Agenda item

8a – Licensing Committee 16 September 2021 – Minute No 18 – Sex Establishment Policy

 

The Chairman confirmed that he had allowed 5 minutes for Councillor Judes Butt, Chairman of the Licensing Committee to present the recommendations on this issue.

 

Councillor Butt, Chairman of the Licensing Committee presented the report on the Sex Establishment Policy as set out on the agenda and outlined the recommendations.  Councillor Butt explained that this was the first BCP Council Sex Establishment Policy.  She reported on how the Policy had been developed to enable the regulation of the operation of any sex establishment within the BCP conurbation, including the legislative requirements, the comprehensive consultation with all relevant stakeholders at each stage and the chronological journey of the Policy to date.  The Chairman highlighted key aspects of the policy including public sector equality issues. On 29 June 2021 there had been an all Member briefing giving Members the opportunity to be informed about the policy raise questions and contribute to the process being followed.  The Chairman referred to the last meeting of the Licensing Committee in September which heard questions and statements from the Public and from Councillors.  She explained that the Committee had considered these and all the public feedback, dancer responses and the equality impact assessment which was referred to at every Member workshop to ensure a thorough and detailed consideration of all equality impacts. Councillor Butt reported that the equality impact assessment had been signed off by the Equality Assurance Panel a new step to ensure that the Council met its Statutory duties in full.  The Chairman reported that the policy demonstrated the Council’s compliance with the Public Sector Equality duty. Councillor Butt explained that the Licensing Committee has comprehensively discussed and interrogated the report and appended policy and had amended and improved it throughout its journey.  Members were informed that on 16 September 2021 the Committee agreed the final amendments to the policy which were set out in detail in the report at 8 (a).  Councillor Butt referred to the proposal relating to the retention of CCTV footage to amend from 31 to 90 days.  However, this was subject to a further amendment agreed by all Members of the Licensing Committee that the retention of CCTV footage should be amended back to 31 days and not 90 days.  Councillor Butt explained that the reason for the amendment was although in theory it was a good idea, officers had subsequently received further advice that this change goes against the principles of GDPR and the guidance issued by the Information Commissioners Office (ICO), which states that personal information should be deleted as soon as practical. For domestic users this was 14 days and for commercial users this was 31 days. Members were informed that Officers had spoken to the BCP Council’s CCTV manager and the Crime Prevention Officer for Dorset Police and they had both confirmed that they agree that 31 days was reasonable and any longer would breach ICO rules. Members were informed that full assurance can be provided that if any incidents occur at venues, officers would, always download any CCTV images and save a copy for action, this then gives any persons plenty of time to come forward if they so wish. The Chairman reported that the Draft Policy presented today reflects this amendment pending agreement by Council. 

 

Councillor Butt took the opportunity to thank the Licensing Committee Members and Officers for all their efforts and contributions in the creation of this complex policy.  In conclusion she reported that the Sex Establishment Policy as agreed by the Licensing Committee sets out a robust framework for making decisions on sex establishments and it provides strict conditions in all venues in order to keep dancers, staff, customers and the public safe. Councillor Julie Bagwell seconded the proposal.

 

Councillors considered the proposed recommendations and made a number of comments. Councillor Dunlop highlighted that violence against women and girls was an epidemic she outlined the statistics relating to death and rape and access to videos illustrating abuse.  She referred to the intolerable level of harassment that girls suffer at school on a daily basis.  She reported that the normalisation of the porn culture by the sex industry which dehumanises women as sex objects to be enjoyed by men drives this epidemic.  Whether legal or not such activities undermine everything that the Council says about women’s equality, safety and values in society.  Councillor Dunlop explained that such objectification as practised in sexual entertainment venues was directly linked to sexual and domestic violence and was recognised at an international level by the legally binding United Nations Convention to eliminate discrimination against women which calls upon states to take action against objectification.  Councillor Dunlop indicated, not to be confused with the Licensing Act which explicitly excludes sex establishments and requires evidence of undermining, the legislation that applies to Sexual Establishment Venues gives Local Authorities extensive powers. Councillor Dunlop reported that a Council needs no evidence of anything in order to decide that objectification and exploitation of women does not reflect its values.  She explained that the Licensing Committee had the power to say no and the authority to accept the view of the female respondents who told the Committee clearly, 95%, that they were vehemently opposed to these clubs with good reasons based on safety and equality.  She further explained that the power of sexual establishment legislation makes it possible to say no location was suitable so with her portfolio hat on she could object to a SEV licence application renewal because she was creating a family identity and such establishments do not fit.  She highlighted that the Policy gives required rights to the existing clubs and exempts them from the powers the Council has to use the locality to control them for 5 years – the law indicates that the applicants cannot be treated any differently to existing clubs.  She asked due to no limit what was expected to happen when the Council uses locality when dealing with new applicants, she indicated that she could not support the policy.

