a)
Cabinet
Cllr Molyneux reminded members that minutes
were available for those who wanted more detail and invited
questions.
Cllr Gardiner asked why members had not been
sent a hard copy of the Cinderford regeneration prospectus.
Cllr Molyneux replied that the prospectus had
only been released recently and was available on the council’s
website.
The chairman confirmed that all members had
been emailed a link to the prospectus.
Cllr Thomson asked why Cllrs
Hale and Quaile had been appointed to the joint waste committee by
the cabinet and not Full Council.
The Solicitor to the Council
explained that the cabinet was responsible in law for specified
functions, including waste collection. The cabinet had delegated
that function to another public body.
Cllr Evans said that members had been told at
the presentation regarding the regeneration that they would receive
a hard copy of the presentation. He had found it galling to read
the detail in the local newspaper.
Cllr Molyneux replied that it had been
important that the members were the first to see the presentation
as a preview and the council wanted to present the scheme in the
best possible way to attract developers to bring investment to the
district. The prospectus was a glossy document, which was expensive
to print. If members wanted a hard copy, he urged them to pass it
on to potential investors after reading it. A copy would be placed
in the members’ room.
b)
Strategic Overview and Scrutiny Committee
Cllr Burford, chairman of the Strategic
Overview and Scrutiny Committee, reminded members that the
committee’s next meeting would be held on 19 July at 6pm in Lydney
Town Hall and invited all to attend.
Cllr Hiett, referring to item 5, asked how the
council would be watching and listening to the development of the
County Traffic Management Agreement.
Cllr Burford said that the fact that the issue
was on the committee’s agenda reflected its importance and the
committee would expect to be kept up to date. Committee members
would have raised issues if they arose; further detail could be
found in the minutes.
The Strategic Director confirmed that officers
from the council were in contact with the county council.
Cllr Horne asked how much the committee
meeting would cost to run in Lydney.
Cllr Burford answered that there would be a
small hire cost and that travel costs would even out.
The chairman said that it was a great way to
involve the people of Lydney, but sadly he was unable to
attend.
Cllr Birch asked about scrutiny’s involvement
regarding the benefits shared service on agenda page 44.
Cllr Burford answered that the committee had
been aware that the issue was on the horizon and that it was a
major piece of work. It had asked for the report, so that scrutiny
members were aware of what was going to happen before a decision
was made.
Cllr McMahon asked scrutiny to look at the
issue of future governance options, since he believed that the
current Governance Options Group was not working, with re-arranged
meetings and other matters slowing down proceedings.
Cllr Burford explained that the Strategic
Overview and Scrutiny Committee had considered the issue and
concluded that it would have been wrong to hold a scrutiny inquiry,
as that would have excluded the five executive members. It was
important that the Leader of the Council be involved in the
group.
Cllr McMahon asked if the cabinet members did
not have a vested interest in keeping the current arrangements,
since they received allowances for their roles.
Cllr Burford accepted that it was one point of
view, but reminded members that Full Council had made the decision
to set up the politically balanced task group and he had been happy
to go along with that. As the chairman of the scrutiny committee he
said that he himself had the same vested interest, because, at one
extreme, councils returning to the committee system could decide
that there was no longer a need for a scrutiny function.
The chairman reminded members that any
councillor was welcome to attend and listen to the deliberations of
the Governance Options Group and he asked Democratic Services to
circulate a list of all meeting dates for the group.
Cllr Molyneux said that even under a committee
system chairmen still received allowances similar to this council’s
cabinet allowances, citing South Gloucestershire. It was a fallacy
to suggest that cabinet members only undertook their roles for
financial gain. He asked members to compare the allowance against
time spent on council duties for cabinet members and some members
who only attended Full Council meetings. He confirmed that the
Governance Options Group would bring forward a recommendation that
would be the best way for this council going forward.
Cllr Diana Edwards said that some previous
comments had been flippant and ill informed. She believed that the
Governance Options Group took its work very seriously.
Cllr Smart reminded members that the
Governance Options Group’s work was not in the scrutiny report.
There would be an all-member briefing on 1 August when a
questionnaire would be circulated to all members. On 10 September
the Governance Options Group would meet to consider members’
responses ready for a report back to Full Council on 11 October
2012.
Cllr O’Neill asked if the report back from
trade unions regarding the Single Status work (agenda page 45,
paragraph 9) would be to the scrutiny committee.
Cllr Burford replied that the trade unions
would give their views to the officer group working
on the project. He would expect scrutiny to consider the issue
again before the final report went to the cabinet
The Head of Paid Service
confirmed for Cllr Hiett that an update report would be presented
to the Staff Joint Consultative Panel the following
week.
PDF 97 KB