Agenda and minutes

To approve as a correct record and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 31 July 2014.

The Minutes (copies of which had been circulated) of the meeting held on 31 July 2014 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chair.

Councillors and Officers to declare any interests which they have in any of the items on the agenda for the meeting.

Councillors and Officers were invited to declare any interests which they had in

any of the agenda items for the meeting.

The following interest was declared:-

Personal Interest

To consider call-in items (if any).

There were no call-in items to consider.

To consider whether it is in the public interest to exclude the public during part of the consideration of the following agenda item which contains information “not for publication” by virtue of the appropriate category set out in the Local Government Act 1972 (as amended).

RESOLVED – That in order to prevent the disclosure of information which was not for publication, the disclosure of which would not be in the public interest, would not be fair and would be in breach of Data Protection principles, the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the ‘not for publication’ appendix to the following item, should the content of this appendix need to be discussed:-

To consider a report of Leader of the Council and the Deputy Leader of the Council (Executive Councillor (Corporate, Customer and Community Services).

At its meeting on 15 July 2014, the Executive received a Medium Term Financial Forecast that indicated a budget reduction requirement of £22.453m for 2015/16, and forecast a cumulative reduction requirement of £39.419m in 2016/17, rising to £64.5m by 2018/19. In response to those forecasts, and in line with its previous deliberations and statements of intent, the Executive agreed the strategic framework for Investing in Stockport (IIS), a single programme of sustainable growth and public service reform in the Borough over the medium term.

At its most recent meeting on 12 August the Executive brought forward a set of proposals informed by the strategic framework and designed to address the budget reduction requirement. Executive Councillors agreed that there should be a report to all scrutiny committees in the next cycle outlining the proposals relating to each committee’s remit. Confirmation of which proposals fall within the remit of which Committee is provided at Appendix 1.

The business case working papers that were made available to the Executive Councillors accompany this report have been updated to include additional information in relation to the potential risks and impacts associated with the proposed changes.

All scrutiny committees are being requested during this cycle of meetings to comment upon the approach being taken by the Executive to address the need to make substantial savings over the next two years, and the specific proposals brought forward for consultation.

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to comment upon both the overall approach being taken by the Executive and the specific proposals detailed in the accompanying documents, where they fall within the remit of that Committee.

Officer contact: Steve Houston / Laureen Donnan; 0161 474 4000 / 3180 or email: steve.houston@stockport.gov.uk or laureen.donnan@stockport.gov.uk

A joint report of the Leader of the Council and the Executive Councillor (Corporate, Customer and Community Services) was submitted (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the Executive’s proposals to respond to the Medium Term Financial Forecast considered by the Executive in July 2014. At its meeting in August, the Executive endorsed for consultation a set of proposals, in accordance with the Investing in Stockport strategic framework, that sought to respond to the required budget reductions but also to target investment to ensure the best outcomes for residents of the Borough.

The accompanying documents to the report provided further detail on the following Investment in Stockport proposals:-

·         Leisure Facilities

·         Museums and Cultural Attractions

·         Highways and Engineering Services

·         New Model for Regulation

·         Locality Operating Model

·         Solutions SK Operating Model

·         Facilitating Accelerated Growth.

The Business Case Working Papers were an indication of the ‘direction of travel’. Detailed Business Cases would be submitted to the next meeting of the Scrutiny Committee incorporating draft business cases and detailed consultation plans. However, the draft business cases for Leisure Facilities, New Model for Regulation and Facilitating Accelerated Growth would be submitted to the Executive Meeting on 30 September 2014 and feedback submitted to the next meeting of this Scrutiny Committee.

The Executive Councillor (Communities and Sustainability) (Councillor Martin Candler) and the Executive Councillor (Economic Development and Regeneration) (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions. The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration also attended the meeting to answer questions from the Scrutiny Committee.

The following comments were made/issues raised in relation to the following proposals, as set out in the Business Case Working Papers:-

Leisure Facilities

·         With regard to the proposed transfer of dual facilities from the Council to Bramhall, Hazel Grove, Priestnall and Werneth Schools, negotiations with the schools were in progress, albeit at different stages, and the particular situation with regard to each school was different. It was important that the facilities remained as community facilities which were open during the school holidays. The schools had access to funds to help them take over the ownership and operation of the dual use facilities. The transfer of the dual use facilities to the schools was predicated on there being no revenue subsidy from the Council. In order to facilitate the transfer of responsibility for the facilities, the Council may need to consider a one-off capital sum to bring the facilities up to an acceptable standard.

