To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Cllrs Bill Evans, Frankie Evans, Val Hobman, Bruce Hogan and Bernie O'Neill.

To confirm the minutes of the meetings held on 12 July 2012 and 27 September 2012.

The minutes of the meetings held on 12 July 2012 and 27 September 2012 were confirmed and signed as an accurate record.

Cllr Stephens, Chairman of the Council, who had not been at the previous meeting, said that he was sorry for the loss of Cllr Helen Stewart, who had been a hardworking representative for her ward.

The chairman to identify any items of urgent business.

The chairman identified no items of urgent business.

To receive any declarations of interest in any matter to be discussed at the meeting.  Members and officers are requested to identify the nature of the interest.

No declarations of interest were made.

Cllr Stephens was pleased to announce the opening on Tuesday afternoon of the £1.6m kidney dialysis Unit on the Forest Vale Industrial Estate, Cinderford, which would benefit more than 200 patients needing kidney dialysis.  This investment would provide existing patients with the option to transfer their dialysis to the new Unit, bringing care closer to their homes.  Supported by Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust and the Forest of Dean District Council, the Unit boasts state-of-the-art dialysis machines and has capacity for 48 patients with 12 dialysis stations. He said that it was fantastic news, the council had played a full part and he believed that it represented the beginning of the Cinderford Northern Quarter revival.

Upon invitation Cllr Smart, as the council's representative on the Gloucestershire Health, Community and Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee, agreed that it was a fantastic unit. During her time on the committee she had always fought for local services and was pleased to see at the opening of the unit that the plaque read 'The Forest Dialysis Unit' rather than 'The Glos NHS Trust Dialysis Unit'.

Cllr Baynham, the council's health champion said he and his wife sat on the Forest Health Forum, which had campaigned for some time on the initiative, and he was pleased that it had come to fruition. People in the district would no longer have to drive long distances for dialysis.

The chairman then announced that Cllr Gardiner had gone on his behalf to the poet laureate tournament first round and voted for three finalists who were Eley Furrell, Brenda Read-Brown and Joy-Amy Wigman. The panel then chose Brenda Read-Brown as the eventual winner of the Gloucestershire Poet Laureate.

He congratulated the council for once again participating in the World’s Biggest Coffee Morning in aid of Macmillan Cancer Support. The event had raised £250.15.

The Chairman’s Charity Dinner will be held on Friday, 23 November 2012 at Whitemead Forest Park, Parkend, at 7pm.  The focus for the evening will be the Pride of the Forest Awards.

The Chairman’s Charity Dinner would be held on Friday, 23 November 2012 at Whitemead Forest Park, Parkend, at 7pm.  The focus for the evening would be the Pride of the Forest Awards, run in conjunction with the Forester newspaper. He was pleased that tickets remained at the previous year's level and urged members to support the event, which would raise money for his two charities, the Alzheimers Society and Forest Pulse.

The Chairman to announce that he will be holding a carol service on Tuesday, 18 December 2012 at the Holy Trinity Church, (Forest Church), Drybrook.

More details will be circulated in due course.

The chairman would be holding a carol service on Tuesday, 18 December 2012 at the Holy Trinity Church, (Forest Church), Drybrook at the earlier time this year of 6.30pm and invited all to attend. More details would be circulated in due course.

To answer questions asked by members of the public. The constitution requires that questions are received three working days before the meeting (deadline 4.00pm on Monday, 8 October 2012)

Question 1

The following questions have been received from Alan Preest, 7 Greenacre, Bream, Glos GL15 6AP.

a)      Are the council aware that Two Rivers Housing are selling off ex-council housing on the open market? Does the council believe that this is socially and morally correct?

b)      How many people are on the Forest housing waiting list? Broken down please into those who reside in the Forest and those who do not. How many people were on the list in October 2010 and October 2008?

c)      What percentage of people to date have been housed on the new Lydney Higher-Park development under local connection clause criteria?

Response from Councillor Terry Hale, Cabinet Member for Community

a)      The Council is aware that Two Rivers as part of their business plan to fund the development of new affordable housing in the district will need to sell about 50 void properties up until 2015.

The government does not prevent Housing Associations from selling properties either on the open market or to residents. Indeed the right to buy scheme has recently been extended. The council recognises that in the current economic climate, coupled with reductions in Homes and Communities Agency grant levels that tough decisions need to be made if new affordable housing is to continue to be provided.

