DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

COUNCIL MEETING

Held on

Wednesday, 21 April 2010

at

County Hall

Matlock

Derbyshire

________

In the Chair:

COUNCILLOR R B BALDRY

(Chairman, Derbyshire County Council)

________

Verbatim Report of Proceedings

_________

From the notes of J L Harpham Ltd

Official Court Reporters and Tape Transcribers

55 Queen Street, Sheffield S1 2DX

Tel: 0114 2728908

_________

1

DERBYSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

MEETING OF THE COUNCIL

WEDNESDAY, 21 FEBRUARY 2010

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 APPOINTMENT OF CHAIRMAN

MR TYSOE (County Secretary): Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. The first item

on the agenda is appointment of the Chairman. May I have nominations?

CLLR K L PARKINSON: Firstly, I would like to thank the Chairman, Councillor

Robin Baldry and his consort Linda, and the Vice-Chairman, Councillor George Wharmby and

his consort, Councillor Jean Wharmby, for all their hard work over the past year.

I would like to nominate Councillor Robin Baldry, who has got a great deal out of

meeting County Council employees and their partners to share in their celebrations for working

for this Authority, many others having the opportunity to get to know him during his “round

Robin” when he visited many of our staff across the county.

He has been strong in building new links. Schools, many of whom have been visitors

into County Hall, and an innovation for the new administration choosing to build strong links

with the military and the Cadet Force.

Another first is the Chairman’s Charity, with the Council deciding to hold a number of

fundraising events throughout the year. Taking forward building new links with the community

we are all aware of the huge number of volunteer organisations who give so much time and

effort locally and I look forward to the support and advocacy continuing to grow through a

Chairman.

I am sure all here will agree that Councillor Baldry has embraced the successes of his

predecessor, Councillor Joyce Sanders, and with his own energy and strong support of his

consort Linda, connected fully with our whole community. He has been an excellent champion

for the Council and I have pleasure in nominating Councillor Robin Baldry as Chairman of

Derbyshire.

MR TYSOE: Is that seconded?

CLLR J WHARMBY: Thank you. I would like to second that, if I may. Also I would

like to congratulate Councillor Baldry on his work in the last year and his dedication to his role

as Derbyshire County Council’s Chairman. Thank you.

MR TYSOE: Thank you. Are there any other nominations? Councillor Baldry has

been nominated. All those in favour? CARRIED I will ask Councillor Baldry to take the

chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. May I start in the

traditional way and thank my nominators for their kind words. I am not the first to say it, but I

can confirm that it is a truly great honour to serve you as your civic head, and I am extremely

proud to be able to represent Derbyshire County Council across the county and beyond.

2

As many of you will know, I have already had a both busy and interesting year as your

Chairman. Between us, our Vice-Chairman George and I have carried out more than 250 civic

engagements. I am sure my second year in office will be at least as productive and equally

enjoyable.

One of the best parts of this job is getting to meet so many local people, people from all

walks of life and with so many stories to tell. That is as well as colleagues and friends from our

neighbouring Councils and our visitors from further afield.

I see it as one of my key duties to encourage a new sense of civic pride among our

communities and believe, as a team, we have made a good start on doing that. I take pleasure

in hosting our monthly citizenship awards and in sharing the genuine joy of each of our new

citizens, their friends and families. I am proud to be British and I am pleased they are keen to

become British citizens too.

I am also delighted we have been able to create new and rewarding links with the

courageous men and women serving our Queen and country. They deserve our thanks for the

brave and selfless contribution they make to protect our freedom, and it is time we formally

acknowledge the real sacrifices they are making on our behalf.

Therefore, I was particularly keen for us to properly mark Remembrance Day with a

special service at County Hall. I was pleased that the Lord Lieutenant could join us, along with

representatives and contributions from all three Armed Services. I am sure those of you who

attended found it both moving and uplifting.