·         With regard to the proposal to amend and extend existing agreements with Life Leisure to include full repairing and insuring responsibilities for the leisure centres with significantly reduced investment by the Council, it was clarified that there was no ‘plan B’ should the negotiations with Life Leisure fail. The conditions in any new agreement for the transfer of facilities to Life Leisure were set out in the Business Case Working Paper and included limitations on charging rates.

·         Public/service user consultation would not be necessary as it was not envisaged that the proposals would impact on members of the public.

Museums and Cultural Attractions

·         A Member expressed concern that the care and maintenance of museum collections would be reduced, which could compromise accreditation standards and potential for external funding. This had been included in the Business Case Working Paper as a potential risk, but was something that the Council would want to avoid. Discussions would held about the possibility of sharing museum curatorial expertise across Greater Manchester.

·         In response to a Member’s question, the Corporate Director confirmed that a bid had not been received from the ARC to run the Art Gallery. The Council continued to work with all the voluntary arts organisations in the borough.

·         A Member enquired as to the valuation of the artworks owned by the Council. It was agreed that a written response would be sent to all Members of the Scrutiny Committee.

·         In response to a Member’s question, the Corporate Director  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

The First Update Portfolio Performance and Resource Reports (PPRR) for the Communities & Sustainability and Economic Development & Regeneration Portfolios are presented for consideration by the Committee. These provide a summary of progress in delivering the portfolio priorities, budgets and capital programmes during the first quarter of 2014/15, and include early forecast performance and financial data for the Portfolio. The reports also include a progress report and updated risk assessment of the portfolio savings programmes. 

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to:-

a)    Consider the Annual Portfolio Performance and Resource Reports,  

b)   Review the progress against priorities, performance, budgets and savings targets for 2013/14;

c)    Highlight key areas of and responsibility for taking forward corrective action to address any performance or resource issues.

d)    Identify how areas of strong performance and good practice can be shared in other services.

Officer contacts Joe Conmee/Michael Cullen on 0161 474 5396/4361 or email: joseph.conmee@stockport.gov.uk/michael.cullen@stockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the First Update Performance and Resource Reports for the Communities and Sustainability, and Economic Development and Regeneration Portfolios. The report provided a summary of progress in delivering the portfolio priorities, budgets and capital programmes during the first quarter of 2014/15, and included out-turn performance and financial data for the Portfolio. The report also included a progress report and updated risk assessment of the portfolio savings programmes.

The Executive Councillor (Communities and Sustainability) (Councillor Martin Candler) and the Executive Councillor (Economic Development and Regeneration) (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.

The following comments were made/ issues raised:-

Economic Development and Regeneration Portfolio

·         It was encouraging to see that the overall employment rate in Stockport was still the highest in Greater Manchester at 75.6%.

·         More pro-active work was required to increase occupancy rates of premises in Hazel Grove. Problems were caused by the ribbon development in Hazel Grove District Centre, the fact that the Council did not own the land in close proximity to the A6 in Hazel Grove and the proximity of dwellings close to the shops.

·         Although business investment was strong in Stockport in Quarter 1 and the retail market in the town centre continued to perform well, investment was not strong in manufacturing.

·         A Member queried the viability of the Stockport Business and Innovation Centre as it was 62% let.

·         A Member enquired whether there was a breakdown of the number of full time and part time jobs which had been created and whether the increasing number of independent businesses in the town centre (320) as a proportion of the number of businesses (47.76%) was appropriate.

·         In the Portfolio Risks Update for the Economic Development and Regeneration Portfolio under Section 4 ‘Increased Transport Network Congestion’, the SEMMMS strategies and policies were not a mitigating action for Hazel Grove where traffic would increase. The Council remained in discussions with the Department for Transport and the Highways Agency regarding a feasibility study for the second stage of the SEMMMS relief road,

·         There would be a gym and a sports hall at the new leisure centre in Brinnington.

