Agenda and minutes

Councillors Jeffries, Hobley, Walklett and Williams had given their apologies.

Councillor Rowena Hay declared a non-pecuniary interest in agenda item 13 (Notices of Motion) as a Trustee of the Oakley Neighbourhood Project.

Minutes of the meeting held on 18 July 2016

The minutes of the last meeting had been circulated with the agenda.

Upon a vote it was unanimously

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on the 18 July 2016 be approved and signed as an accurate record.

The Mayor informed members that since the last Council meeting, she had been invited to over 90 events and meetings as Mayor and some of the highlights included:

·         Celebrating 300 years of Spa waters in the town at Pittville Pump Rooms with a Tea, which proved a successful fundraiser for her two charities.

·         Along with Councillor Chris Coleman, she had attended the South West of England and Wales Green Flag ceremony where five Green Flags were awarded, including a Prestigious Heritage award for Pittville Park, which she commended as an outstanding result for Green Space Development, Park Department, UBICO and the many voluntary friends groups who worked in partnership with the Council. 

·         For receiving so many Green Flags and for the floral planting in the gardens and superb hanging baskets, the Council in collaboration with Cheltenham in Bloom, had awarded UBICO and the Green Space Development team, with the Business Pride Trophy. 

·         Cheltenham had been accredited with a Purple Flag, which celebrated town and cities that have a vibrant and safe town centre, whilst managing their night-time economy.  This was great news and the awards presentation evening would take place in November at the Town Hall.

·         Continuing celebrations of our 60 years twinned with Annecy, the Mayor along with over fifty Cheltenham residents had visited the town in August and a particular highlight of the trip had been the Fete De Lac firework displays.  She gave thanks to the Twinning Committee for their work in organising the visit. 

·         She felt privileged to have unveiled the six names that had been added to the towns recently restored War memorial on the 76^th Anniversary Battle of Britain. 

·         Along with Councillors Mr and Mrs Hay, the Mayor had the pleasure of being in the welcoming line-up to meet the Duchess of Gloucester when she paid a visit to Faithfull House and The Phoenix Centre.

·         The Mayor and several other Members had attended Her Majesty’s Lord-Lieutenant of Gloucestershire awards ceremony at Imjin Barracks.  The awards celebrated the professional and personal achievements of those who worked or volunteered within the Reserve Forces and the cadet Movement.  Cheltenham College and All Saints Academy had received top awards, as well as Cadet Poppy Slack. 

·         There had been a number of student visits to the Chamber from countries including Japan, China, Poland, France and Germany.

The Mayor acknowledged the passing of two retired Members of Cheltenham Borough Council: Alderman Robin MacDonald who was Mayor in 2008-2009 and Mary Gray.  The Mayor, along with Mark Sheldon, the Director of Corporate Resources and Projects, had attended Alderman MacDonald’s funeral.

The Mayor took the opportunity to thank the Deputy Mayor, Councillor Sudbury, for attending several engagements on her behalf.

The Leader echoed the condolences of the Mayor, for Mary Gray and Alderman MacDonald and he was aware that a memorial service had been arranged for Mary Gray at Cheltenham Minister, St. Mary’s.  He endorsed the  commendation of the Green and Purple flags that had been awarded, which was great news for the town. 

The waste and recycling consultation had launched today, with residents being invited to choose their preferred option.  This was in advance of a very important decision later in the year, on the collection of recyclables, ahead of procuring new vehicles next year.

It was announced that Councillor Baker would be replacing Councillor Collins on the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

He advised that the report on the Domestic Homicide Review into the tragic case of Jane Wigget would be published tomorrow.  Cheltenham Borough Council had co-ordinated the review, from which many lessons had already been learned, with more to follow.  This tied in with the motion on coerced debt, which would be debated later in the meeting.

Councillor Colin Hay submitted three petitions which called upon Cheltenham Borough Council to work with Gloucestershire County Council, Cheltenham Borough Homes, the NHS and the Police to ensure that services provided by the Oakley neighbourhood Project. Which had announced its closure, would be maintained and enhanced in the future.  The petitions had 761 signatures collectively and the Mayor was happy to accept them as one petition. 

These must be received no later than 12 noon on the fourth working day before the date of the meeting.