 

Councillor Hadley indicated that he was a member of the Licensing Committee but was not a Member of the Working Group that looked in detail at the policy. He referred to the safety of the dancers and comments made by Councillors that they felt unsafe in the vicinity of the venues and was concerned about the removal of the cap on the number of establishments.  He indicated that he would be abstaining from supporting the adoption of the policy.

 

Councillor Moore explained that when the policy was discussed at the Licensing Committee, she submitted a written statement objecting.  She acknowledged that the Committee had undertaken a huge amount of work and subsequently approved the policy.  However, she highlighted that her initial objections still stand, and she would not be supporting the policy.

 

Councillor Farquhar thanked Councillor Dunlop for her summing up of the issue. He explained that he was a Member of the Licensing Committee acknowledging that it was within the law but highlighting that this was the wrong message to send from BCP Council and he would be voting against the adoption on any SEV Policy.

 

Councillor Lewis reported that she had submitted a statement against the policy and endorsed everything that Councillor Dunlop had said.

 

Councillor Rampton acknowledged the strong views that had been expressed whilst highlighting that the venues were lawful to operate, they were regulated, there has been consultation, there was no apparent evidence of trafficking, coercion or exploitation and no evidence or reports of assaults or violence linked to any of the venues. She emphasised that the Council was compliant with Public Sector Equality duty and she would be supporting the policy.

 

Councillor Wilson indicated that he had not been directly involved in the development of the policy but based on the statement from Councillor Dunlop he would be voting against the policy.  He emphasised that this was not solely on moral grounds as there was other evidence.

 

Councillor Judes Butt in summing up acknowledged the high passions and accepted that Councillor Dunlop’s statement had identified worries.  She identified that the Council has to provide for the BCP area, and the Licensing Committee had done its best in the development of the SEV Policy. She was saddened that some Councillors had not been involved in the process but thanked those Councillors who had come forward with their concerns.  Councillor Butt reported that the SEV Policy as agreed by the Licensing Committee sets out a robust framework for BCP Council to make decisions on sexual establishments and provides extremely strict conditions which would be applied and was there to keep the dancers, staff, customers and the public safe.

 

A request for a recorded vote failed.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Licensing Committee on 16 September 2021 as set out on the agenda and the further amendment that the CCTV retention period be amended to 31 days and not 90 days which were carried as follows.

 

Voting: For – 35, Against – 14, Abstentions – 13

 

Councillor Farquhar wished to be recorded as voting against the above decision.

 

8b - Cabinet 29 September 2021 - Minute No 55 - Accelerating regeneration and investment in the BCP Area

 

Councillor Broadhead, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Development, Growth & Regeneration presented the report on accelerating regeneration and investment in the BCP area as set out in the agenda and outlined the recommendation.  Councillor Broadhead referred to the development and identification of approximately 15/16 sites with around £3bn of gross development value of regeneration with a considerable amount concentrated on the rejuvenation of Poole which had been highlighted in the Big Plan.  He referred to the Future Places Urban Regeneration Company which was operational with really talented staff and he was proud of the work already being undertaken.  The recommendation before the Council sought approval to increase the budget by an additional £3.404m which was a fraction of a percent of the gross development value.  Councillor Broadhead reported that costs such as site and ecological surveys were being incurred in the development of the programme.  Councillor Mellor seconded the proposal.

 

Councillors commented on the recommendations including concerns about how the proposed additional resources were being funded, the expectation that future generations would fund such projects and the need to stop and think before approving any further expenditure as the budget was showing a deficit.  Councillor Howell indicated that in general he was supportive of the measures in the report.  He emphasised the need for proper governance in relation to such matters and proposed the following amendment which was seconded by Councillor Rice:

 

“In the interests of promoting confidence in the governance of the URC amongst the public, developers, investors and future residents the Council requires one Board position to be offered to one of the opposition groups.” 

 

The Chief Executive reported that any amendment should relate to the content of the report which was considered by Cabinet and from which the recommendation had come from. Councillor Broadhead reported that Councillor Howell was referring, he believed, to a different regeneration report relating to the commissioning business plan which was not part of this recommendation.  Councillor Howell indicated that the business plan was referenced in the document.  The Chief Executive reported that the matter was appropriate to bring before the Council in another form but to raise at this point in the agenda it was necessary to check that it was referenced in the appropriate report.  The Chairman reported that as this reference could not be confirmed at this stage it was not possible to proceed with the above amendment. Councillor Howell indicated that the relevant place in the report was point 46.  The Chairman reiterated that it would not be possible to accommodate his amendment as this related to the officer structure

 

Councillors commented further on the proposals including acknowledging the positive messages for future places, asking where the resources would be funded from.  Councillor Mellor, having reserved his right to speak, explained that he was delighted to be involved in this work, he highlighted the calibre of staff that had been attracted to the role, the work being undertaken and the opportunities to invest.  He highlighted that the administration would fund for the future and the priorities identified now. The Leader reported that the Council had significant funds and resources at its disposal whilst referring to the lack of understanding of the budget.  The Leader reported that the regeneration was exactly what was envisaged in respect of the Big Plan with genuine ambition to move the area forward and putting world class placemaking at the heart of what the Council was doing.

