Northamptonshire County Council has previously advised that it has contractual arrangements with the PFI provider that the same arrangements apply to all 42 schools, which does give NBC a problem in reviewing its Playing Pitch Strategy as the contractual arrangements relating to community access to the facilities are unknown.  Therefore, the issues as set out in the report of 12^th October 2009 remain unresolved as a true picture of sports and playing pitches available for community use cannot be quantified.

The Council’s objections to the release of Kingsthorpe and Parklands schools will therefore be maintained until the whole question of access to the PFI playing pitches has been resolved.  The County Council’s agents have been advised of the position of both this Council and Sport England. 

The Council’s Planning Committee re-considered Bective School at its meeting on 12^th January 2010.  WNDC has been advised that the proposals for this site should make provision for on-site community facilities.

The Committee asked questions, made comment and heard: -

·        schoolbookers.com would not appear to have gone live.  It was last checked the week before the Committee meeting.

·        In response to a query whether NBC knows whether planning conditions are being adhered to, Sue Bridge advised that this is a matter for NCC’s Planning Department and Planning Committee. If the conditions were not being adhered to, it would have an impact upon NBC’s Playing Pitch Strategy.  It was noted that it would be easier to monitor if the school bookers site was working.

·        The Committee expressed its disappointment, adding that NCC should have put into place access agreements some years ago.  It has created a lot of work for NBC and is unfair for those not given the access.

·        Sue Bridge confirmed that NBC and Sports England are still maintaining their objections. This issue is going to have to be fully resolved before NBC can review its Playing Pitch Strategy.

Councillor Tony Clarke addressed the Committee, commenting that he appreciated the work that NBC’s Planning Department had done  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Committee to receive details of the Central Area Action Plan:  Submission Draft Publication Consultation

Sue Bridge, Head of Planning, advised that consultation had taken place in the summer 2009, which had been very well received.  All of the consultation responses had not yet been processed, but it was nearly finished.  On balance the quality of response was high with interesting representations.  A report will go forward to Cabinet in due course.  It was confirmed that responses to consultations individually do not have to be issued but a precis of how consultations were received is produced.

Due to the gaps in the evidence base the next stage of consultation is around 9-10 months behind schedule. Therefore it will not be possible to meet the timetable as set out in the Local Development Scheme.  The Joint Strategic Planning Committee has submitted a revised LDS timetable to GoEM and discussion with Government Office are taking place regarding the revised timetable.

The Committee made comment and asked questions: -

·        It response to a query regarding slippage regarding the timetable, Sue Bridge confirmed that it is not possible to catch up due to the amount of work that has to be done on strengthening the evidence base.  This timetable has been agreed and all the transport modeling work can be done within the revised timescale.

·        The Government has changed the criteria that it assesses its Transport Policy. There has been a flurry of transportation studies, which has led to a study called  DaSTS, which looks at the wider picture, which will take into account the work that is being done by NCC that has drawn together all the workstreams.  Regular meetings are taking place and the revised timetable is on target.

·        The Committee commented that water cycle studying is complex which includes an intermediate phase too.  It was confirmed that the water study is not as troubling in terms of timescale.

AGREED:   The Committee supported the consultation process.

The Committee to receive a briefing on NBC’s Environmental Health Service – Consultancy input to WNDC

Steve Elsey, Head of Public Protection, referred to the briefing note adding that the informal agreement with WNDC is due to come to an end.  However, Environmental Services will in the future be involved in making environmental comments formally but not necessarily at a pre determined stage.  Environmental Services will still have an input into planning applications.

The update was noted.

The Committee to receive a briefing on the Byelaw for Good Rule and Government

Debbie MacColl, Community Safety Administration Officer, advised that byelaws are a complex process that follows guidance.  Regarding the Byelaw for Good Rule and Government, renewed Government guidance and regulations are awaited. Community Safety has been working with the Home Office and has undertaken the pre-consultation stage and come up with a draft.  As soon as the guidance is issued, Community Safety should be able to proceed relatively quickly.  The Byelaw will permit the issuing of Fixed Penalty Notices.

The Committee asked questions, made comment and heard: -

·        A byelaw can be created for anything that there is not already a regulation on but it has to be a criminal offence.