We have an enviable record of delivery in the district over the last few years and Two Rivers Housing have been a key player in this. For 2010/11 the council delivered 103 affordable homes, in 2011/12  126 affordable homes and in the first half of 2012/13 73 affordable homes have been delivered, with more in the pipeline.

b)      At present 2,490 households are on the housing waiting list. Individual people are not counted, as housing options seeks to address a household’s identified housing need rather than individuals within a household.

It is difficult to draw off numbers living in the district and those outside and to do so would be misleading . Someone can live in the district without having a local connection (i.e. only recently moved to the area) and therefore no priority and someone can live outside of the district but still have a strong local Forest connection.

Of the 2,490 households:  2,252 (90%) have a local connection to the Forest of Dean; whilst 238 (10%) do not

We do not usually retain record of numbers on the waiting list in October as we are required to complete statistical returns for April and records are kept on that basis. The nearest figures for the dates indicated are:

Waiting List August 2010  = 2,053

Waiting List April     2008  = 1,935  

c)      We can only report on those households nominated by the council for the affordable housing on the Lydney site.  Of the properties let so far 98% have a local connection to this district.  Obviously we have no record of who has bought the private housing and whether this is being used for owner occupation or private rental.

Supplementary question

Mr Preest was not  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

Can the Cabinet Member for Efficient Council and Planning Policy please inform members of the income projections for car parking fees up to the end of the financial year 2012/13, and what contingency has he put in place if the predicted income fails to reach this target?

Question 1

Councillor Paul McMahon

Can the Cabinet Member for Efficient Council and Planning Policy please inform members of the income projections for car parking fees up to the end of the financial year 2012/13, and what contingency has he put in place if the predicted income fails to reach this target?

Response from the Deputy Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for an Efficient Council and Planning Policy, Councillor Brian Robinson 

The gross income for parking fees is projected at £130,900. 

As part of the formal budget setting process the S.151 Officer is required to comment on the robustness of funds available to support the budget.  The assessment of the funding to be provided in the working balance, as part of the 2012/2013 budget, recommended a contingency of £80,000 be made against shortfalls in car park and green waste income in the year. 

Supplementary question

Cllr McMahon commented that three shops in Coleford had closed in the previous month and two in Lydney in the previous week. He asked how bad things needed to get before an economic impact assessment was undertaken.

Response from Cllr Robinson

Cllr Robinson replied that the issue would be discussed later in the meeting, adding that the evidence to date showed that the car parks were being used mainly for short periods of one or two hours.

To consider report F.180 relating to Business Rates Retention.

Cllr Robinson presented report F.180, commenting that this important issue related to the government's intention to allow collecting authorities to retain a percentage of business rates collected.

The key aspect for the council was the opportunity to pool business rates with the other councils in Gloucestershire, which in many circumstances would increase the amount of funds for the council, given that it only collected five per cent of the total business rates in Gloucestershire.

The council would share in increased income and if income decreased the council would bear up to the first ten per cent of any loss. If a growing surplus of business rates arose, then any excess would be used to build a reserve for possible future losses and to support local business. On 4 October the cabinet had recommended that the council move forward on the matter.

If Full Council agreed to be part of the pool, there would be a cooling off period when it could withdraw.

Having studied the figures, Cllr Robinson believed that in the main the council would be better off in a pool. Stroud District Council, Gloucester City Council and Tewkesbury Borough Council had already agreed in principle. The remaining three were due to make decisions imminently.

Cllr Hiett asked whether there was a risk to the council, given that on agenda page 28 the report said not, but on agenda page 36, paragraph 8.8 the report mentions 'some risk'

Cllr Robinson replied that a fall in business rates income would have some impact, but that pooling did not create a bigger risk, rather it mitigated risk across the pool members. The decision to remain in the pool would be an annual decision for all councils involved.

The Group Manager for Finance and Property added that the Full Council was being asked to make an in-principle decision, hence the 'no' under the risk column for implications.

Cllr Thomson believed that being part of the pool would reduce risk, but thought that the government's proposal would not get rid of the complex mechanisms for its support grant, since it would be redistributing the percentage it retained in the same way it had done before. He doubted that the council could be sure that any extra income would not come off the funding formula.

Cllr Robinson replied that business rates currently disappeared into a black hole, so the government was attempting to give local authorities the ability to spend locally what they collected. It was designed to give communities more influence and an incentive to help grow businesses with the concomitant benefits for employment. He thought that this was a step in the right direction, but that there was still a long way to go.

