Agenda and minutes

To receive any apologies for absence from Members.

Apologies were received from Cllr D Farr and Cllr G Farquhar

To receive information on any changes in the membership of the Committee.

Note – When a member of a Committee is unable to attend a meeting of a Committee or Sub-Committee, the relevant Political Group Leader (or their nominated representative) may, by notice to the Monitoring Officer (or their nominated representative) prior to the meeting, appoint a substitute member from within the same Political Group. The contact details on the front of this agenda should be used for notifications. 

Cllr A Filer substituted for Cllr D Farr and Cllr L Allison substituted for Cllr G Farquhar.

Councillors are requested to declare any interests on items included in this agenda. Please refer to the workflow on the preceding page for guidance.

Declarations received will be reported at the meeting.

Cllr J Edwards declared for the purpose of transparency in relation to agenda item 6, Scrutiny of Transport and Sustainability Related Cabinet Reports - Climate Action Annual Report 2019/20, that a member of her family was a report author and she would therefore not take part in this item.

To receive any public questions, statements or petitions submitted in accordance with the Constitution. Further information on the requirements for submitting these is available to view at the following link:-

https://democracy.bcpcouncil.gov.uk/documents/s2305/Public%20Items%20-%20Meeting%20Procedure%20Rules.pdf 

The deadline for the submission of public questions is 4 clear working days before the meeting.

The deadline for the submission of a statement is midday the working day before the meeting.

The deadline for the submission of a petition is 10 working days before the meeting.

There were no public questions, statements or petitions submitted for this meeting.

To consider issues within the Regeneration, Economy and Strategic Planning Portfolio area, including the following report scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 16 December 2020:

• BCP Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise the report and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.

Cabinet member invited to attend for this item: Councillor Philip Broadhead, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Regeneration, Economy and Strategic Planning and Councillor Mike Greene, Portfolio Holder for Transport and Sustainability.

The Cabinet report is attached for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

BCP Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document - The Portfolio Holder for transport and Sustainability introduced the report, a copy of which had been circulated and which appears as Appendix ‘I’ to the Cabinet minutes of 16 December in the Minute Book. A number of issues were raised by the Board in the subsequent discussion, including:

·     Parts of the Twin Sails regeneration area were designated as zone B but were within good walking distance and within the regeneration zone which should itself have good community facilities. A Councillor felt that these parts should be within zone A as was part already across the water. It was also noted that the Port was designated as zone c and it was suggested that this should be an area where we were reducing traffic. The Portfolio Holder advised that it wasn’t expected that this would be completely right from the beginning and there were options for reviewing the zones. However, it was also noted that the difference in requirements between zone b and zone a were minimal and only in reference to 2-bedroom houses and family size, 3-bedroom flats.

·     A decision to move coach parking by the previous Christchurch Council from the Town Centre to a more remote location. A Councillor asked if there was anything more on coach issues on this report. The Portfolio Holder advised that this policy related solely to new development parking provision and did not address any normal car parks or on street parking provision.

·     Many bus companies were now working with very tight margins in the provision of some routes and in light of this the Portfolio Holder was asked about the timescales for when it was anticipated that the bus services would meet the needs of the community. The Board was advised that the Council needed to work with the bus companies and that they had been involved with this policy. The major changes from previous policies were in zone A and B which were areas which were already well served by bus routes. Some routes were just on the margin of viability should in theory be helped by the parking standards policy. The overall timescale for this would need to work itself out.

·     A Board member commented that parking was major contributor to BCP finances and there was a need to support retailers and the hospitality sector particularly at the moment. It was suggested to delay proposals to allow for natural erosion following Brexit and Covid to take its course. The Portfolio Holder responded that he couldn’t see anyway in which the policy would work against businesses in town centres and reiterated that there was no change to public car parking or on street parking under the policy.

·     A Councillor asked about the previous proposals for constructing future properties with car parking which could be converted to other uses as the need for car parking reduces. It was noted that this was now unlikely to be required as there was no onsite parking proposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 112.

To consider issues within the Transport and Sustainability Portfolio area, including the following report scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 16 December 2020:

• Climate Action Annual Report 2019/20

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise the report and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.

Cabinet member invited to attend for this item: Councillor Mike Greene, Portfolio Holder for Transport and Sustainability.

The Cabinet report is attached for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

Climate Action Annual Report - The Portfolio Holder for Transport and Sustainability introduced the report, a copy of which had been circulated and which appears as Appendix ‘H’ to the Cabinet minutes of 16 December in the Minute Book. A number of issues were raised by the Board in the subsequent discussion, including:

·     In response to a question the Portfolio Holder advised that the 153 point action plan, was approved for consultation in 2019, the consultation had since been delayed. The action plan consisted of 100 actions for the Council to reduce emissions in Council targets and a further 53 actions to work with partners. Some of the internal Council actions had already been completed. Others were being considered as to how the Council would be able to deliver them over the next 10 years. Some were condensed into others and others were not considered suitable for moving forwards. The 53 external actions were the ones being consulted on starting on 17 December 2020. Nothing out of the 153 had been lost.

·     That it would be useful to show which actions had been achieved or condensed in order to demonstrate the work that the Council had undertaken. The Portfolio Holder advised that whilst the report included some details on next steps there was no direct mapping and the Portfolio Holder undertook to take the suggestion for this on board.

·     A Councillor commented on the global reduction in greenhouse gas emissions due to the global pandemic and the issue that was outlined in the report that greater reductions in greenhouse gasses were needed year on year. How this was going to be done was not outlined in the report.