 

Councillor Broadhead in summing up addressed the issues that had been raised during the debate including the funding.  He referred to legacy budget issues from the previous administration and highlighted that the current administration did not want to push pause on the much-needed regeneration.  He referred to the suggestion that the administration was not dealing with the financial challenges for the future and asked Councillors to wait for the proposed budget for 2022/23.   Councillor Broadhead reported that Councillor Howell’s point on governance had been raised and addressed at the Overview and Scrutiny Board in detail and the same proposal had not been supported. He explained that Future Places was different to other external companies which the Council interacts with.  Futures Places was a purely Council owned entity namely a teckal company which essentially meant that it was another Council function.  Due to this structure the main interaction by Members should come through the commissioning plan.  He emphasised that more external involvement was needed on the Future Places Board and it would not be appropriate to have further Councillor representation. Councillor Broadhead reported on the continuing cross-party engagement at the commissioning stage.

 

Councillor Howell asked to respond, the Chairman indicated that there was no provision in the Constitution to speak again on a proposal.  Councillor Howell continued to speak.  Councillor Nicola Greene raised a point of order and reported that she would like to use the provision that the Councillor be not heard again due to the disrespect that Councillor Howell had shown the entire Chamber.  This proposal was seconded by Councillor Judes Butt.  In accordance with the provisions of the Constitution the Chairman clarified the following proposal moved by Councillor Nicola Greene and seconded by Councillor Judes Butt

 

That Councillor Howell be not further heard.

 

The above motion was immediately put to the vote without discussion and was carried by a majority.

 

The Chairman confirmed that Councillor Howell would not be able to be heard for the rest of the meeting but indicated that he would like him to remain in the meeting.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendation arising from the Cabinet meeting on 29 September 2021 as set out on the agenda which was carried as follows.

 

Voting – For - 41, Against - 8, Abstentions 13

 

8c- Cabinet 29 September 2021 - Minute No 58 - Cleaner, Greener, Safer

 

Councillor Mark Anderson, Cabinet Member for Environment and Place presented the report on Cleaner, Greener, Safer as set out on the agenda and outlined the recommendation.  He explained that this issue had been scrutinised by the Overview and Scrutiny Board and the proposed expenditure recommended by Cabinet.  Councillor Nicola Greene seconded the proposal and in doing so highlighted that few things matter more to residents and elected representatives than the condition of local neighbourhoods.  She referred to the pride agenda focussed through work under the cleaner, greener, safer banner which looks to recognise and address these issues and the report provided early investment to ensure that a visible difference was made. She explained that it was not the whole of the agenda and much work would follow next year. Councillor Greene reported that the Overview and Scrutiny Board had spent time delving into the detail of the project raising excellent points on how to monitor and improve this work.  Councillor Greene thanked officers for the work undertaken to bring the proposals forward and Councillor Haines for her drive and expertise in preparing the Cabinet paper.

 

Councillors commented on the proposals including whilst supporting the principles of cleaner, greener, safer that there was a disconnect between the ambitions of the initiative and the services being delivered.  It was suggested that the Portfolio Holders overseeing the project look at the quality of the service provided.  Councillor Hadley welcomed the general thrust of the paper referring to the great comments that he had received on the imaginative planting at Hunger Hill.  He outlined his concerns relating to the removal of street furniture to improve flow highlighting that good public seating was important with café seating creating new pinch points.  He asked for assurance that such furniture would be retained where possible and only moved where necessary.  Councillor Hadley reported that one of the biggest issues for Poole High Street was incidents of loose pavement bricks which had resulted in injuries to pedestrians with no capital investment to fix the paving.  He explained that the area had suffered from the loss of public toilets, and he could see no funding for the refurbishment of these facilities.  Councillor Hadley having checked referred to 27 streetlights in Poole High Street that were not working and stressed that the basics were not being done.  Councillor Farquhar echoed Councillor Hadley’s points referring to amenities in his own ward and that the level of service expected was provided to the residents of BCP. Councillor Rigby commented on the use of glyphosate when weeds were being treated and the associated health issue with using this treatment which has been addressed with the Leader of the Council.  He indicated that alternatives would be used when they become more financially available and more affordable.  Councillor Rigby referred to point 29 of the report and the procurement of services from a specialist company contracted to supply a spot treatment weed spray which he welcomed as it would minimise usage. Councillor Mike Greene having listened to the debate and read the paper did not believe that the comments made were in anyway contradictory and was grateful for the issues raised by Members.  He reported that it was up to all ward councillors to make note of where these deficiencies were taking place and reporting them.  Councillor Butler referred to theme 2 and urban greening and in particular the use of shrubs which can be useful for wildlife habitats.  She commented on the need for manual workers and suggested that offenders should assist with cleaning graffiti and litter.