Cllr Birch asked who the largest business ratepayer was, as mentioned on agenda page 36, paragraph 8.11.

The Group Manager for Finance and Property said that it was one of the supermarkets.

Cllr Robinson proposed and Cllr Molyneux seconded the motion at the agenda.

RESOLVED - to

a)  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

To consider report F.181 relating to new Financial Procedure Rules for the council.

Cllr Molyneux, Leader of the Council, presented report F.181, explaining that the proposed changes to the contract procedure rules resulted from harmonisation among the partners in the GO Shared Service. The Audit Committee had considered the report thoroughly and had not suggested any changes to the recommendations.

Cllr Baynham asked for clarification that the employee's intellectual property rights would also be protected under proposals at agenda page 87, paragraph F.12, citing an example where an individual retained rights to music written for the employer.

The Solicitor to the Council replied that in such exceptional cases where individual employees used artistic talent, the council would agree to negotiate and ensure that the individual was properly represented.

The Group Manager for Finance and Property confirmed that Full Council would need to approve capital schemes in excess of £100,000 (agenda page 69, paragraph C4.2.2)

Cllr Molyneux proposed and Cllr Diana Edwards seconded the motion.

RESOLVED - to approve the financial procedure rules set out at Annex A to report F.181.

Voting was as follows.

For (41) - Norman Stephens, Roger Yeates, Jim Connell, Gethyn Davies, Brian Jones, Brian Edwards, James Bevan, Judy Davis, Carole Allaway Martin, Marrilyn Smart OBE, Len Lawton, Peter Ede, Marion Winship,  Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Arthur Thomas, Julia Gooch, Ian Whitburn, Dave East, Maria Edey, Philip Burford, Clive Elsmore, Andrew Gardiner, Paul Hiett, Graham Morgan, Max Coborn, Frank Baynham, Bill Osborne, Paul McMahon, Roger Sterry, David Thomson, Don Pugh, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Terry Hale, Diana Edwards, Martin Quaile, Patrick Molyneux, Brian Robinson, Jane Horne

Against (0)

Abstentions (0)

To appoint a representative to the Two Rivers Housing Board for the remainder of the term of this council.

The chairman presented the item, saying that sadly the council needed to appoint a replacement to the board for Cllr Stewart and called for nominations.

The following nominations were made

Cllr Fraser - nominated by Cllr Martin and seconded by Cllr Lynn Sterry

Cllr Whitburn - nominated by Cllr Burford and seconded by Cllr Birch

Cllr Ede - nominated by Cllr Brian Edwards and seconded by Cllr Jones.

An election was then held.

RESOLVED - to appoint Cllr Peter Ede as a council representative to the Two Rivers Housing Board for the remainder of the term of this council.

To consider report LD.437 relating to new arrangements for dealing with alleged complaints.

Cllr Molyneux presented report LD.437, explaining that the matter had been considered in various committees and groups. The Minister for Communities and Local Government had begun the process of reform, wishing to create a simple system where the police and other appropriate authorities handled very serious cases, and lesser cases were resolved at the ballot box. He said that the minister's general notion needed processes by which it could operate on a day-to-day basis, which this council had considered and had formulated the recommendations in the report.

Cllr Thomson asked what the sanctions would be, as mentioned on agenda page 123, paragraph 3.2(vii).

The Solicitor to the Council replied that the panel could censure a subject councillor or recommend to the council that they no longer represent the council on outside bodies or sit on committees.

Cllr Hiett asked that the typographical errors on the flowchart on agenda page 127 and on agenda page 129, paragraph 1.1(a) be corrected

Cllr Molyneux concluded the item by informing members that the political group leaders had agreed to nominate four members and four deputies, to create a pool.

Cllr Molyneux proposed and Cllr Quaile seconded the motion.

RESOLVED - to

a.      Note the advice from the Information Commissioner about Discloseable Pecuniary Interests relating to spouses and partners

b.      Approve the arrangements set out at Annex A for dealing with complaints of alleged member misconduct for district and parish councillors with immediate effect

c.      Approve the Terms of Reference for the Standards Panel set out at Annex B

d.      Appoint members to serve on the Standards Panel for the remainder of the municipal year 2012/13 together with named substitutes from each of the Political groups represented on the Council

e.      Appoint the Monitoring Officer as the proper officer for the purposes of receiving and determining applications for dispensations from members and co-opted members of the Council

f.        Amend the Local Code of Conduct and the Planning Code of Conduct to require members to declare any interest and not vote where the well-being or financial position of the member’s family or people with whom the member has a close association is likely to be affected by the business of the council more than it would affect the majority of inhabitants of their ward or electoral division affected by the decision

Voting was as follows.