Just recently I was pleased to invite the 2nd

Battalion Mercian Regiment to hold a

Freedom March through Matlock. It was a memorable spectacle which saw 300 soldiers (all

returned from tours of duty in Afghanistan) march through the town to the applause of

thousands. Our event was one of 18 Freedom Marches through Worcestershire,

Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. I am delighted we were able to be part of this chain of

events.

I am also grateful to the Army, Navy and Air Force Cadets who – along with the

military band and the Derbyshire Youth String Orchestra – made my civic service such a

success. Around 450 guests joined me for the very special and moving service at St John’s

Church, Buxton, possibly one of our biggest civic services yet.

I have enjoyed my visits to almost 20 schools to present awards or to open new

classrooms. I have also been pleased to host many groups of youngsters here at County Hall. I

intend to extend invitations to more schools and bring the often boring subjects of politics and

local government to life for them.

It has been my privilege to represent the Council at three recent Royal visits to

Derbyshire: His Royal Highness the Duke of Gloucester when he came to Sudbury Open

Prison; Her Majesty the Queen and His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh for

the giving of Maundy money at Derby Cathedral, and His Royal Highness Prince Andrew in

Eckington as part of a Yorkshire and Derbyshire tour. I also believe that today is the Queen’s

birthday. Happy birthday, ma’am.

As a new move, I have decided to hold a number of fundraising events throughout the

year for the Chairman’s Charity. My chosen worthy causes will each benefit from the initiative

3

and include Help the Heroes; the East Midlands Air Ambulance Service; the Chesterfield &

North Derbyshire Prostate Cancer Society and Blythe House Hospice at Chapel-en-le-Frith, a

spread of funds across the whole county. I hope I can count on all your support.

I also have some exciting projects lined up for the coming twelve months. We will join

Derby City Council in celebrating 150 years of the Cadet Force at a special concert in the

Assembly Rooms. I hope this will make way for more partnership working in the future as,

after all, we are one united County of Derbyshire.

For the first time in many years the Council will be represented at a Royal Garden Party

at Buckingham Palace. We are extending our invitations to include three of our senior retiring

officers and three of our Excellence in the Community Award winners.

On June 22 I will host, on behalf of the County Council, a Beating Retreat by the 2nd

Battalion the Mercian Regiment band. It will give the opportunity for invited guests and

members of the public to witness the impressive sunset march in the County Hall car park.

Then, of course, there is my Charity Golf Day hosted by Matlock Golf Club and

sponsored by many local businesses. My aim is to bring together teams of golfers from across

Derbyshire to play in a one day Golf Tournament (the proceeds of which will go to my chosen

charities).

I am planning to hold a special evening to celebrate the work and contribution

Derbyshire’s voluntary organisations make to our communities. As colleagues will know, we

are very keen to strengthen links with this special group of people and this will, in a very small

way, show our appreciation and recognise their hard work.

As well as royalty, civic dignitaries and many local people, I have been lucky enough to

meet many of our employees across all our services. It has been my pleasure to attend our long

service award ceremonies and to share their stories and memories of the County Council.

I have also taken time to get some first-hand experience of what they do in their day-to-

day jobs. I can tell you it has been a real eye opener. Without exception, our staff are doing a

brilliant job which often goes unnoticed and unappreciated by local people. I do not understand

why people think working for the Council is a soft option. It is not. Our staff work hard in and

for our communities to make them better places for each and every one of us.

That is what our new, and I think much improved Council Plan is all about. As a new

Council it is right we should have a new direction, new plans and a new approach. “Derbyshire

– Leading the Way” is proof of that. We have taken time to listen to what local people say is

important to them; to really think about how best to deliver what they need and offer the best

possible value for their money.

We are building on the best of what has been done in the past, but make no mistake: we

are making changes, but not for change’s sake. Our changes are about making us even more

efficient and effective, about delivering what we said we would. That is why our Council Plan

shows how we will lead the way to make sure local people have better choice and more of a

say. That means working more closely with voluntary, private and public sector organisations

and it means helping local communities work together to deliver solutions that are right for

them, not what we think is right for them.