Report of the Cabinet Member Development and Safety

The Mayor outlined the procedure for dealing with the petition and invited Mrs Doreen Spiers (Friends of Springbank) and Andy Hayes (Hesters Way Partnership) as petition organisers, to formally present the petition. 

Mrs Spiers, a resident in Springbank and a regular user of the C Service, refuted the claim that the changes had benefited any residents.  Andy Hayes commended Doreen for having initiated the petition, which had garnered over 1000 signatures.  He urged the Council to support a request that Stagecoach undertake a consultation exercise on the change to the C Service; namely the removal of the service to Springbank Way in its entirety.  Whilst Stagecoach had calculated "that most customers using the affected stops on Springbank Way will need to walk a maximum of 2 minutes further to the nearest bus”, which equated to ‘only’ 500m, the majority of people that used the C Service were not physically able to walk this distance.  The change to this service had impacted some residents’ ability to access not only the local shops, but the resource centre which housed the Doctors surgery which had over 200+ registered patients and received 60,000 visits a year, as well as a Dentist surgery, Pharmacy and childcare facility and it was noted that this building was owned by Cheltenham Borough Council.  The service had changed on the 01 May 2016, without any public consultation or Equality Impact Assessment having been undertaken by Stagecoach, they had simply advised the Transport Board of the intended changes and then implemented them.  Stagecoach cited punctuality as the reason for the change, having given no consideration to residents needs, and stated that since the change punctuality had increased by 2.37% between May and August 2016, which the petitioner did not consider as much of an improvement.  He appreciated that this council was not the local transport authority but hoped that it could put pressure on Gloucestershire County Council, to have Stagecoach review their decision in light of the petition.  

Members were aware that Rupert Cox, Managing Director of Stagecoach West, was present in the public gallery and suggested that, having expressed his willingness to answer Member questions, the matter should be debated at this meeting.  The Cabinet Member Development and Safety had been minded to refer the matter to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, but was comfortable to debate the issue at Council, if that was Members’ preference.  

Councillor Stennett formally proposed that the matter be debated at  this meeting, with Councillor Clucas as his seconder. 

Councillor Colin Hay raised a point of order.  He felt that the issue would be easier to debate at Overview and Scrutiny as the usual rules of debate could be dis-applied with the Chairman of the Committee using their discretion to allow non-committee Members to speak and ask questions.  

Upon a vote it was RESOLVED that the mater be debated at this meeting. 

The Mayor was advised that it was at her discretion to extend the time allowed for the debate.  

Rupert Cox, Managing Director  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.

Report of the Cabinet Member Corporate Services

The Cabinet Member Corporate Services, Councillor Whyborn, introduced the report.  He described the motions before council as simple and in themselves uncontroversial, namely to respectively appoint Paul Jones and Councillor Steve Jordan, both of whom he considered to be eminently suited to the roles, to the posts of continuing Section 151 Officer, and Member representative of Cheltenham Borough Council, to the planned Support Services Company. 

Recommendation 6 noted the retention of the Revenues and Benefits service by Cheltenham Borough Council consequent to the decision of Cabinet not to move it from the Joint Committee to the new company. 

The Cabinet Member explained how the project had originated as a result of Central Government’s aspiration to promote innovative and cost-effective solutions to delivering local authority services, and Cheltenham had first-hand experience of shared services in Gloucestershire and the use of a Teckal companies.  At the time, Ubico was unique in being a shared service and a company using the Teckal exemption, meaning the service ran largely as an in-house service and did not have to go out to EU-type tendering.  Government grant funding (TCA funding) was available and the 2020 project councils were able to secure £3.8m for business transformation and related costs.  Further financial advantage would result from the fact that new employees would be engaged on terms outside of the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS).

 The initial vision, which was largely the one which other partner authorities were still working to, was a group of companies which would employ all employees and include all in-house services including Democratic Services, etc.  Only Statutory Officers were to be outside of the scheme, with their services being seconded from the companies and not surprisingly this revolutionary approach has proved hugely controversial.  Though early pioneers in shared services and arms-length services, Cheltenham has always adopted a “one size does not fit all” approach and decided at an early stage that it would not include the following: Regulatory services; Wellbeing and Culture; Legal and Building Control; Property; Democratic Services; Media; Elections; Community; Customer Relations; Bereavement; Green Space and Client and Commissioning officers, as well as social housing services already in CBH. 

