The deadline for questions to be submitted to the Monitoring Officer is 29 December 2023.
Minutes:
Question by Councillor Duane Farr
Last summer Councillor Adams and I supported a funding bid via the Community Infrastructure Neighbourhood Portion for Fernheath Community Sports Association to match fund a much needed upgrade for their multi-use games area. This was duly submitted on time, however since then there has been no communication back confirming whether the bid was successful or not, because the assessment panel has been repeatedly delayed in making the decisions. This means the local charity is left in limbo regarding the availability of funding, not knowing if they should seek funding elsewhere so the facilities are left unusable, and leaving them in a position whereby other funders towards the upgrades may not continue to be so patient.
At time of writing on 15 December 2023 it currently states the following on the council website:
“Round 5 will open in June 2023 with bids accepted to 31 July 2023. We will announce successful grant awards in September 2023.”
Further down the page it goes on to state:
“Round 5 - closed 31 July 2023, successful bids will be announced in November 2023”
It is now January 2024 – 5 months later.
Please can the Cabinet Member confirm the date when successful grants will be announced so that Fernheath Community Sports Association and other local charities will have an idea when funding will be granted?
Response by Councillor Millie Earl, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Connected Communities
Thank you Cllr Farr. Applicants were notified of the decisions regarding their applications on 22 December. I’m delighted that Fernheath Community Sports Association were successful in their bid along with 27 other community projects across 16 wards.
It is regrettable that the decision period took so long – this was down to trying to find a suitable date for the CIL panel to meet due to the availability of councillors and officers, and also the capacity in the Planning Team who were working hard to finalise the Local Plan.
Supplementary Question by Councillor Duane Farr
I'm pleased to hear funds have since been awarded despite the unfortunate delay. What does the cabinet member intend to do to improve communication with funding applicants to avoid them being left in limbo in future?
Response by Councillor Millie Earl, Deputy Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Connected Communities
When we are looking at the next rounds, we need to make sure that they are aligned with the timetables of other activities that are going on within planning.
This got left behind because of that timetable alongside a huge amount of work in the local plan. Hopefully, now that we have passed the local plan through Council, the next round should be a lot smoother, and we'll have a bit more of an opportunity to get a bit more pace around it rather than it being sporadically rounds here and there. It will be smoother from here on in.
Question by Councillor P Canavan
Can I thank the Leader for her email to Councillors dated 22 December 2023 and the information regarding Devolution. The Leader will recall that I raised with her an article in the Press indicating that the Leader of Dorset Council would be presenting a paper to their Cabinet outlining a Wessex model that included Somerset and Wiltshire and Swindon. Could the Leader indicate what further discussions are planned, whether a joint strategy has yet been agreed, if any work has yet been done on a possible financial model and at what point a paper is likely to come forward to BCP Cabinet on this?
Response by Councillor Vikki Slade, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Dynamic Places
Thank you, Councillor Canavan, for the question and the opportunity to clarify the current position. The previous administration took a paper through the previous Cabinet in December, 2022, setting out a number of options to explore around devolution. This gave authority to the cabinet to continue to explore options. At the time, there were four options, Pan-Hampshire, a partnership with Dorset, Great Southwest, and Central South. At that time and now, there was a view that we would not be interested in a mayoral model. Just stress that is still the case. The papers at the time looked at the pros and cons of each option, and we continue to look at them when we came into council in summer.
There have been meetings with members across the various options, but during one of those meetings, I raised the opportunity to look at a Wessex deal, bringing in unitary councils from across the region that covered both rural and urban areas. We have now met with the leaders and chief executives of the six councils and have a further meeting planned next week. At this time, officers have been asked simply to create a working document that looks at where we might be aligned. No further details have been agreed. We are also aware that both options, the current government has on the table, will not work for us, and we will not be able to move much further forward than a decision in principle.
The leader of Dorset has chosen to share this update with his council as he has elections in May and is keen to make progress during this term as it formed part of his own earlier commitments. The other leaders have made it clear alongside me that this is not a key priority for their local authorities at this time, but that we would want to be in a position to be ready should the circumstances change, either under the current government or the next government. I would expect to bring forward a paper to cabinet in the early summer with an update on the options that remain open to us as councils, and no decisions or significant spend will be taken without the full democratic process being followed.
Supplementary Question by Councillor Patrick Canavan
My supplementary question is then when?
Because at the meeting of the O&S Southwest meeting this morning, a report was given by both Devon and Cornwall about substantial progress which they have made on a devolution model, which does not include a directly elected mayor. So they're well underway in those authorities and devolution is coming. So when, through you, Chair, are we as a council going to be able to take a view on this, look at the risk, look at the options, look at what the potential situation is in terms of funding from government?
Response by Councillor Vikki Slade, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Dynamic Places
Thank you. As I say, there were four options that were being considered by the previous administration.
It was fairly clear that there was not an appetite to simply have a Dorset and BCP deal. Otherwise people would say, what was the point of LGR? You might as well just have one council.
The Pan Dorset deal, you can read about it. It's been falling apart because of difficulties between the Hampshire County Council and Portsmouth. So that deal is no longer practical. Great Southwest would not be a deal because Devon and Cornwall are doing their own devolution deals. And in fact, Plymouth have refused to work with the Devon deal. So that's not practical. And Central South, which would be something which would be the Central South urban areas that we all thought was a great idea, is not practical because Hampshire won't allow there to be a contiguous area.
So those deals that were on the table at the early stages when we came in are really not practical. This idea about going with Wessex has only come forward within the last three months. Those deals with Cornwall and Devon have been on the table for a lot longer. Government has to actually progress those deals with us. We are not yet in that position.
I fully expect to bring forward a paper to Cabinet in the early summer with an update on the options. So your timetable of when? Early summer. Of course, it is worth saying that those deals that Devon and Cornwall have announced have the approval of government. And the two different tiers, neither of them are offering what we would want. What we do has to be right for our residents. And if it's not right for our residents, we won't do it.