·        Regarding a query whether a bicycle a self-propelled vehicle, Debbie MacColl confirmed that the Byelaw would not cover bicycles.

·        In response to a query about skateboarding it was confirmed that areas that have been selected are because they are causing problems to pedestrians for the safety of both the general public and the skateboarders. This Council has an enforcement policy, which applies to byelaws.  The purpose of the Skateboards Forum, comprising a variety of stakeholders, is to look at how a nationally significant skateboard park could be delivered in Northampton.  The Skateboarders Forum has met once and a further meeting will be scheduled.  The Chair asked that updates on the work of the Skateboarders’ Forum be presented to this Committee.

AGREED:  That regular updates on the work of the Skateboarders’ Forum be presented to this Committee. 

Members are asked to comment on the draft budget for 2010-2011 to 2012-2013

Gavin Chambers, Head of Finance and Assets, advised that the 2010-2013 draft budget was currently out to consultation.  The budget would then be presented back to Cabinet and Council for approval post-consultation.  This year, the same process as previously had been adopted for consulting Overview and Scrutiny on the Council’s proposed budget.  The Reporting and Monitoring Working Group would have been asked to select the issues from the budget proposals for each Overview and Scrutiny Committee but this meeting of the Reporting and Monitoring Task and Finish Group did not take place due to the inclement weather at that time.

Chris Cavanagh, Head of Regeneration, confirmed that Francis Fernandes, Borough Solicitor, had advised the Chair that due to the sensitivity of the issues and an agreed consultation process, it would not be possible for officers to reveal details of budget saving consultation proposals at this stage.  Chris Cavanagh advised that he was currently in discussions with staff regarding the details around the options regarding the restructure of the Regeneration Department.  It was reported that it is possible that some of the Committee’s questions might relate to individuals, as some posts are only specific to one post etc, in which case such questions could not be answered at this stage.

The Committee queried how comfortable the Council was that the proposed restructure would not impact on the regeneration of the town Chris Cavanagh advised the Committee that that the report had been driven by the Council’s overriding need to make savings on its general budget.  In terms of Regeneration and Development, a focus on delivery had been adopted in terms of finding options and focus on Council priorities.  This had lead to a restructure and focus on delivery of the Council’s priority projects and initiatives.

Sue Bridge, Head of Planning, advised that in respect of the Planning Department, there was an intended minor internal structure to strengthen Planning policy, which will pick up some of the policy work done in Regeneration currently.   Other proposed changes are in respect of income and operational efficiencies.  In response to a query regarding whether the changes would have an impact on planning coming back to the borough, Sue Bridge advised that she had made provision for four additional posts in the establishment, which were not funded this year but were earmarked in reserves, by next year there will be more of a certainty regarding the need for these posts. 

Chris Cavanagh suggested that Heads brief Overview and Scrutiny on details of the restructures and savings proposed presenting to a future meeting of this Committee once the one to one meetings with affected staff have been concluded.

The Committee made comment on two specific proposed options contained in the draft general fund budget 2010-11 to 2012-2013: -

·        Savings for community centres of £170,000 may not be realized due to the work of the Community Task and Finish Group

·        Concerns were conveyed regarding the proposed savings in the Regeneration and Planning and as to whether this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Committee to receive details of the Action Plan contained in the Single Equalities Scheme

Consideration of this item was deferred to the next meeting on 19 April 2010.

 Members to review the Monitoring Work Programme and determine the Committee meetings at which the implementation of the Task and Finish Group reports’ recommendations will be monitored

The Chair suggested that as an update on the review into WNDC had been provided earlier in the meeting there was not the need for the Committee to monitor the implementation of the accepted recommendations contained in the WNDC and partnership working with NBC report.   It was suggested however that there was a need for Overview and Scrutiny to have an input into the statutory body that replaces WNDC.

The Committee to receive an update on the progress of the implementation of the recommendations contained in the Councillor Call for Action Task and Finish Group report.  As a reminder the recommendations contained in the Task and Finish Group’s report is attached.

Thomas Hall, Head of Policy, advised that the Overview and Scrutiny Task and Finish Group had produced a pilot for CCfA.  At its recent meeting the Constitutional Working Party had taken on board this piece of work and is producing a procedure for CCfA based on the work of the Task and Finish.  