It highlights how we will make good use of public money so we give our Council

4

taxpayers the best value for their money. It means keeping a tight grip on our spending and

serious scrutiny of all budgets. It sets out our plans to raise aspirations so local people and their

families enjoy even happier, healthier and more rewarding lives. This is not just about what we

can do for them, it is about how we can help them to improve their own lives. We will show

how we will provide high quality personalised services that meet individual needs. We know

that one size does not fit all. We are committed to giving people the choice and flexibility to

live independent lives. If they need help and support it is right they should be able to choose

what they get, when they get it, and where they get it from. Lastly, we aim to build places

where people want to be. That means improving life where people live so they benefit from

safe, interesting and active communities. It also means making them easier to get to with better

roads, public and community transport links.

The next few years will not be easy. We face challenges: cuts in public spending and

higher demands for our services, but we also see it as an opportunity because it means changing

the way we deliver some services, cutting out more red tape and giving local people better

choice and control. That is what we were elected to do and our plans for this Council will, I

believe, deliver just that. You will have the opportunity to discuss our Council Plan later in this

meeting.

Finally, all of us, members and officers, should be proud to be part of this excellent

organisation that delivers what people need. A Council that truly helps people live the quality

of life they want: safely, healthily and happily. Thank you for your indulgence.

2 APPOINTMENT OF VICE-CHAIRMAN

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 2, to appoint the Vice-Chairman of the Council.

CLLR K L PARKINSON: Thank you, Chairman. I would like to nominate Councillor

George Wharmby, who I know has been a strength and great support to you, equally a superb

champion for Derbyshire. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have we a seconder?

CLLR BRADFORD: Yes Chairman, we have. I am very happy to second that

nomination of Councillor Wharmby to continue as Vice-Chairman of Derbyshire County

Council and hopefully he will enjoy Year 2 of on-the-job training.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have we any other nominations? All those in favour?

CARRIED Thank you. Come on down.

3 CABINET APPOINTMENTS, PORTFOLIO RESPONSIBILITIES,

COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP AND APPOINTMENTS TO OUTSIDE BODIES

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 3, Cabinet Appointments, Portfolio Responsibilities,

Committee Membership and Appointments to Outside Bodies. You have all received a

schedule which has been circulated and I just ask are there any amendments from any other

groups?

CLLR FLITTER: Chair, if I could just say I did not think this was coming up at this

particular time, we would like to note that although there are going to be no changes from the

Lib Dems on this, we do note that meetings have changed in some description, even days of

meetings have changed without consultation. It has caused us one or two problems but we are

5

going to try and sort that.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Flitter. Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: Thank you, Chair. First of all can I welcome you and Councillor

Wharmby back into your civic roles for the second year.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.

CLLR WESTERN: May you continue. We have made some changes in terms of our

Shadow responsibilities and also to some of our Scrutiny Committee membership and so on.

We have passed those to Mr Molyneux already. I understand it is his birthday as well as the

Queen today, Chair. I do not know if you want to comment on that?

THE CHAIRMAN: I don’t know which way to take that, Councillor Western!

Councillor Stevenson.

CLLR STEVENSON: On the Regulatory Planning Committee, Chair, the substitute

members from the Labour Group have not been put on. They are Williams, Hosker, Cox,

Coyle and Stevenson. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: I am sure that will be looked at, Councillor Stevenson. Thank you

very much.

4 CHAIRMAN’S ANNOUNCEMENTS

THE CHAIRMAN: We will go to agenda Item 4, which is the Chairman’s

announcements.

I have to unfortunately announce the deaths of two former County Councillors. Firstly,

former Councillor Izzy Pryce who served on the Council from 1989 to 2009 representing the

Dronfield South Division. Secondly, former Councillor Gill Jones who served from 1985 to

1989 representing the Moor and St Helen’s Division in Chesterfield.