·         The bid to Sport England’s Inspired Facilities Fund to replace the clubhouse at Woodbank Athletics Stadium had been unsuccessful. However, the Council had been advised to amend the bid and resubmit it.

·         With regard to PI Code ED & R 14, a Member enquired how the Council could help to increase the percentage of the adult population who participated in regular sport and active recreation.

·         How much the Council subsidised the reduction in the number of visitors to Stockport’s Museums.

Communities and Sustainability Portfolio

·         The reduction in the percentage of parks and open spaces assessed as satisfactory was as a result of the loss of long standing staff and the recruitment of multi-skilled staff who were new to the service and required training. The sunny and wet conditions in Quarter 1 had meant that resources had struggled to keep up with the rapid grass growth.

·         The significant increase in Unsupported Borrowing in 2015/16 compared to 2014/15 was a result of the Highways Investment Programme.

·         Members complimented the excellent figures obtained in the performance figures for recycling.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

The Scrutiny Committee is recommended to consider and comment on the priorities for the first and second years of the Highway Investment Programme, prior to the final decision being taken by the Executive Councillor.

Officer contact: Megan Black on 0161 218 1410 or email: megan.black@stockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) requesting the Scrutiny Committee to consider and comment on the priorities for the first and second years of the Highways Investment Programme, prior to the final decision being taken the Executive Councillor (Communities and Sustainability).

In February 2014 the Executive had approved a highways investment programme with the aim to improve the % of Category 3 modelled condition (widespread damage to the road surface) to 10% for carriageways and footways and thereby mitigating the revenue pressures on the reactive maintenance and insurance budgets. This would require additional investment in reactive maintenance and a total capital investment of approximately £100.6m over a nine year delivery period. It had subsequently been agreed that the investment be split into two phases of £49.8m and £50.8m.

The Executive Councillor (Communities and Sustainability) (Councillor Martin Candler) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         In response to a Member’s view that that the investment appeared to be concentrated in a few Wards, it was clarified that the investment was over nine operational years. In order to ensure efficiency in project delivery it was important to ensure that the Council’s contractors worked in one area of the borough for set periods, reducing the costly and time consuming need for them to frequently relocate to different work sites across the network. Consequently the proposal was to maximise efficiency and work in areas of the borough for set periods. In 2014/15 and 2015/16 it was proposed to commence works in the areas with the highest percentage of category 4/5 highways.

·         A Member felt that Councillors should have been more involved in compiling the investment programme.

·         It was important that the quality of the work to be undertaken was of a high standard which was long lasting.

·         It was important that there was extensive liaison with the utility companies regarding the works.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration and Corporate director for Corporate and Support Services

The report details the outcome of an exercise to assess the redevelopment options for the Gorsey Bank site in Cheadle Heath and makes a recommendation to the Executive for the end use and delivery vehicle for a high quality light industrial development.

(Note: Appendix 3 to the report includes information ‘not for publication’ that has been circulated to Members of the Scrutiny Committee only).

The Scrutiny Committee’s views are requested.

Officer Contact: Nicola Turner on 0161 218 1635 or email: nicola.turner@stockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) detailing the outcome of an exercise to assess the redevelopment options for the Gorsey Bank site in Cheadle Heath. Stockport Property Alliance had undertaken an Outline Business Case to establish the development potential and had considered various options. The Executive at its meeting on 30 September 2014 would be recommended to approve the end use and delivery vehicle for a high quality light industrial development.

(Note: this report contained information ‘not for publication’ in Appendix 3 that had been circulated to Members of the Scrutiny Committee only)

The Executive Councillor (Economic Development and Regeneration) (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions. 

RESOLVED – That the Executive be advised that this Scrutiny Committee supports the proposals for the development of the Gorsey Bank site.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

The Scrutiny Committee is requested to comment on the regeneration strategy for the Market Place and Underbanks and proposals to invest in the area in order to drive delivery of the regeneration strategy, prior to their consideration by the Executive.

Officer Contact: Nicola Turner on 0161 218 1635 or email: nicola.turner@stockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) requesting the Scrutiny Committee to comment on the regeneration strategy for the Market Place and Underbanks, and the proposals to invest in the area in order to drive the delivery of the regeneration strategy, prior to its consideration by the Executive at its meeting on 30 September 2014.