For (41) - Norman Stephens, Roger Yeates, Jim Connell, Gethyn Davies, Brian Jones, Brian Edwards, James Bevan, Judy Davis, Carole Allaway Martin, Marrilyn Smart OBE, Len Lawton, Peter Ede, Marion Winship,  Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Roy Birch, Arthur Thomas, Julia Gooch, Ian Whitburn, Dave East, Maria Edey, Philip Burford, Clive Elsmore, Andrew Gardiner, Paul Hiett, Graham Morgan, Max Coborn, Frank Baynham, Bill Osborne, Paul McMahon, Roger Sterry, David Thomson, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Terry Hale, Diana Edwards, Martin Quaile, Patrick Molyneux, Brian Robinson, Jane Horne

Against (0)

Abstentions (0)

“In recent years there has been a proliferation of unsolicited junk mail through our doors, cold-calling through our telephone lines and spam and scam through our computers. Much of this is due to the sale of the Edited Electoral Register on which can be found our personal details. This can be sold on again and again, and this is in glaring contradiction of the Data Protection Act.

The Electoral Commission, the Association of Electoral Administrators, the Information Commissioner and the All Party Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee all are opposed to the sale of the Edited Register, recognising its potential for misuse.

In June, the responsible Minister decided that it was to remain despite all this opposition. That Minister, Mark Harper MP, even ignored the Electoral Commission’s compromise request for the option to be ‘opt-in’ rather than ‘opt-out’ which has to be done each year.

Therefore, I propose that this Council will introduce an ‘opt-in’ system of registration  now and in subsequent years, and further that correspondence is sent to Mr Harper (or whoever the new Minister is!) urging that this policy is reviewed Nationally.”

Cllr Martin tabled her motion with minor amendments as follows:

“In recent years there has been a proliferation of unsolicited junk mail through our doors, cold-calling through our telephone lines and spam and scam through our computers. Much of this is due to the sale of the Edited Electoral Register on which can be found our personal details. This can be sold on again and again, and this is in glaring contradiction of the Data Protection Act.

The Electoral Commission, the Association of Electoral Administrators, the Information Commissioner and the All Party Political and Constitutional Reform Select Committee all are opposed to the sale of the Edited Register, recognising its potential for misuse.

In June, the responsible Minister decided that it was to remain despite all this opposition. That Minister, Mark Harper MP, even ignored the Electoral Commission’s compromise request for the option to be ‘opt-in’ rather than ‘opt-out’, which has to be done each year.

Therefore, I propose that this Council introduce a system to make it easy for people to opt out indefinitely from having their details appear on the edited register now and in subsequent years, and further that correspondence is sent to Chloë Smith MP, Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform, urging that this policy is reviewed nationally.”

Cllr Martin explained that her original motion proposed something that the council could not do. She said that everyone at the meeting must have been subjected to unsolicited mail and hoped for a consensus

Cllr Molyneux said that he thought that all members would sympathise and believed an opt-in system to be wise and workable.

Cllr Edey pointed out that the Royal Mail, designers and printers gained income from producing junk mail.

Cllr Diana Edwards thanked Cllr Martin for bringing forward this sensible motion and the chairman agreed that this was a common-sense proposal.

Cllr Martin proposed and Cllr Horne seconded the amended motion.

RESOLVED - that this Council introduce a system to make it easy for people to opt out indefinitely from having their details appear on the edited register now and in subsequent years, and further that correspondence is sent to Chloë Smith MP, Minister for Political and Constitutional Reform, urging that this policy is reviewed nationally

Voting was as follows.

For (41) - Norman Stephens, Roger Yeates, Jim Connell, Gethyn Davies, Brian Jones, Brian Edwards, James Bevan, Judy Davis, Carole Allaway Martin, Marrilyn Smart OBE, Len Lawton, Peter Ede, Marion Winship,  Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Roy Birch, Arthur Thomas, Julia Gooch, Ian Whitburn, Dave East, Philip Burford, Clive Elsmore, Andrew Gardiner, Paul Hiett, Graham Morgan, Max Coborn, Frank Baynham, Bill Osborne, Paul McMahon, Roger Sterry, David Thomson, Don Pugh, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Jackie Fraser, Terry Glastonbury, Terry Hale, Diana Edwards, Martin Quaile, Patrick Molyneux, Brian Robinson, Jane Horne

Abstentions (1) - Maria Edey

Against (0)

“That an immediate Community Impact Assessment is undertaken to look at the effect of car parking charges on traders and businesses in the four towns and villages under this income regime.