·     A Councillor asked about how the achievements would be measured in terms of reductions in tonnes of CO2 and where this couldn’t be equated for some actions, alternative measures of progress, including reductions of plastic and waste and details on how this was being done and how it was encouraged.  The Portfolio Holder confirmed that this was an important point, and this was included as part of the greening of the energy tariff.  The Portfolio Holder advised that he felt there would be considerable advances over the next year.

·     It was noted that words used in the report included encourage, continue work started or strategize, and it was suggested that this did not show a lot of commitment to definite targets moving forward. The Portfolio Holder advised that this was the annual report on what has happened over the last 12 months rather than looking forward. However, there was an element in the report on next steps, but this was a report on what has happened rather than an action plan. It was hoped that the action plan would be available in the next few months.

·     The report included a point about investigating opportunities for local waste treatment facilities and a Board member suggested that just because something was local did not mean it was the best environmentally and that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 113.

To consider issues within the Community Safety Portfolio area, including the following report scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 16 December 2020:

• Domestic Abuse Strategy

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise the report and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.

Cabinet member invited to attend for this item: Councillor May Haines, Portfolio Holder for Community Safety.

The Cabinet report is attached for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

Domestic Abuse Strategy - The Portfolio Holder for Community Safety introduced the report, a copy of which had been circulated and which appears as Appendix ‘K’ to the Cabinet minutes of 16 December in the Minute Book. A number of issues were raised by the Board in the subsequent discussion, including:

·     A Councillor raised a number of concerns with the strategy, including that there were no principles of measurement for what was trying to be achieved, that there was no specific plan outlined for how performance in this area could be improved and also that there was reference to finance concerns and accessing temporary one-off grants. Overall, it was felt that this was disappointing.

·     It was noted that most reports of domestic violence came through the police and other intelligence and within the plan it was set out what we would do with reports received. The Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference group met on a weekly basis and considered what action was required for all those on a ‘watch’ list. There were priorities which were held jointly with the police. It was explained that the strategy was not intended to provide a one size fits all plan and issues would need to be dealt with on a case by case basis.

·     A Board member commented that the report was lacking on information regarding investment of resources in prevention and education and funding refuge places. The report referred to a SWOT analysis, but it currently did not have sight of where the weaknesses were. It was noted that financial issues were included within the main report under financial implications. It was noted that the £425k referred to in the report included funding for raising awareness of the issue but that there was a need to be sensitive in the way that this was done, particularly for those who may be at risk.

·     It was noted that the report referred to a delivery plan that would be developed and it was suggested that this should be shared with the Board.

·     Members asked if, due to the current circumstances, whether another rise in the number of incidences of domestic violence was expected and how would the delivery plan reflect the impact of Corona virus on this. It was noted that the strategy was a joint initiative with other agencies and any update could be brought back to O&S if this was helpful. The Covid response to this area was approved back in April and there was joint communication with police and partners and awareness was being promoted through ‘#you’re not alone’. Cases had gone up recently and the numbers were concerning. The strategy needed to be agreed in order to work together and bring the numbers down. It was normal for cases to increase at this time of year.

·     A Councillor commented that they would have liked to have seen more detail in the report but there was a lot of detail that could not be gone into and felt that  ...  view the full minutes text for item 114.

In relation to the appendix of the report below the Board may wish to consider making the following resolution should it wish to discuss matters contained within the appendix to the following report: -

‘That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs such interest in disclosing the information.’

RESOLVED that under Section 100 (A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 1 and 2 in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act and that the public interest in withholding the information outweighs such interest in disclosing the information.

To consider issues within the Environment Cleansing and Waste Portfolio area, including the following report scheduled for Cabinet consideration on 16 December 2020:

• Bereavement Services Business Plan Phase 1

The O&S Board is asked to scrutinise the report and make recommendations to Cabinet as appropriate.

Cabinet member invited to attend for this item: Councillor Mark Anderson, Portfolio Holder for Environment, Cleansing and Waste.

The Cabinet report is attached for consideration by the Overview and Scrutiny Board.

Bereavement Services Business Plan Phase 1- The Portfolio Holder for Environment, Cleansing and Waste introduced the report, a copy of which had been circulated and which appears as Appendix ‘C’ to the Cabinet minutes of 16 December in the Minute Book. A number of issues were raised by the Board in the subsequent discussion, including:

·     A Councillor commented that they found it difficult to support the report due to the proposals and the impact they would have around the whole market for death and bereavement in Poole and the outward and ongoing impact that it would have. There was concern about how the funding was going to be invested. It was asked why immediate investment in Poole was not included as an option within the report. The Portfolio Holder noted that this was included as an option with the report. The division of funding for Bournemouth and Poole was outlined by the Head of Parks and Bereavement Services.

·     There was also concerns raised about the lack of burial space now available within Poole and the impact that this would have going forward. Officers and the Portfolio Holder confirmed that there was an awful lot of work to do in this area and appreciated the concerns of Councillors.

·     In response to a question regarding the investment and the potential for borrowing in this area the Portfolio Holder confirmed that this was the first stage and there were several reasons to proceed on this basis. It was noted that the paper set out an interim position over the next 18 months.

·     There was discussion regarding working in partnership with other funeral providers and the reasons for and against this option.

·     A Board member asked about the natural burial ground in Throop, the Portfolio Holder advised that he was not sure if it was meadow or woodland but there would be no grave markers and would be owned by the Council.