The Executive Councillor (Economic Development and Regeneration (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         A Member supported the proposals, but felt that the development of the Market Place and the Underbanks should have taken place many years ago. As set out in the Greater Manchester Town Centres Project report 2013, the Market Place and Underbanks were the key to delivering Stockport’s sense of place. This was based on the quality and uniqueness of the environment as well as its strategic position to the wider town centre.

·         Further details and a timescale for the programme would be submitted to a future meeting of the Scrutiny Committee should the Executive approve the regeneration strategy for the Market Place and Underbanks.

RESOLVED – That the Executive be advised that the Scrutiny Committee supports the regeneration strategy for the Market Place and Underbanks, and the proposals to invest in the area in order to drive the delivery of the regeneration strategy.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

The report provides details of the proposed Town Centre Access Package and consultation process.

The Scrutiny Committee is requested to support the principles of the package and provide comments on the individual schemes proposed as part of the package.

Officer Contact: Sue Stevenson on 0161 474 4351 or email: sue.stevenson@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) providing details of the proposed Town Centre Access Package and requesting comments on the schemes included in the package. The report also provided details of the consultation process.

The Town Centre Access Package was one of the Greater Manchester Local Transport Priorities funded by the Growth Plan. The package included measures to improve access to and from, and around the town centre by all modes of transport. Although the package included a number of individual schemes, these all needed to be delivered in order to gain the benefits predicted in the outline business case.

The following comments were made/issues raised:-

·         With regard to the proposed new pedestrian and cycle path in Woodbank Park linking the park to Dark Lane, Bredbury which would include a new pedestrian/cycle river crossing over the Rive Goyt, a Member felt that as there was already a bridge crossing the River Goyt in this area the additional expense of constructing a further crossing could be avoided if suitable amendments were made to the proposed route. The proposed cycleway would require significant earthworks to ensure that it provided a surface suitable for cycling in the light of the topography of the area and the cost and logistics associated with this would need to be closely evaluated.

·         The proposed cycleway on Stockport Road West, Bredbury consisted of two very short lengths of designated cycleway which did not contribute to a wider cycleway scheme and it was questioned whether this would provide any significant contribution to road safety or the ability of cyclists to effectively and safely negotiate this junction.

·         There were air quality problems in a significant part of the town centre and this was an issue that needed to be considered in the proposed Town Centre Access Package.

RESOLVED – That the comments of the Scrutiny Committee be taken into consideration as part of the consultation on the Town Centre Access Package.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Corporate and Support Services and the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration

(PLEASE NOTE THAT THE DETAILED PLANS ARE ‘TO FOLLOW’).

The Scrutiny Committee is requested to comment on the proposed acquisition of land interests by compulsory means required to facilitate the Bridgefield Redevelopment scheme, primarily on Princes Street, prior to its consideration by the Executive.

Officer Contact: Michael Bownes on 0161 474 3212 or email: michael.bownes@srtockport.gov.uk

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) requesting the comments of the Scrutiny Committee on the proposed acquisition of land interests by compulsory means, primarily on Princes Street, in order to facilitate the Bridgefield redevelopment scheme. The report would subsequently be considered by the Executive at its meeting on 30 September 2014.

The Executive Councillor (Economic Development and Regeneration (Councillor Patrick McAuley) attended the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.

RESOLVED – That the Executive be advised that this Scrutiny Committee supports the proposals to acquire land interests (primarily on Princes Street) by compulsory means, as detailed in the report, in order to facilitate the Bridgefield redevelopment scheme.

To consider a report of the Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration.

The report considers the exemptions to parking charges resulting from the abolition of the paper tax disc.

The Scrutiny Committee is requested to comments on the options before the final decision is taken by the Executive at its meeting on 30 September 2014.

Officer Contact: Megan Black on 0161 218 1410 or email: megan.black@stockport.gov.uk

(NOTE: The Chair was of the opinion that this item, although not included on the agenda, should be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972 in order that the Scrutiny Committee’s comments  on the exemptions to parking charges could be considered by the Executive at its meeting on 30 September 2014, prior to the abolition of the paper tax disc on 1 October 2014 when it would no longer need to be displayed on vehicles windscreens.

