Issue - meetings

For debate and decision.

a)         Scrutiny review

Cllr Brain Oosthuysen, Chairman Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee (OSMC), presented the Scrutiny Review report to council.A meeting of scrutiny chairs and vice-chairs had taken place on 28 February 2017 to undertake an ‘end of term’ review of overview and scrutiny at the Council. He drew member’s attention to the current inquiry by the Communities and Local Government Select Committee on Overview and Scrutiny, and that Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee had used the inquiry questions in this work.

Council noted the key messages within the report which outlined that feedback had been overwhelmingly positive and no changes proposed to the current scrutiny practices. There were some areas, particularly around working practices where improvements could be made.

b)        Scrutiny update

i)          Economic Growth  Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Cllr Joe Harris, Chairman of the Committee, took this opportunity to thank Jo Moore, Senior Democratic Services Adviser, for her help and support to him and the committee.

ii)         Environment and Communities Scrutiny Committee

Cllr Lunnon asked a question relating to recycling credits. She noted that this committee had discussed this matter before the release of the additional information in the Urbaser Balfour Beatty contract and suggested that the committee might wish to revisit this matter as recycling credits would now be a charge for this council and she questioned how this would be managed. She also indicated that following the release of the contract information she might have further questions. Noting that Cllr Lunnon was not standing in the upcoming election the Chairman of Council stated that council would no doubt see Cllr Lunnon in the public question lists in the next council. Cllr Theodoulou, Cabinet Member Finance and Change, stated that he would arrange for a response to this question.

iii)        Health and Care Overview and Scrutiny Committee

As agreed at the start of the meeting Cllr Binns, Cabinet Member Older People, gave a short update on the situation with regard to Cleeve Link. She assured members that arrangements with care agencies across the county to pick up the domiciliary care that was previously provided by Cleeve Link have now largely been agreed. In most of the county these were already up and running with the Human Support Group covering Gloucester and Stroud; Radis were covering the Forest of Dean and parts of Tewkesbury Borough; Live Well at Home were supporting Tewkesbury Town and Marina Court; and Careful Care were supporting the Cotswolds.

Comfort Care were the fifth care agency involved and they were working with the council to ensure a smooth transition in Cheltenham; with the largest group of service users and staff this area has been the most difficult part of the transfer arrangements but that we were expecting this to be concluded by the weekend. In the meantime, council officers with support from partners, particularly Gloucestershire Care Services NHS Trust, were continuing to ensure people received the support that they needed. Cllr Binns stated that she was appreciative of the forbearance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23

For information and members’ questions.

Cllr Brian Oosthuysen, Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee, presented the report.

Cllr Tim Harman, Chairman of the Children and Families Overview and Scrutiny Committee, assured members that a piece of work would be undertaken ahead of the May 2017 elections to scope a scrutiny review on school exclusions. He recognised that there had been a significant increase in exclusions across the county and the reasons for this needed to be explored.  He said that the review would not start ahead of the elections but the terms of reference would be ready for the work to start soon afterwards.

RESOLVED to note the report.

For information and members’ questions.

Cllr Brian Oosthuysen, Chair of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee, presented the report.  He said that scrutiny chairs had attended a chairing skills session run at Shire Hall by John Cade from the Institute of Local Government Studies at Birmingham University. He was pleased that scrutiny at the Council was recognised nationally as best practice.  There had been an opportunity at the session to start exploring the shape of scrutiny for devolution. This would be taken forward through discussion at Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee lead members and take on board the views of the districts and partner organisations.

Cllr Lesley Williams, Chair of the EU Referendum Scrutiny Task Group, advised that, although the group had been unable to complete its work in light of the earlier than anticipated referendum, useful information had been provided at the two evidence gathering sessions held.  She hoped that there would be an opportunity to share this information wider with members.

Answering a question, Cllr Oosthuysen confirmed that scrutiny chairs were expected to present recommendations from their committee irrespective of their personal views. 

Some concern was expressed that the information in the scrutiny report relating to the Forest of Dean scrutiny review did not reflect the recommendations in the task group report.  Cllr Rob Bird, explained that the report before members only summarised discussion at the Environment and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee and did not in any way change the recommendations of the task group.  The recommendations would be presented to the Cabinet in due course.  

RESOLVED to note the scrutiny report.

For information and members’ questions.

The report includes a recommendation from the Environment and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee requesting that a letter be sent to the Secretary of State relating to the extraction of unconventional hydrocarbons in Gloucestershire.

a)    Exploration for unconventional hydrocarbons

Cllr Rob Bird, Chair of the Environment and Communities Overview and Scrutiny Committee, presented the recommendation from the committee meeting held on 13 January 2016.  He noted that since the original motion was referred to the committee the national position had changed.  He said that a small majority of committee members had requested that the matter be referred  back to Council with a recommendation that a letter be sent to the Secretary of State requesting that the process for exploring for unconventional hydrocarbons be halted in Gloucestershire.  Some members were mindful that the Council was the statutory minerals planning authority.  Those members believed that it was unwise for the Council to express a view at the present time.

Cllr Nigel Moor, the Chair of the Planning Committee, stated that the matter required some careful thought as there was a risk that members supporting the recommendation might be viewed as predetermining the issue.  He said that members could be viewed as having a closed mind.  A fundamental principle of the planning process was that all the evidence including the views of the public should be considered at the time of the application. 

A number of members believed that it was right and proper for the Council to listen to the views of the public and send a message to the Government which recognised their concerns.  They noted that they were not considering an individual application and they could not see why the Council could not comment on an issue which was of such significance to local people. 

One member said that the extraction of hydrocarbons was a known cause of climate change, an issue which was of fundamental importance to national security.

Another member stated that exploration to find out what was present was very different to the extraction of unconventional hydrocarbons.  He failed to see an issue with taking steps to explore what was there.

Other members questioned the value of writing to the Secretary of State.  They remained concerned about the danger of predetermination, not only for individual planning applications but also in respect of approval of the Minerals Local Plan. They were anxious that members were able to determine matters locally.  To do that they needed to be able to show that they approached decisions with an open mind.  Making statements ahead of the decision making process might open the Council up to legal challenge including judicial review. 

Responding to a request for advice, the Head of Legal Services advised that members needed to satisfy themselves that they could approach the decision making process with an open mind and consider the evidence presented in an objective way.  She said that it was a matter for individual members to decide whether they wished to participate in the debate or reserve their right to comment until they were required to make decisions on individual applications or the Minerals Local Plan. 

On being put to a recorded vote, it was

RESOLVED that Gloucestershire County Council sends  ...  view the full minutes text for item 11

For information and members’ questions.

RESOLVED that the scrutiny report be noted.

For information and members’ questions.

RESOLVED that the scrutiny report be noted.

For information and members’ questions.