 

Councillor Mark Anderson in summing up explained that the purpose of the paper was to provide funds, that the comments on the tree strategy and the use of shrubs could be considered through a proposed working group to address these issues, that part of the funding in the paper would include the provision of seasonal workers, that he encouraged Councillors to report issues they spot such as defective street lights and referred to an asset management programme that would be undertaken to address the condition of street furniture.  Members were informed that it was also proposed that QR codes would be included on benches and bins to enable reporting of any issues eg overflowing bins.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendation arising from the Cabinet meeting on 29 September 2021 as set out on the agenda which was carried by a majority.

 

8d - Cabinet 29 September 2021 - Minute No 60 - 2021/22 Quarter One Budget Monitoring Report,

 

Councillor Drew Mellor presented the report on the 2021/22 Quarter One Budget Monitoring report as set out in the agenda and outlined the recommendations. He explained that this was the regular quarterly report, which was considered by the Overview and Scrutiny Board, that he looked forward to the next quarter update in December and the budget cafes.  Councillor Mellor reported on the significant work undertaken which was ongoing with material and positive progress.  He indicated that predecessor conservative colleagues do have a record of delivery on the management of the budget as does this administration in delivering a £5m surplus having inherited a £50m deficit from the previous administration and this year would be no exception.

 

Councillor Mellor then read out the following statement

 

The Council has the power to enter into the Grant Agreement with Homes England under the general power of competence. However, full Council approval is now required in order to enter into it. Attention should be drawn to the fact that there are extensive provisions with which the Council must comply, including delivery obligations, operational obligations, review, monitoring and reporting obligations, as well as transparency obligations. In addition, there are further provisions concerning circumstances in which Homes England would be entitled to withhold payments and in which the Council would be required to repay grant monies to Homes England. Homes England is unlikely to be prepared to negotiate the terms of the Grant Agreement and so it is a matter for the Council to consider whether to accept the risk of these terms, in particular the clawback provisions, together with the need for the funding. I would therefore propose that Council formally approves authority to enter into the grant agreement with Homes England and in doing so recommendation (E) is altered to read “That Council approves the Capital virements as set out in paragraph 74 and authorises the entering into the Grant Agreement with Homes England.”

 

Councillor Broadhead seconded the proposed recommendations including the amendment as set out by Councillor Mellor detailed above.

 

Councillor Farquhar asked how many times must we hear the reference to the £50m budget deficit without an answer to how it was filled and where the funding came from.

 

Councillor Mellor in summing up responded to the above question reporting that the funding came from the Conservative Government delivered at the start of the pandemic and the administration in the change to the financial strategy.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting on 29 September 2021 together with the following amendment to recommendation (E) That Council approves the Capital virements as set out in paragraph 74 and authorises the entering into the Grant Agreement with Homes England which was carried by a majority.

 

The meeting was then adjourned from 9.45 – 9.55 pm

 

Councillor Nick Geary left at 9.45 pm

 

8e - Cabinet 29 September 2021 - Minute No 63 - BCP Housing Strategy 2021-2026 "Our commitment to our communities

 

Councillor Bob Lawton presented the report on the BCP Housing Strategy 2021-2026 “Our commitment to our communities” as set out on the agenda and outlined the recommendation.  He explained that this Strategy brings together three documents and reported that the Strategy had been developed over a number of months following a long public consultation with a great deal of stakeholder engagement through various sessions.  Members were advised that it was a high-level document which sets out the clear vision with strong leadership for BCP to ensure that housing, planning, economic development and regeneration work together and were integrated to best influence the housing market.  Councillor Lawton emphasised that it was a key document that forms partnerships working together, drives shaping and contributes to health and wellbeing within the local population. He set out the vision statement and the five main objectives. Councillor Rampton seconded the proposals and highlighted that good housing was fundamental to good health and wellbeing.  She highlighted the impact of the strategy which would run for a five-year period supported by a robust action plan which would help ensure delivery.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendation arising from the Cabinet meeting on 29 September 2021 which was carried unanimously.

 

8f - Cabinet 29 September 2021 - Minute No 64 - Council New build Housing & Acquisition Strategy (CNHAS), 2021-2026

 

Councillor Bob Lawton presented the report on the Council New build Housing & Acquisition Strategy (CNHAS), 2021-2026 as set out on the agenda and outlined the recommendations.  He referred to the Council’s house building programme over the next five years.  CNHAS would sustain BCP Council’s direct delivery of quality homes on its own land and would help support its communities and response to growth priorities.  Councillor Lawton in referring to the building programme over the next five years reported that this would ensure a diverse set of homes were developed as identified in the BCP Housing Strategy.  He explained the latest evidence around housing provision for young people, older residents, couples and families and those most vulnerable needing support. CNHAS would deliver at least 65% affordable homes as a mix across the next five-year programme not the statutory 40%.  Members were informed that this would vary by scheme as they were built some would be 100% affordable and some less. Councillor Lawton reported that the programme in 2022 was expected to deliver 85% affordable housing, with expected minimum standards for the housing and a diversity of house types.  Councillor Lawton explained that it would reduce the burden placed on BCP Council for the use of temporary accommodation for those who were homeless.  He referred to the purchase of properties under the previous Bournemouth Borough Council the purpose of the scheme was to house homeless people which reduced the burden placed on the Council to accommodate homeless people.  Councillor Lawton highlighted the Council’s ambitious house building programme to enable people to get into the housing market. 