Could I please ask everybody to join me for a minute’s silence. Thank you.

(Councillors stood in silent tribute)

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you all very much. Is there anybody who would like to say

a few words about either councillor? Councillor Taylor.

CLLR TAYLOR: Thank you, Chair. I had the privilege of sharing the Bench here with

Izzy Pryce for 20 years. During that time he actually said very little in this Council Chamber.

He was one of those rare politicians who only spoke when he had something to say and also if

he thought it would make a difference. I am afraid he had a low opinion of anything said in this

Council Chamber actually making any difference. I tend to share his view on that. However,

in Committees he was always to be heard when there was an important point to be made,

seldom partisan, but always gave a very clear balanced view. He had certain very definite

views on the Investment Panel. He argued consistently for a much more ethical investment

stance. In particular he was concerned about the County’s considerable investment in tobacco

shares, which he regarded as living on immoral earnings. Izzy knew a great deal about cancer.

6

With a name like Islwyn Pryce it is not surprising he came from Wales, from mid-

Wales. He was proud to have been the product of one of the very first comprehensive schools

in Wales. He also had a distinguished career other than as a politician, as a medical physicist,

specialising first of all in radiation therapy, latterly in ultrasonics. I always gathered that that

would have been some kind of a back room job but in practice I gather he was very much

dealing with patients. He had unfortunately on many occasions to tell an expectant mother that

there was a problem. I cannot imagine anybody more sympathetic than Izzy at having to do

that job.

He was, besides a member of this Council, also a member of North East Derbyshire

District Council and a member of Dronfield Town Council, was mayor of that Council and very

proud to be mayor. I think those of us who were at the funeral were interested to discover just

how much loved he was within the community of Dronfield and how involved in everything he

was. He did believe in politics very strongly that it could make a difference to his town, to the

county and to the world. He always took a very balanced scientific view on things but that did

not mean he did not hold fairly passionate political views.

As a group we will miss his wise counsel and will miss him as a friend.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Taylor. Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: Thank you, Chairman, and thank you for those comments. I think that

was a really fitting tribute to a member of this Council, very well made.

I think Councillor Pryce really was a gentleman in the true sense of the word. He was a

fine County Councillor as well. He is someone that I, and I know many members of the Group,

at the time enjoyed speaking to and we were all very sad to hear of his passing.

I think the last time we met was some weeks after the election in June when he came up

to the top corridor and we shook hands. He was as courteous and interested in what was going

on as ever, despite the severe challenges he faced in his own life at that time.

All the Conservative Group remember him fondly and we are all very sad that he died

after that very long battle with cancer that he had to face. Thank you, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Allen.

CLLR ALLEN: Chair, just to say a few words about Gill Jones. There are not many

people here probably who still remember her. It is a sign either you have been here a long time

or you are very old. She was a very fiery smallish person who stood very strongly for

women’s rights and equal opportunities and was a very active member of the Labour Party in

those days when things were changing. I remember it fondly. I used to give her a lift

sometimes to Matlock. In those days my kids were small and sometimes they were dragged

along to political meetings. She gave me some books for the kids at the time, which is I

suppose quite a nice touch. She was a very caring person. Even though as I say she was very

fiery at times, she had an opinion and strongly fought for what she believed. Again it is a long

time ago. She remained interested in politics. It is quite a long time since I had seen her, at a

Branch meeting, but she was still actively interested and supported what we were doing. Again

her passing is sad but I think she had a good life and a good contribution at the time when she

was on this Council. Thank you, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Allen. Councillor Ellis.

7

CLLR ELLIS: Thank you, Chairman. I would just like to say a few words about Izzy

because as Barrie said he was a member of North East Derbyshire District Council where I

served with him for seven years. He was also on the Board of Rykneld Homes where we

worked together for three years.