The Corporate Director for Place Management and Regeneration submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) requesting the Scrutiny Committee to consider the exemptions to parking charges resulting from the abolition of the paper tax disc, prior to the decision being taken by the Executive on 30 September 2014.

In October 2007 the Council had determined that vehicles falling within Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) Emissions Band A would be exempt from parking charges. The exemption applied in on and off street parking places operated by the Council throughout the borough in respect of vehicles having exhaust emissions below 100g/km. Civil Enforcement Officers used the tax disc to ascertain if the vehicle was registered as having Band A emissions and where applicable will not issue a Penalty Charge Notice. From 1 October 2014 the paper tax would be abolished and would no longer be required to be displayed on vehicle windscreens and therefore the Council would no longer be able to use the tax disc to ascertain if a vehicle was registered as having Band A emissions and therefore qualify for free parking.

The report set out three options:-

·         Remove the current exemptions to parking charges.

·         Amend the current exemptions to parking charges – to only apply to vehicles registered with the Greater Manchester Electric Vehicle Scheme.

·         Offer Band A vehicles a 5% discount on Contract Permit Charges

The Chair reported that the Branch Secretary of UNISON Stockport Local Government Branch had written to Members of the Scrutiny Committee expressing concerns regarding the three options following receipt of a large number of representations from his members.

The Corporate Director circulated a sheet at the meeting proposing an additional option of ‘No Change’ for new vehicles where a paper tax disc would not be supplied and owners of Band A vehicles could print out (from the Government’s vehicle enquiry website) their vehicle details and leave a copy of this in their dashboard to prove emission levels. Alternatively, a fraud proof system could be implemented for the owners of Band A vehicles who would be required to pay for an annual permit at a cost of £10. This figure incorporated the work required to process an application and issue a permit. If this option was supported, it was recommended that this system be reviewed after six months of operation.

RESOLVED – That the Executive be advised that this Scrutiny Committee supports the option of ‘No Change’, but that the owners of Band A vehicles be required to pay for an annual permit at a cost of £10; this system to be reviewed after six months of operation.

To consider a report of the Democratic Services Manager.

The report sets out the process for the selection of Scrutiny Review topics by Scrutiny Committees to be carried out during the 2014/15 municipal year.

Consideration of the topic selection was deferred from the last meeting.

The Scrutiny Committee is invited to consider the selection of Scrutiny Review topics to be carried out during the 2014/15 municipal year.

Officer contact: Craig Ainsworth on 0161 474 3204 or email: craig.ainsworth@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) requesting the Scrutiny Committee to consider the process for the selection of Scrutiny Review topics to be carried out during the 2014/15 Municipal Year. He reported that the Corporate, Resource Management and Governance Scrutiny Committee, at its meeting held on 16 September 2014, had invited this Scrutiny Committee to consider undertaking a Joint Review in relation to ‘Understanding the digital divide in the Borough’.

RESOLVED – (1) That the Scrutiny Committee agrees to undertake a Joint Scrutiny Review with the Corporate, Resource Management and Governance Scrutiny Committee in relation to ‘Understanding the digital divide in the Borough’:

(2) That the following members of this Scrutiny Committee be appointed to the Review Panel:-

Councillor Oliver Johnstone

Councillor David Sedgwick

(3) That the Democratic Services Manager be requested to ask Councillors Richard Coaton and Hazel Lees, who were absent from this meeting, whether or not they wished to serve on the Panel.

To consider a report of the Democratic Services Manager.

The report sets out planned agenda items for the Scrutiny Committee’s next meeting and Forward Plan items that fall within the remit of the Scrutiny Committee.

The Scrutiny Committee is invited to consider the information in the report and put forward any agenda items for future meetings of the Committee.

Officer Contact: David Clee on 0161 474 3137 or email: david.clee@stockport.gov.uk

A representative of the Democratic Services Manager submitted a report (copies of which had been circulated) setting out the planned agenda items for the Committee’s next meeting and Forward Plan items which fell within the remit of the Scrutiny Committee.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.