 

Councillor Broadhead in seconding the proposals took the opportunity to thank Councillor Lawton for his leadership in this area.  He emphasised that it was nothing new for Local Authorities to provide housing but what was new was the scale of the programme which was in addition to the Council’s aspirations for the regeneration agenda which was about placemaking and the homes agenda which was about people with a long-term plan for the future.  Councillor Broadhead also commented on the acquisition element of the strategy and the previous work through Seascape Homes and Property Limited.  In particular he referred to the final approval of the Princess Road scheme which was a fantastic example of what a Council led project should be.

 

Councillors commented on the proposals including seeking clarification on the progress with the Herbert Avenue scheme for homeless families, thanking Councillor Lawton for his commitment and dedication as a Cabinet Member, that both of the housing strategies rely heavily upon references to the Local Plan which was currently being developed and to the Government’s standard method of calculating housing totals. Councillor Brooke further explained that the Local Plan Working Group was looking closely at the standard method and it would appear that the Council may be able to apply exceptional circumstances and provide a situation whereby it would be looking at a lower housing figure as a whole over the Plan period. He reported that it would therefore potentially be difficult if the two housing strategies continued to refer to the standard method and suggested that the housing strategies could be modified to accommodate what may happen with the Local Plan on that issue. Councillor Brooke also asked for consistency on the comments between the Local Plan and the strategies in particular relating to dates.  Councillor Hadley echoed the comments made about Councillor Lawton and his dedication.  He highlighted his concerns about affordable housing but was pleased to see retention of properties for rent for various schemes and plans for properties to have a high sustainability standard.  Councillor Hadley urged consideration of the provision of open space, play space and green space.  Councillor Phipps, in supporting the comments made by Councillor Brooke, asked if the Portfolio Holder could explain when the Council goes out on the issues and options consultation for the Local Plan, and it was decided the Council goes for exceptional circumstances and does no opt for the 2,700 homes per annum how this would be dealt with in this strategy and the previous document. Councillor Brown asked about the proportions of affordable housing and market homes within this Strategy. 

 

Councillor Lawton in summing up reported the latest on the Herbert Avenue Scheme that tenders had been received and were being evaluated.  He explained that he shared the concerns relating to the housing figures for the Local Plan and the differentials between the Plan and the Strategies, but he felt that there was sufficient flexibility within the policies for them to be adjusted to ensure that they were all aligned.  In response to the issue raised on open space Councillor Lawton indicated that he agreed that as much open space should be retained as feasible and possible but there was an increasing population in the BCP area.  He highlighted that there was a need to balance the need for accommodation with the need for open space.  Councillor Lawton reported that the statutory requirement for affordable housing was 40% the paper proposed an average of 65% affordable housing and was dependent on the feasibility of each scheme and in 2022 it was expected that 85% of all units built would be affordable.

 

Councillor Lawton took the opportunity to thank the Officers for the development of the Housing Strategy and the CNHAS Strategy.  He also reported that it had been an honour, a privilege and a pleasure to be the Portfolio Holder for Housing for Bournemouth and BCP Councils and he was glad that he was leaving an excellent legacy.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting on 29 September 2021 which were carried unanimously.

 

8g - Standards Committee 5 October 2021 - Minute No 16 - Local Government Association - Revision to Model Code of Conduct for Councillors

 

Councillor Daniel Butt, Chairman of the Standards Committee presented the report on the Local Government Association – Revision to Model Code of Conduct for Councillors as set out on the agenda.  He reported that following Council’s adoption of the code of conduct in June this year the Council received notification from the Local Government Association outlining a series of amendments to their model code which the Standards Committee considered at its meeting on 5 October 2021.  Councillor Butt reported that the changes made were set out in the agenda pack.  The Committee supported these changes subject to a number of alterations which were set out on the agenda.  He took the opportunity to thank Councillors for attending the training sessions on the new code of conduct and that he had been advised that 82% of Councillors had already attended the training.  He explained that further dates would be offered to those Councillors who had not completed or undertaken the training. Councillor Butt outlined the recommendations as set out on the agenda. Councillor Borthwick seconded the proposals.

 

Councillor Andrews explained that the new code tidied up some typographical errors but did not give any particular extra powers if a Councillor was found to have contravened its provisions.  He highlighted that the Committee could not suspend a Councillor, but the Committee can ask them to apologise, and they may refuse.  Councillor Andrews reported that the Councillor needs to be reported to the Group Leaders who do have powers to suspend a Councillor from their group membership or demote a Councillor who holds an SRA.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Standards Committee meeting on 5 October 2021 which were carried as follows.