He had spoken at length on the issue of Customer Services (CS) and Revenues and Benefits (R&B) at a recent scrutiny meeting and Members seminar, to say, in short, that the relatively modest savings involved, compared to the potential reputational risk to the council, did not justify the change.  The administration considered these to be highly sensitive front-line services, which were best directly staffed by the Council and managed locally, unlike GO Shared Services and ICT. 

These services were already largely shared and the only question was whether to take further advantage of a Teckal Company.  There would be no immediate advantage to CBC as staff were already shared and on the payroll of other authorities, but there would be a long term gain and moreover, preliminary costings for reverting the services to CBC, were expensive in terms of both revenue and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Tim Harman

The Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Councillor Harman, introduced the Annual Overview and Scrutiny Report 2015-16.  Firstly, he thanked Saira Malin, the Democracy Officer who supported the committee, as well as those that had been involved in any of the task groups and the lead Members, Councillors Payne and Walklett, for their contributions and hard work over the last year.  The report summarised some of the successes of the previous year, which had involved holding Cabinet to account, as well as a number of presentations on topics that were important to Cheltenham residents, which had included the NHS and the Police and Crime Commissioner and Cheltenham Festivals were scheduled to attend an upcoming meeting.  He reminded all Members that they could put forward items for consideration for inclusion on the committee work plan and were welcome at meetings.  As had been agreed earlier in the meeting, Stagecoach would attend a future meeting of the committee and he noted that he would be minded to use his discretion to allow non-committee Members to ask questions, were they to attend. 

Councillor Sudbury raised the issue of the Urban Gull Forum, which was currently supported by the Team Leader for Participation and Engagement, but which she hoped could be adopted as a standing task group.  Councillor Harman, who was also a member of the Forum, confirmed that they were scheduled to meet on the 1 November and that he planned to suggest that a formal report be tabled with the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting in November.  It would then be for the committee to consider if and how it wanted to scrutinise the topic.   

The Cabinet Member Clean and Green Environment took the opportunity to highlight the work of Cabinet Member Working Groups, which he personally felt, provided a level of scrutiny. 

Members thanked the committee for the work that they conducted, given the limited resources available to them. 

Upon a vote it was unanimously

RESOLVED that the Annual Report of Overview and Scrutiny 2015-16 be noted.

Chair of Audit Committee to address Council

Audit Committee minutes (21 September 2016)

The Chair of the Audit Committee, Councillor Colin Hay had asked for this item to be tabled on the agenda.  Since authority to agree and sign the accounts had been delegated to the Audit Committee and Chairman of the Audit Committee respectively, reporting to Council had ceased.  However, Councillor Hay felt that it was important that all members be made aware that the accounts had been audited, with Grant Thornton, the external auditors having recorded their appreciation for the assistance provided by the finance team and other staff.  Whilst some issues were identified, which was not uncommon, there were no material issues, which had long been the case and he felt that officers should be congratulated for their hard work.  In terms of the Value for Money, three areas were assessed: decision making, sustainability and partnership working and two interlinked risks were identified: the MTFS and 2020 Vision.  Grant Thornton were confident that the risks were adequately mitigated by past experience of this council finding alternatives.  ICT controls needed to be reviewed, but again, Grant Thornton were confident that this could be achieved.  

He also took the opportunity to report that, following a review of the future provision of Internal Audit, proposals from both Audit Cotswolds, the councils existing provider, and the South West Audit Partnership (provider to Forest of Dean, West Oxfordshire and Cotswolds) had been assessed.  The bids had been assessed using a price/quality score of 40%/60% and the South West Audit Partnership had been successful, meaning the same amount of work would be delivered for less money, by a larger group, which included a more extensive skill set.  He did note that the draft minute of this item would be amended, following concerns raised by officers of Audit Cotswolds that they read as if Audit Cotswolds had not been successful because of resilience and a weaker governance model.

Members were advised that the Whistle-Blowing Policy had been reviewed so that it was aligned with partners. 

A Member agreed that officers should be commended for their effort and hard work in producing the annual accounts.   

There were no resolutions arising from this item.

Motion 1 – proposed by Councillor Clucas and seconded by Councillor Parsons

“This Council recognises the hardship that is being caused by gender and age related changes to State Pensions and calls upon the Government to make fair transitional state pension arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951, who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA) with lack of appropriate notification."