He was Mayor of Dronfield and as Barrie said very proud of that. In fact he did an

enormous amount for Dronfield. He was a very important person in Dronfield public life. I

have to say that although he was a staunch Liberal Democrat he never put Party politics above

the public interest. I think that is to be admired.

He was immensely popular in Dronfield. I do not think anything showed that more than

the commemoration after his funeral when the Civic Hall at Dronfield was packed to bursting

point. I can only say that he will be truly missed by all who knew him. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Ellis. Councillor Stone.

CLLR STONE: Thank you, Chair. I obviously second the comments especially made

by Barrie and the councillor from Dronfield on Izzy.

I would just like to say a few words about Gill Jones because not many people knew

Gill. I first met Gill in 1963 when she was doing drama at the local Youth Club. Although she

was a socialist, and let me know it, she certainly was, as David said, a person who put people

first above all things. We remained friends - even though I was a Liberal Democrat, much to

her disgust - we remained friends constantly until she died. In fact by strange coincidence she

lived next door to my sister-in-law in recent years so I kept very much in touch with Gill. Gill

was a fiery person and had a lot of good qualities in the same way that Izzy had. I think

probably the fact they both came from Wales said a lot. She was very blunt in what she said,

she did not mince her words at all, but she liked people, she liked the countryside. She was a

rather individual person. When she was on the County Council she was a very very hard

working County Councillor and I think all of us who knew Gill will miss her very much.

Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Stone.

We will go on to 4(iii). On a happier note I am pleased to welcome David Mills, the

Chief Executive Officer of Ricoh UK Ltd, who is here to present the Authority with an

environmental award.

MR MILLS: Just to tell you a little bit about the award here today. This is Ricoh

working in partnership with Derbyshire County Council. We have just planted 5,000 trees.

Each tree represents 100 impressions on a piece of paper, over 100,000 pieces of paper that is

printed, copied or faxed. A great achievement. Looking at the paper in this room today I am

sure we have planted a tree for the paper that is sitting on people’s desks. A big thank you from

Ricoh for your business and hopefully we can move things forward in the future together.

Thank you very much.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. If we had not got our papers today I could

have blamed you!

MR MILLS: Yes. (A presentation was made) (Applause)

8

THE CHAIRMAN: I am again happy to announce that the County Council is one of

only three County Councils placed in the Best Places to Work in the Public Sector Survey 2010

and was awarded “One to Watch” status. The survey is independently run and measures levels

of employee engagement and satisfaction. I am sure you would wish to join me in

congratulating the Chief Executive and the whole of the workforce on this achievement.

Joining the Chief Executive and representing the workforce for this award are Sarah

Wheeldon, one of our young apprentices; Sue Mitchell, the Joint Chair of the Disabled

Workers’ Group; Rob Bounds, Chair of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Group;

Matthew Edwards, Chair of the Black and Minority Ethnic Group, and Carl Roper and Nigel

Hughes who led the work from HR Team. Well done. Ann Macmillan-Wood is in place of the

Chairman who is not here. (A presentation was made) (Applause)

MR EDWARDS (Chair of the Black and Minority Ethnic Group): I think I would say

all the three groups who are represented here, the LGBT Group, the Disabled Workers’ Group

and the BME Group, we have enjoyed the support we have had from the Authority over the last

years and we are looking forward to 2010 being a really brilliant year in supporting the things

that we do such as Idaho Day; Disabled Workers’ Week and the Black History Month

celebrated in October. Thanks very much. (Applause)

THE CHAIRMAN: Can I remind members of the first members’ briefing to be held on

the morning of Wednesday, 12 May. There will be two presentations, the first by Brigade

Commander Brigadier Andrew Williams, 49th

(East) Brigade, and the second by Jeff Wheatley

on the Changing the Way Derbyshire Works Project.

May I also point out to the Council, but most of you probably know, that this good man

beside me, Mr David Tysoe, who has been a brilliant County Secretary, is going to retire. I do

not know whether I am going to let you go actually, David, but I don’t suppose I will get an

option.