Tracy Tiff, Scrutiny Officer, advised that a draft Overview and Scrutiny CCfA Protocol has been produced, as has the relevant extract for inclusion in the Council’s constitution and these were currently being worked upon by the Constitution Working Party and will be presented to full Council in March 2010 for approval.  Thomas Hall added that CCfA has been a statutory instrument since April 2010 and there is a Protocol for using this but it had not been formally adopted.

Concerns were raised that the pilot for CCfA had never been set up or tested to check whether the process worked.  The Committee was provided with details of proposed training on the scrutiny of crime and disorder and CCfA.

The Chair gave examples of a request for a CCfA to Northamptonshire County Council, which had not been able to go through the process. 

The Committee commented on the need to test the pilot scheme for CCfA to ensure that it was the correct process to follow. Tracy Tiff undertook to circulate the flow chart contained in the Overview and Scrutiny CCfA Task and Finish Group to all Overview and Scrutiny Members.

The Chair of the Task and Finish Group to provide a progress report

Mr Toby Birch, representing Alliston Gardens Community Centre, addressed the Committee commenting that the Centre had been running for around 14 years, it has 40 volunteers, employs its own staff.  It is a very busy centre with approximately 500 people using centre a week, plus parties and other bookings.  A lot of people use the centre.  It is important that people that use the centre get the best out of it.  It would be useful to have some kind of value added so that the Community Centre could show what it is doing in a positive way.  Mr Birch confirmed that he would be very willing to work with the Borough Council to show what can be achieved.  He added that it would be good to have a list of aims and objectives for Community Centres.  There is a range of services provided by community centres such as I

ICT, which could be developed further.   There is a need to demonstrate that Community Centres are providing value for money to the local communities.  Mr Birch concluded that it is important that community activities are fully developed and Community Centres are used.

Keith Westhead, representing Kingsheath Resident Association, commented that his Committee felt that it was wrong to close down Community Centres.  The Committee had the preference for NBC to continue to run Community Centres and if this were not possible the Committee would like to see them run by community groups.  Mr Westhead referred to the Community Centre in Kingsheath advising that the Need to Know shop had offered to take over the management of the Community Centre.  Mr Westfield felt that should Need to know take on the management of the Community Centre it on would ensure its long-term viability.  He asked that this be given every consideration.

The Committee put questions to Mr Westhead:

In response to a query about access to the Community Centre if Need to know took over the management of the Centre, Mr Westhead confirmed that most of the other rooms would be available as access for all.

In response to a query why Mr Westhead felt that Community Centres would be closed, he advised that he had read details in the local press from time to time that 11 or 12 would be closed, some had applications for management committees to take over, others had not. He added that the Council was looking to change the caretaking process to floating caretaker support, Mr Westhead felt that with this type of caretaking in place less people would use the Centres and therefore they would close.

Al Bell, Community Matters, commented that Community Matters is a national community organisation with a number of members.  She advised that she had received concerns from a number of members regarding the work of the Task and Finish Group and the proposals for caretaking.  Some centers have 170 volunteers with a footfall of 2,000.  Al Bell gave examples of some of the services provided such as surgeries for police,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13a

Members to review the work programme and note that the order in which the outstanding Task and Finish Groups will operate is a matter for the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee to determine

The Committee noted its work programme.

The Chair and Vice Chair have been asked to examine the performance indicators and bring to the attention of the Committee those they wish to investigate further

The Committee noted the Best Value Performance Indicators for the period  November 2009.

Violent crimes and burglaries are a major crime for this town; these types of reported crimes are inclined to drop off in bad weather.

This Council has worked very hard and well with people subject to domestic violent crime.

Thomas Hall added that the figure for the Performance Indicator for domestic burglary is still red, but only just.  The Council has never been anywhere near this target for some time.

Members to examine the forward plan and decide if there are any items they wish to pre-decision scrutinise.

The current Forward Plan was noted.

This item is for business that by reasons of the special circumstances to be specified, the Chair is of the opinion is of sufficient urgency to consider.   Members or officers that wish to raise urgent items are to inform the Chair in advance.

There were none.