Motion 2 – proposed by Councillor Colin Hay and seconded by Councillor Wilkinson

“This council notes the decision of Oakley Neighbourhood Project and Oakley Regeneration Partnership to close due to the current finances being unsustainable. It further notes the substantial benefit to residents the project has had in the ward, which has some of the highest indices of deprivation not only in Cheltenham but the whole County.

The loss of services, provided by the project, will have a significant negative effect on the local community, which will almost certainly create greater demand on statutory services.

Therefore, this Council - which is most closely associated with the project, should call a meeting of the statutory bodies, CCG, the County Council, the Police, Cheltenham Borough Homes and other relevant organisations with an interest in the local area to identify what services are required and how best to deliver them. That this meeting is called with some urgency to ensure residents have some continuity. That council also ensures that local councillors are fully involved in the discussions.”

Motion 3 – proposed by Councillor Willingham and seconded by Councillor Sudbury

Preventing Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse

“Cheltenham Borough Council notes the important and valuable work performed by the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service (GDASS) across the County. 

This Council is concerned that whilst many areas of Domestic Abuse are addressed by primary legislation, have well-defined best practice to try to prevent them and have support services that can provide assistance to victims; the victims of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse can be left with little redress against their abuser, can experience poverty and can become secondary victims of the debt collection industry, and that there is currently little guidance and best practice for lenders and financial services providers about the necessary checks and balances to incorporate into their lending and debt recovery procedures to avoid facilitating or exacerbating Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse.

This Council notes that it has limited powers to act directly to address Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse, but calls upon the Leader of the Council, or his delegated Cabinet Member, to ensure that the matter is raised with the Local Government Association both to raise the profile of this issue and to lobby the government to introduce primary legislation to require lenders, financial services providers and the debt recovery industry to put safeguards in place to try to minimise the occurrence of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse, and to investigate what measures can be put in place to reduce the impact of Coerced Debt on the victims of  ...  view the full agenda text for item 13.

Motion 1 – Changes to State Pensions

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Clucas, seconded by Councillor Parsons:

“This Council recognises the hardship that is being caused by gender and age related changes to State Pensions and calls upon the Government to make fair transitional state pension arrangements for all women born on or after 6th April 1951, who have unfairly borne the burden of the increase to the State Pension Age (SPA) with lack of appropriate notification."

In proposing the motion, Councillor Clucas highlighted that this was an important issue affecting many women who for various reasons did not mange 40 years of contributions. The motion was asking government to look again at this issue and the same request had been made by many other councils. In the previous week, 197 petitions had been presented at the House of Commons.

She referred to the amendment which had been circulated by Councillor Babbage and seconded by Councillor Savage. She indicated that she would be happy to accept the amendment provided it made reference to the other parties that have made similar representations and the 197 petitions. Th additional wording would then read

“This Council supports the work done by Cheltenham's MP Alex Chalk together with MPs from all parties in presenting 149 petitions signed by local residents calling for fairer transitional pension arrangements and debating the issue in Parliament.

This Council also welcomes the formation of the new All Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on the State Pension Age of which Alex Chalk MP was a founding member.”

As Councillor Babbage was happy to accept the revised wording, this became the substantive motion.

In seconding the motion, Councillor Parsons said that it was an issue of great concern to many women and it was a matter of fairness and justice.

In the short debate that followed Members agreed that many women were suffering financial hardship and had lost out because of their date of birth and Members were happy to support the motion. A Member encouraged other members to sign the online petition if they had not already done so.

Councillor Clucas thanked Members for their support and hoped that Council's resolution would be passed to government so that the authority could be seen as one supporting fairness in pensions and encouraging to young people.

Upon a vote the motion was CARRIED unanimously

Motion 2 – Preventing Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse

The following motion was proposed by Councillor Willingham, seconded by Councillor Sudbury:

“Cheltenham Borough Council notes the important and valuable work performed by the Gloucestershire Domestic Abuse Support Service (GDASS) across the County. 

This Council is concerned that whilst many areas of Domestic Abuse are addressed by primary legislation, have well-defined best practice to try to prevent them and have support services that can provide assistance to victims; the victims of Coerced Debt and Financial Abuse can be left with little redress against their abuser, can experience poverty and can become secondary victims of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

There were no urgent items requiring a decision.