 

Voting: For – 63, Against – 1, Abstentions - 0

 

8h - Cabinet 27 October 2021 - Minute No 72 - Estates and Accommodation Retention of Poole Civic Space

 

Prior to consideration of the recommendation Councillor Diana Butler asked the following question:

 

Having asked the previous administration a similar question in September 2020 – I ask the current administration: When will the residents of Poole be given a Public Consultation on the future of the listed Poole Civic Centre building?

 

Reply from Councillor Drew Mellor, Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance & Transformation

Councillor Butler thank you for your question and for your continued interest and passion for this hugely important building for Poole.

 

As per the paper before us this evening I am delighted to once again confirm my personal and our administration’s position in relation to retaining this building for future generations. What is not and will not be on the table while I am leader of this council is any disposal. A clear difference to the position of the Liberal Democrat led Unity Alliance who had marked this site for disposal.

 

As you will see from the later paper tonight, the current expectation is that the listed part of the site will be retained by the mayoralty, the charter trustees and a new anchor tenant being the coroner. In relation to the wider site we have asked our emerging URC team, Future Places, to explore options and a large part of their ethos, and the ethos of any successful regeneration, is to put the community at the heart of it and to that end a key piece of work that will be forthcoming is something called “the big conversation” which will be a powerful community engagement and consultation exercise. So, the community won’t just have the opportunity to comment on this site but also the wider conurbation as we bring forward regeneration across BCP.

 

Councillor Mellor, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Finance and Transformation presented the report on the Estates and Accommodation Retention of Poole Civic Space and outlined the recommendation relating to the approval of the budget set out in Appendix 2 of the report.  Councillor Mellor reported that he was committed to retaining the Civic Centre for this and future generations and the desire that the Community would not only benefit from this asset, but that community use would be integral to the Council’s Plans going forward.  He confirmed that the building would be used by the Mayoralty and the Charter Trustees and the intention was for the Coroner to be the anchor tenant.  He thanked Members and officers for their work in developing the proposals.  Councillor Mark Anderson seconded the proposals.

 

Councillors commented on the proposals including concerns expressed about the proposed changes to what was a listed building such as fire escapes, the impact on other elements of the building, that there had been no comments from the Conservation Officer, that the plans provided related to April 2021 when the Charter Trustees had discussed a September 2021 plan illustrating a layout of the vertical slice and a different positioning of the fire escapes.  Councillor Le Poidevin indicated that of all the possible uses of the vertical slice the inclusion of the Coroners Court was appropriate.  She indicated that the facilities set aside for the mayoralty were adequate but raised concerns about the start date for works of May next year.  She emphasised that no work should affect the Mayor Making ceremony.  In addition, she asked that the Cattistock Room and the Council Chamber were available for Mayoral and Community use and that nothing would hinder pre-booked events.  Councillor Trent asked about the proposed arrangements for temporary accommodation for the Poole Charter Trustees and declared an interest as it would be the first six months of his mayoralty.  He suggested that the Old Branksome Town Hall could be an option and asked if any progress had been made.  Councillor Hadley indicated that the Unity Alliance had not decided to dispose of the building but accepted that the Town Hall would be the civic offices for BCP Council and for Poole Civic Centre an alternative use was needed but that plan had not been made.  He expressed his concern about how reports were considered through the democratic process from Overview and Scrutiny Board, Cabinet and onto Council without modification.  He indicated that he had raised in the Overview and Scrutiny Board and Cabinet concerns about the sustainability of the proposals for the vertical slice including insulation, the state of the windows, uncertainty around the use of electricity generated on site, and heat pumps and none of this has been included in the paper. Councillor Bagwell highlighted the provision of parking for those accessing the building and in particular those stakeholders using the Coroner’s Court.

 

Councillor Mark Anderson reported that he had been round the Civic Offices with the Coroner and relevant Officers looking at the work that would be undertaken and raised a number of questions including relating to fire escapes and the state of the building.  He advised that he was informed that all necessary works would be carried out correctly.  In respect of the issue raised by Councillor Le Poidevin on use of rooms Councillor Anderson reported appropriate arrangements would be in place.  Councillor Anderson reported that Councillor Hadley was right, and the heating and insulation of the building needed to be looked at and he would talk to his colleagues on this issue.

 

Councillor Mellor in summing up reported that he had also raised concerns on the sustainability of the building.  He highlighted that he was committed to the consultation via future places work and protecting the listed part of the building. In respect of the comment made by Councillor Butler concerning the plans he had emailed her earlier with a response from the relevant officer.  The Leader referred to the arrangements for Mayor making and gave an assurance that this event was planned, and any works would start after that. He reported that some discussions were ongoing relating to the use of other venues by the Charter Trustees and that can be shared with the Mayor and Charter Trustees.  The Leader indicated that the only difference in the paper was that the administration was not proposing to sell the building removing the word “disposal” and he was aware of the previous Leaders position.  He agreed with the comments on parking and that there needed to be a solution.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendation arising from the Cabinet meeting on 27 October 2021 which was carried by a majority.

