Agenda and minutes

Members to note any apologies and substitution.

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.

Members to state any interests

Called-In by Councillors Lee Mason and Tony Clarke (Copy attached)

Decision 11 taken on 3 March 2010:-

1.    That Cabinet notes the outcome of an appraisal of potential management options for leisure and sports provision (see annex 1 of the Cabinet report).

2.        That, in accordance with the outcome of the management options appraisal, Cabinet agrees to the commencement of the implementation phase for the establishment of a new charitable trust for the provision of leisure and sports development services.

Reasons for Call-In:-

1)   Lack of any Pre Scrutiny.

2)   Lack of Public Consultation despite the paper being prepared and written before and during the period of the Council's Public Consultation on the 2010- 2011 Budget and the Council Corporate Plan

3)   Lack of Complete Legal Advice

4)   Lack of an Equalities Impact Assessment on the outcome of the report

5)   Lack of proper consultation with non-cabinet members of the Council

The call in authors also ask that O&S reject the Cabinet's proposal for "Post" decision scrutiny on the grounds that this sets a precedent for Cabinet to ignore the need for pre scrutiny of sensitive decisions by way of Fait accompli post decision scrutiny after the event.

The Chair advised that upon the advice of the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer, this Call-In request had been through the appropriate channels and it is confirmed that the correct procedure had been followed.  The Borough Solicitor confirmed that there is no legal requirement for pre-decision scrutiny to take place.  Francis Fernandes, Borough Solicitor, advised that there is no legal requirement for the provision of pre-decision scrutiny; it would be for the Committee to decide upon the validity of reason 1 for Call-In - Lack of any Pre Scrutiny.

The Chair then advised the Call-in Hearing of the procedure that would be followed and reminded the Committee of the reasons for Call-In:-

1)   Lack of any Pre Scrutiny.

 2)   Lack of Public Consultation despite the paper being prepared and written before and during the period of the Council's Public Consultation on the 2010- 2011 Budget and the Council Corporate Plan

 3)   Lack of Complete Legal Advice

 4)   Lack of an Equalities Impact Assessment on the outcome of the report

 5)   Lack of proper consultation with non-Cabinet members of the Council

The Call In Authors also asked that Overview and Scrutiny rejected the Cabinet's proposal for "Post" decision scrutiny on the grounds that this sets a precedent for Cabinet to ignore the need for pre scrutiny of sensitive decisions by way of fait accompli post decision scrutiny after the event.

The public addressee was invited to speak to the Committee.

Dr Ronald Mendell, representing Northampton Trade Union Council, addressed the Committee advising that his comments were in respect of call in reasons 2 and 4.  He was concerned that there had been no consultation on this issue as part of the consultation process on the draft general fund budget 2010/2013.  In his opinion this issue should have been subject to consultation with both users and providers.  He felt that there was no evidence of the production of an Equality Impact Assessment for this report and highlighted the fact that the proposal could have a negative impact on specific groups such as pensioners, disabled and youth.  Dr Mendell went on to state that in his opinion a Trust could introduce a charge that could have a negative impact to users.

Dr Mendell was thanked for his address.

The Chair then invited the Call-In Authors to expand upon their reasons for concern, following which the Overview and Scrutiny questioned the Call-In Authors.  Councillor Lee Mason, Call-In Author, addressed the Committee commenting that she had deep concerns for the future of Leisure Centres, in particular Lings Forum.  She was further concerned regarding the implementation and process, which would impact on both staff and residents. In Councillor Mason’s opinion costs would rise and she was concerned that current concessions such as free swimming might not continue.  Leisure Services currently provides a high quality service and Councillor Mason queried why it was proposed to change this.

Councillor Mason referred to a previous Overview and Scrutiny Review that had in 2007 investigated leisure services but had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.