That an immediate Community Impact Assessment is undertaken to look at the effect of car parking charges on traders and businesses in the four towns and villages under this income regime.

Speaking to the motion, Cllr McMahon said that it was not useful to blame the weather and the economic downturn for the effects on traders since July 2012. He was simply asking that the street wardens visit traders at random in each town and analyse the responses. He said that that Cllr Robinson had declined his invitation to accompany him on a walkabout in Coleford, commenting that the cabinet member could learn from direct consultation.

He referred to Cllr Horne's comment previously that parking in Newent was now easier, indicating that the reason was that the car parks were empty. He also referred to the district's towns, villages and communities spiralling into oblivion and asked the chamber to support his motion, commenting that all of them had been elected to support the community of the Forest of Dean.

Cllr McMahon proposed and Cllr Osborne seconded the motion at the agenda.

Cllr Molyneux asked how exactly the proposed community impact assessment would be undertaken. He was not sure that the suggestion for street wardens to do it would achieve an accurate assessment of any impact. The council would need to analyse trader's accounts over a period of two years and agree benchmarks to compare with other councils. He also wondered how the exercise would separate out other influencing factors such as the Olympics and the weather.

Cllr McMahon replied that it was not difficult to gauge opinion by asking how business had been since the introduction of car park charging. He was simply stating that there was a problem in the community that the council needed to address.

Cllr Molyneux said the answer was inadequate and that it was not the street wardens' job to do such an exercise.

Since she had been named, Cllr Horne corrected Cllr McMahon, saying that it had been a local resident who had told her that she could park more easily, now that the car park was not filled with cars staying all day.

Cllr Gardiner said that the council's Community Engagement Team had been very professional in helping with consultation over the forestry issue and he recommended that the team be used for this community impact assessment.

Cllr Baynham said that he had undertaken a similar exercise over a different issue. It had been easy to carry out, simply asking if the issue had made a difference. It was important to talk to the people affected and there was no need to make a comparison with other areas. He, too, recommended the Community Engagement Team.

Cllr Lawton emphasised that any assessment had to be valid and confidently reliable. Anecdotal evidence would not be sufficient, as the council would need to know the effects of Internet shopping, the weather and other possible contributory factors. He gave the example of a supermarket chain where individual  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.2

The Scrutiny function is intended to be transparent and open.  The practice of holding a chairman’s briefing meeting before a scrutiny meeting gives the impression that scrutiny is conducting secret meetings.  This council will cease this practice immediately.

The Scrutiny function is intended to be transparent and open.  The practice of holding a chairman’s briefing meeting before a scrutiny meeting gives the impression that scrutiny is conducting secret meetings.  This council will cease this practice immediately.

Speaking to his motion Cllr Pugh said that scrutiny was an essential function to act as a critical friend to the executive. However the current practice of having member-only chairman's briefings might appear to the public to be secret and there must not be the slightest suspicion of secrecy. This motion was not born of conspiracy theory, but of reasonable public concern. The council's legal team had informed him that all member briefings were confidential. If there were commercial sensitivities, then that was acceptable. However open meetings needed to be clear, honest and trustworthy. If the practice continued scrutiny would be viewed as a complicit friend and so the briefings must stop.

Cllr Pugh proposed and Cllr Hiett seconded the motion at the agenda.

Cllr Burford, chairman of the Strategic Overview and Scrutiny Committee, agreed with everything in the motion concerning the open nature of scrutiny. He explained that to be effective the committee planned the way in which it would ask questions to get meaningful answers in the briefings. The briefings were open to all members and were no different to any other member-only briefings held before public meetings. Members did not debate or make decisions in the briefings and it was nationally recognised that organising questioning was more effective than random questions to achieve outcomes. At other councils, select committees and at this council for cabinet, shadow cabinet and other committees there were pre-meeting briefings. For this Full Council meeting there had been a member-only briefing regarding pooling business rates and there were several all-member briefings planned for the coming months. They added to members' understanding and helped inform a knowledgeable debate. Scrutiny remained a non-political critical friend.

