Venue: Remote Meeting
Contact: Becky Atherton (0113 37 88642) Email: Becky.email@example.com
APPEALS AGAINST REFUSAL OF INSPECTION OF DOCUMENTS
To consider any appeals in accordance with Procedure Rule 25 of the Access to Information Rules (in the event of an Appeal the press and public will be excluded)
There were no appeals against the refusal of inspection documents.
Exempt Information - Possible Exclusion of the Press and Public
1 To highlight reports or appendices which officers have identified as containing exempt information, and where officers consider that the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons outlined in the report.
2 To consider whether or not to accept the officers recommendation in respect of the above information.
3 If so, to formally pass the following resolution:-
RESOLVED – That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following parts of the agenda designated as containing exempt information on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press and public were present there would be disclosure to them of exempt information, as follows:-
There were no items on the agenda requiring the exemption of the public.
To identify items which have been admitted to the agenda by the Chair for consideration.
(The special circumstances shall be specified in the minutes.)
There were no late items.
Declarations of Disclosable Pecuniary Interests
To disclose or draw attention to any disclosable pecuniary interests for the purposes of Section 31 of the Localism Act 2011 and paragraphs 13-16 of the Members’ Code of Conduct.
No declarations of pecuniary interests were made.
Apologies for Absence and Notification of Substitutes
To receive any apologies for absence and notification of substitutes.
Apologies were received from Cllrs Maqsood, Dye and Goddard.
Cllrs Lennox, Ritchie and Renshaw attended as substitutes.
To consider a report from the Head of Democratic Services advising the Scrutiny Board on the procedural aspects of calling in the decision.
The Head of Democratic Services submitted a report in relation to the procedural aspects of the call in process.
Members were advised that the options available to the Scrutiny Board in respect of this particular called in decision were as follows:
Option 1- Release the decision for implementation
Having reviewed this decision, the Scrutiny Board may decide to release it for implementation. If the Scrutiny Board chooses this option, the decision will be immediately released for implementation and the decision may not be called in again.
Option 2 - Recommend that the decision be reconsidered
The Scrutiny Board may decide to recommend to the decision maker that the decision be reconsidered. If the Scrutiny Board chooses this option a report will be submitted to the decision maker.
In the case of an Executive Board decision, the report of the Scrutiny Board will be prepared within three working days of the Scrutiny Board meeting and submitted to the Executive Board. Any report of the Scrutiny Board will be referred to the next Executive Board meeting for consideration.
In reconsidering the decision and associated Scrutiny Board report, the Executive Board may vary the decision or confirm its original decision. In either case, this will form the basis of the final decision and will not be subject to any further call in.
Failure to agree one of the above options
If the Scrutiny Board, for any reason, does not agree one of the above courses of action at this meeting, then Option 1 will be adopted by default, i.e. the decision will be released for implementation with no further recourse to call in.
RESOLVED – That the report outlining the call in procedures be noted.
To consider a report from the Head of Democratic Services presenting the background papers to an Executive Board decision, which has been called in in accordance with the Council’s constitution.
The call in relates to resolution 123 as recorded in the draft minutes of the meeting of 10 February 2021 and relates to Local Centres Programme.
Those present for this item were:
· Cllr Matthew Robinson - Nominated Signatory for the Call In
· Cllr Helen Hayden - Executive Member for Climate Change,
Transport and Sustainable Development
· Martin Farrington - Director, City Development
· Adam Brannen - Head of Regeneration
· Angela Barnicle - Chief Officer, Asset Management &
The Chair invited Cllr Matthew Robinson as the nominated signatory to the Call In to outline the reasons for calling in the decision and the outcome he wished to secure through the call-in process.
It was noted that the background to the decision under discussion relates to the Capital Programme Update 2021 – 2025, which was discussed by full Council on 24 February 2021.
The Board was reminded that the call-in related only to the specific decision regarding the Local Centres Programme taken by the Executive Board on 10 February 2021 and the determination of the outcome of a call-in cannot be based upon wider consideration of related items.
While acknowledging the constraints of the call in process, Cllr Robinson noted that he remained concerned about the impact of an overall £2.7m reduction in the funding for the Local Centres Programme. He further outlined a number of concerns about the decision including:
- Timing: The decision reduces investment at a time when it is acutely required by town and district centres to support a strong post pandemic recovery.
- Inclusive growth: Reducing the investment available through the programme risks exacerbating inequalities that are increasing as a result of the pandemic and its associated response. The reduction in the investment in the Local Centres Programme is contrary to activity elsewhere in the council which aims to tackle inequalities through the delivery of inclusive economic growth.
- Inconsistency: Schemes have been progressed at different rates in different areas of the city with employers being asked to make varying contributions towards local schemes.
- Advanced schemes: Those schemes at the most advanced stages of development are now being prioritised at the expense of schemes which had been anticipating inclusion in phase two of the programme.
- Communication: There has not been sufficient engagement with ward members and local stakeholders to enable the progression of schemes in wards that were not identified as phase one schemes.
- Learning: Good practice from successful schemes has not been shared more widely to enable the impact of council investment via this porgramme to be maximised.
Cllr Robinson suggested a reconsideration of the decision and its assessment criteria should seek to ensure the programme is proportionate, fair and able to effectively support post-pandemic economic recovery.
Members of the Board were invited to ask questions of Cllr Robinson. Issues raised included:
- Timing of the call in: Members noted that the decision had been called in once the outcome of consultation had enabled final recommendations to be made to the Executive Board on 10 February. Members noted that as a result any reconsideration of the decision would be constrained by the budget subsequently ... view the full minutes text for item 83.
Outcome of the Call In
To consider the Scrutiny Board’s formal conclusions and recommendations arising from theconsideration of the called-in decision.
The Scrutiny Board considered whether or not to release the decision for implementation. A vote was subsequently held and the Scrutiny Board agreed (by majority decision) that the decision be released.
RESOLVED – That the decision be released for implementation.
Date and Time of Next Meeting
The Board’s next meeting will take place on 7 April 2021 at 10.30am. There will be a pre-meetfor all Board members at 10.15am.
It was noted that the next public Board meeting will take place remotely at 10.30am on 7 April 2021.