May I say on behalf of the Council, as we do sit here today, I thank you very much for

all the services, especially the last twelve months when you have had to put up with me. I

appreciate all your help and I am sure there are many people here who do also. Is there anyone,

one from each Group, who would like to say anything?

CLLR LEWER: Yes Chairman. David has worked for the Council for a very long time

and put some sterling service into this organisation in quite a surprisingly wide range of ways.

The brief he has covers an incredible array of subject areas and the advice he has provided has

always been well considered and fair. I wish him all the best in his retirement. Thank you,

Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Andrew. Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: Thank you, Chair. Members of our Group have known David for a

long long time. I think it is a very difficult job and an extremely difficult job to do in this

environment and be seen to be fair and impartial. People always look to you, David, to find a

reason to justify their own arguments. I think you have had to tread quite a difficult line

sometimes, but thank you for everything you have done and I do hope you have a long and

happy retirement.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Western. Councillor Flitter.

9

CLLR FLITTER: Yes, thank you Chair. It is a sad day for the Authority because like

all good Authorities we have very good officers. David is more than capable of being a good

officer. He has been an excellent officer. He has been somebody you can talk to; somebody I

have found level headed who can reason and give answers to questions that we pose. I really

thank him for that support over the time that I have been on this Council. I think everybody is

really sorry to see you go. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. David, would you like to say a few words?

MR TYSOE: Just a brief few words, thank you very much. It has been a privilege to

work for Derbyshire County Council this last 34 years. It has been a rich and varied

experience. We have done all sorts of things that sometimes have been more exciting than you

would want them to be, in fact.

The motto of the County Council on the crest is Bene consulendo, which is Latin for

“with good counsel” and I wish you that in the future. Thank you for those kind words.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. (Applause)

5 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 5, to receive declarations of interest, personal or

prejudicial. Have we any? (No response) Thank you.

6 PUBLIC QUESTIONS

THE CHAIRMAN: We will go to agenda Item 6, to consider public questions. We

have three today. The first one is from Mrs Elizabeth Stevenson to Councillor Harrison.

MRS STEVENSON: Good afternoon. I am Liz Stevenson. I am a member of the

public from Ilkeston and Erewash. I was a full-time family carer for my mum who had a severe

disabling condition for twelve years before she died last April. Seven years after I stopped

being her full-time family carer she then went into a Derbyshire County Council residential

care home, which was absolutely excellent.

I am a member of Action for Carers in Erewash, a voluntary group in Erewash of people

who have to look after loved ones. I am a volunteer secretary for Age Concern, Ilkeston, and I

am also a member of the Erewash Disability Sports Group.

The question I have this afternoon for Councillor John Harrison, Cabinet Member for

Finance and Management is:

“On Radio Derby recently you made a commitment that you had no intention of

introducing charges for the Home Help Service, but Derbyshire County Council is

moving to a personalisation style of service where people will have their own budget

and make choices about how to spend this. Can you guarantee that under

personalisation you will maintain the long held principle of not charging people for

personal care services at home?”

CLLR HARRISON: Thank you very much Mrs Stevenson for your question, also thank

you very much that in the process of introducing it for the tribute you have paid to our Home

Help Service and also our Residential Care Service. You have first-hand experience of that and

10

we are delighted that your family has found it so helpful and useful.

Secondly, I would like to say that as an administration we are a caring administration.

We are very conscious of the needs of vulnerable people and people in need. We are also

equally conscious of the financial burdens many such people face in the present economic

climate. Therefore, I was very happy to confirm in that public debate with the Leader of the

Opposition on Radio Derby recently that it was our intention and commitment not to introduce

charges for our Home Help Service.

However, you are quite right, that the Government is introducing its personalisation

agenda which will introduce significant and complex changes. That is due to come into place

in April of next year.