Cllr Smart agreed that it was absolutely right for scrutiny to be open and transparent. Throughout her time on the Gloucestershire Health and Community Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee, the chairman had held briefings for the committee only before each meeting. They allowed the committee to consider questions and lines of inquiry to become more effective. The Centre for Public Scrutiny recognised briefings as a commonly used approach. They were not unlawful and she believed that if held as described they are acceptable.

Cllr Gardiner supported the motion, as he had recently seen scrutiny take place in private on 11 September 2012.

Cllr Burford asked the Solicitor to the Council to confirm the status of that meeting and she replied that it had been an informal planning meeting for an inquiry that was about to begin.

Cllr Gardiner continued that it should have been based on a written report. He added that a cabinet member had been in attendance who had influenced the meeting, which was contrary to openness.

Cllr Molyneux agreed that scrutiny was hugely important to operate checks and balances.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 12.3

“That the Forest of Dean District Council appoints a Council Member Champion for the Forest; someone with the knowledge and love of the Forest of Dean”.

That the Forest of Dean District Council appoints a Council Member Champion for the Forest; someone with the knowledge and love of the Forest of Dean.

Speaking to the motion, Cllr Edey said that it was important for a champion to be pushing to retain the forest. She believed that if it were cut into once, then the rest would follow.

Cllr Edey proposed and Cllr Osborne seconded the motion.

Cllr Martin said that the Labour group had discussed the issue at its meeting and could not support it, since all councillors were champions and all should include the forest in that. She agreed with everything Cllr Edey had said, urging all members to fight for the forest that she was sure they all dearly loved.

Cllr Hiett said that he had been proud to represent the people of Bream for over 18 years and regarded himself as a forest champion, so would not be supporting the motion.

Cllr Martin clarified for Cllr Gardiner that no Labour member had been whipped, reminding him that a Labour councillor had seconded the motion.

Cllr Gardiner stated that fine words were not a substitute for action. He asked where other members had been when it had been proposed to sell off the forest in 1981. Being champion was about doing something when it mattered. He believed that most had been missing when required. He had been working for years to persuade people such as former MP Paul Marland that the forest mattered. Now the council was advocating the sale of 200 acres of forest. The council should be proud to make a stand.

The chairman agreed with the sentiments of Cllr Martin about all members having the duty to be champions of the forest.

Cllr Molyneux also endorsed Cllr Martin's viewpoint. After having lived in various parts of the country he had made the decision to bring up his family in the Forest of Dean, to become involved as a councillor and currently leader and to champion the forest. He reminded members that the cabinet had set up a support group to work on issues relating to the forest and forestry.

Cllr Winship called for the question to be put.

When put to the vote the motion was unsuccessful.

Voting was as follows.

For (3) - Maria Edey Andrew Gardiner, Bill Osborne

Against (36) - Norman Stephens, Roger Yeates, Jim Connell, Gethyn Davies, Brian Jones, Brian Edwards, James Bevan, Judy Davis, Carole Allaway Martin, Marrilyn Smart OBE, Len Lawton, Peter Ede, Marion Winship, Gabriella Kirkpatrick, Roy Birch, Arthur Thomas, Julia Gooch, Ian Whitburn, Dave East, Philip Burford, Clive Elsmore, Paul Hiett, Graham Morgan, Max Coborn, Frank Baynham, Paul McMahon, Roger Sterry, Lynn Sterry, Di Martin, Terry Glastonbury, Terry Hale, Diana Edwards, Martin Quaile, Patrick Molyneux, Brian Robinson, Jane Horne

Abstentions (2) - Don Pugh, Jackie Fraser

The Leader of the Council and the chairman of the scrutiny committee to report on recent activities, followed by questions from members. Depending on time the Chairman will rule and only take one question per member relating to reports.

a)     Cabinet – Councillor Patrick Molyneux

b)     Strategic Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Philip Burford

Cllr Glastonbury proposed and Cllr Kirkpatrick seconded the motion.

RESOLVED - To defer this item to the next ordinary meeting of Full Council on 13 December 2012.

Thursday 13 December 2012 at 7.00pm

Thursday 21 February 2013 at 7.00pm (change of date)

Thursday 11 April 2013 at 7.00pm (change of date)

Thursday 23 May 2013 at 7.00pm

Thursday 13 December 2012 at 7.00pm

Thursday 21 February 2013 at 7.00pm (change of date)

Thursday 11 April 2013 at 7.00pm (change of date)

Thursday 23 May 2013 at 7.00pm