 

Councillor Farquhar wished to be recorded as voting against the above decision.

 

8i - Cabinet 27 October 2021 - Minute No 73 - Futures Fund - Allocation for the Installation of a Core Gigabit Fibre Network

 

Councillor Broadhead, Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Development, Growth & Regeneration presented the report on the Futures Fund – Allocation for the Installation of a Core Gigabit Fibre Network and outlined the recommendations

 

Councillor Cheryl Johnson left the meeting.

 

Councillor Broadhead reported that he was delighted that this was one of the first applications from the Futures Fund which was designed for both capital and infrastructure projects.  He explained that the proposal was to use £5m of the Futures Fund to create a 70.5 km core giga fibre network and referred to potential operational savings for the Council.   Councillor Broadhead referred to the timing of the project which would enable the fibre to be laid when the roads were already being dug up for the transforming travel initiative.  The report highlighted the first phase of the project with fibre optics but not all the other benefits that would be part of future phases.  He also commented on the smart place and transformation programme, the additional savings in service areas, that other public sector and voluntary organisations could use this network in the future, the acceleration for the role of 5G and a whole host of other applications.  Councillor Broadhead reported that phase one provided a clear case for cost savings and that was the purpose of the recommendations.  Councillor Mellor seconded the proposals.

 

Councillors commented on the proposals including the financial implications of the Futures Fund which should not be used for short term vanity projects which do little or have no benefit for the residents of BCP, that the technology was out of date and that it was unacceptable expenditure.  Councillor Hadley explained that this was a scheme that was fixing yesterday’s problem.  He reported that he was grateful to the Smart Places team for trying to delve deeper into the technical detail.  Councillor Hadley reported that we were increasingly moving towards cloud-based use and the idea of a fibre network was outdated and therefore this investment was a difficult issue as he felt that the paper did not detail the financial implications adequately whilst there were some good elements there were enormous uncertainties and risks.  Councillor Bartlett supported Councillor Hadley whilst he would like to support the paper, he had three concerns on the technology, that the costs were not clear for the total system and how the project was funded namely spending money from savings that had not yet been achieved. Councillor Brown raised questions on the financial stability of the project.  Councillor Earl highlighted the importance of where the resources were being funded from and the proposal that they were paid back over 54 years. She also highlighted the potential views of residents on the project, the funding arrangements and whether this was a good use of resources for now and future generations. 

 

Councillor Mellor, having reserved his right to speak, indicated that there was may be a lack of understanding on what the Futures Fund was and an explanation may be needed.  He reported that it was not a normal business case proposition and explained that the Council wanted to deliver a world class location for the future and as such there were certain requirements.  Councillor Mellor explained that the Council needs to go first, and this was the infrastructure that we need to provide to make BCP outstanding.  Councillor Mellor reported on the Smarter Cities model and the ambition to transform the Council into the most exemplar authority in the country in terms of the ability to deliver modern services that improve lives and were cost effective whilst making year on year savings.  The proposal was to invest a small fraction of those savings into this project.

 

Councillor Broadhead in summing up, explained that the Futures Fund was different highlighting that opportunities would be unlocked.  He reported that the beauty of the Futures Fund was while we were digging up the road the fibre can be laid which was investing in our future now. This was an infrastructure investment to access the cloud.              

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting on 27 October 2021 which were carried by a majority.

 

Councillor Farquhar wished to be recorded as voting against the above decision.

 

8J - Cabinet 27 October 2021 - Minute No 76 - Children's Services Capital Programme

 

Councillor Nicola Greene, Cabinet Member for Council Priorities and Delivery presented the report on the Children’s Services Capital Programme as set out on the agenda and outlined the recommendations.  She explained that the report covered the progress of the Children’s Services Capital Programme and set out the picture across the conurbation.  Councillor Greene highlighted that the intention was to use the funds to provide the very best facilities for our children and young people in which they can enjoy and thrive. Members were informed that the focus for the future was in providing places for children and young people with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND).  Councillor Greene reported on the ongoing focus of the written statement of action and the inquiry into inclusion which has been reported to Cabinet, Children’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Council.  Councillor Greene highlighted that the administration made a commitment to invest in these priorities by allocating an additional £10m to the regular types of Government Grants which the Council receives.  She explained that further work was underway on the analysis of the needs of the current cohort of children and young people which informs spend.  Councillor Greene reported that the decision taken by Cabinet under delegated authority agreed to bring forward a SEND Strategy as part of the wider children’s services capital programme for Council to approve in February 2022.  Councillor Greene referred Members to the recommendations before the Council which sought approval to pause the project to create a satellite for Winchelsea School at Somerford Primary School and the reason for that was that the original decision came before the visit of Ofsted in the Summer and therefore it was appropriate that the Council optimise resources in the light of the work which was following on from that inspection. Councillor Greene reported that she was very grateful to both the schools and the governors for their patience and absolute engagement in the process while we come up with the best solution which suits the requirements of the schools and the wider community.  Councillor White seconded the proposals.

 

Councillors commented on the proposals including Councillor Flagg who reported that he had attended a meeting with senior teaching staff and a member of the Board of Governors who voiced their concern with regards to the process so far.  He highlighted that we all know the difficulty that schools were under financially and their concern was that they had invested time and resources into the proposal.  Councillor Flagg indicated that whilst he fully supported the recommendations in terms of the proposal, he would like to think that this Council would support the school over the next 12 months or so because of the financial input that they had already made to the Winchelsea School moving to Somerford Primary School.

 

Councillor Nicola Greene in summing up responded to Councillor Flagg and thanked him for his engagement and to Councillor McCormack for the open dialogue.  She indicated that the point about the time resource was correct and this was about moving forward and achieving the best solution for the school and the wider community.  Councillor Greene gave her commitment that she was pushing this project forward as quickly as possible

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting on 27 October 2021 which were carried by a majority.

 

8k - Cabinet 27 October 2021 - Minute No 81 - Acceptance and allocation of the Household Support Fund

 

Councillor Nicola Greene, Cabinet Member for Council Priorities and Delivery presented the report on the acceptance and allocation of the household support fund as set out on the agenda and outlined the recommendations.  Councillor Greene reported on the approval sought to accept £2.56m on behalf of BCP communities from the Government. She explained that Government had allocated this sum to BCP Council under the Household Support Fund which followed on from last year’s winter grant.  Councillor Greene explained that the scope of this grant was considerably wider and at least 50% of the grant must be spent on families with children.  The expectation was that the household support fund would be spent on families in most need and in particular on food, energy and water bills.  It can also be used flexibly by households on related items eg assistance with school uniforms as parents were still dealing with some of the employment issues that had arisen from the pandemic.  Councillor Greene reported that there was an expectation that the Council starts providing support from 6 October 2021 namely prior to half term until 31 March 2022. This was a significant improvement on last year’s piecemeal allocation which allows households some certainty through the school holidays.  Councillor Greene reported that the proposed model replicates the arrangements put in place last year and the very targeted approach aiming to reach those most in need but with a considerably increased allowance of £30 per child per school holiday week to be delivered by a flexible voucher.  It was acknowledged that schools were at the frontline of identifying the families most in need largely but not exclusively on the basis of free school meals eligibility.  Councillor Greene highlighted that Children’s Centres and other organisations reach out into those communities in particular around pre-school children.  Citizen’s advice offer work with families in need who often have difficulties through food and fuel poverty. Members were advised that the Dorset Community Foundation reach elsewhere with its well-established grant giving function.  Councillor Greene referred to the Access to Food Partnership setup under the previous administration which was well established highly regarded and received contributions from across the conurbation harnessing a wonderful community response and there was a further £60,000 to support their activities including food banks, community fridges and pantries.  Robust and ongoing monitoring would ensure that those most in need were being reached with a budget provision for communications and Councillor Greene encouraged all members to spread the message in their own wards.  Councillor Kelly seconded the proposals and in doing so welcomed the Government Grant whilst highlighting that it was well document that the Council always puts its communities at the heart of everything it does.  Councillor Kelly indicated that there would be challenges to be faced by residents in the coming winter months and she outlined the key factors.

 

Councillor Earl indicated that she should declare an interest as she runs a community food project and works for Bournemouth Food Bank.  She indicated that this funding had come from a Government that was struggling to justify cutting the £20 uplift on universal credit.  She was pleased that this grant had been allocated but this was not the end for residents who were experiencing extreme poverty and in particular food insecurity.  Councillor Judes Butt sought clarification on providing links on how the process would be put in place so that residents could be advised appropriately.  Councillor Hadley highlighted the national shame of food poverty and that it was surprising that the allocation of funds to the Access to Food Partnership was so small.  He also acknowledged the considerable support provided by volunteers in comparison to funding provided and asked if further funding could be provided.  Councillor Brown referred to the recommendations and reported that the financial summary was in paragraph 26 and not paragraph 25.

 

Councillor Nicola Greene in summing up indicated that she had referred to paragraphs 25 and 26 and with Members’ permission requested that for the record the minutes refer to paragraph 26.  She reported that she was surprised in some respects on how the funding had been received.  She highlighted that it was a significant fund which was targeted, flexible and aimed at BCP communities and we have doubled the amount that had previously been available to families with children via the national free school meals allocation to £30 per child per week of school holidays. In terms of Councillor Hadley’s comment on the grant to the Access to Food Partnership being small Councillor Greene explained that the allocation was based on experience from last year and there was contingency to allow for flexibility.  She referred to the immense support that food banks and community fridges were receiving and therefore £60,000 was proportionate to that.  Councillor Greene highlighted that there would be an ongoing review and appropriate comms provided with a report back via Children’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee as appropriate.

 

The Council then took a vote on the recommendations arising from the Cabinet meeting on 27 October 2021 subject to the reference to paragraph 26 which were carried unanimously.