Because of our commitment to such people and the desire to maintain that service free

of charge, we are hoping that that new approach of personal budgets will not impact on the free

service. It is introducing a system of individual choice and control and therefore each

individual will have the right and responsibility, following an assessment, to choose from the

services which that assessment suggests they need for their betterment. Someone who chooses

the need for a home help then can make use of their personal budget for that purpose, in which

case it will still be free.

When it comes to the question of me giving a guarantee that we will not change this

policy, it would be irresponsible of me to give an unconditional guarantee of the kind you are

requesting because no one can be sure of unforeseen changes in the future.

For example, as we sit here today and as I stand here today we do not know what the

Government Rate Support Grant is going to be beyond the end of the current financial year

ending in March 2011. We are hoping that that will not result in any change in our policies in

relation to home helps but we will keep the situation under review constantly in the hope that

we will be able to maintain that essential and important and valued service free of charge.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Harrison. Mrs Stevenson, you can ask a

supplementary on Councillor Harrison’s response.

MRS STEVENSON: Under the fair access to care system where local authorities

decide at what level they will fund the Home Help Service or personal care for vulnerable

people, can you reassure all the current and future family carers in Derbyshire that the current

level that Derbyshire has at the moment, which is moderate, will not change to substantial or

critical over the next five years?

CLLR HARRISON: In answering that question it is an opportunity to remind everyone

that the budget for Adult Care in the current financial year is £210 million representing a

massive 40% of the Council’s general revenue expenditure. We are servicing on average 6,500

people in the Derbyshire community with the Home Help Service. That is an average weekly.

Under the new arrangements we are not getting any extra money from the Government,

we will have to introduce the personalised agenda within our existing funding and we will

certainly ensure, with the help of our officers, and with the help of the home helps themselves,

to maintain that service as you desire and free of charge if we possibly can.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Harrison.

11

The second question is from Sally Chisholm to Councillor Martyn Ford.

CLLR FORD: Chairman, before I take the question, I have two similar or broadly

similar questions, one from Sally and one from Julie Harrington. I have one answer which

covers both questions so it might be appropriate to hear both questions before I give a single

answer and then take a question from each if necessary?

THE CHAIRMAN: Julie Harrington, are you happy with that?

MS HARRINGTON: Yes.

THE CHAIRMAN: You both read your questions out and then Councillor Ford will

answer.

MS CHISHOLM: My name is Sally Chisholm. I am a local resident and business

owner in the Dunston area where this Cyclamax proposal for the incinerator is.

“This question relates to the Cyclamax application to build an incinerator in

Chesterfield. I am extremely concerned about the continuing delays with this

application and the uncertainty that this is creating for residents and businesses in the

area. I am trying to understand more clearly the reasons for the continuing delays and

any options explored for this latest delay.

I am aware that in other Councils, in a case like this where an applicant asks for a delay

to a planning application, the applicant has to withdraw the application and re-submit it,

so I am interested in whether this requirement was even discussed at the end of the

March planning meeting when Cyclamax requested a delay until after the general

election?

I am also interested in whether the reasons for the current delay (ie the Environmental

Permit and the trip to Dumfries) were raised at that meeting, either by the officers, the

applicant or the Committee?

The applicant wishes to justify through an Environmental Agency Permit, that issues

related to health effects, which are not a planning consideration, somehow excuses

relevant and material site specific issues.

We are not convinced of the relevance of a trip to a new plant only in its commissioning

stage in Dumfries. When it has suited Cyclamax they are linked to this project as in the

early days of consultation and when they are not wishing to be linked, as Tony Watkins

declared in a public meeting here at Matlock “This application is nothing like that at

Dumfries!” The public are fearful of the long term health implications of this

technology. Their ‘fears’, even if eventually after 20 or so years are unproven, are a

‘material planning consideration’ now.

A visit to a plant, which is now only in its commissioning stage, in totally different

surroundings, will not prove or disprove the long term safety of this technology, nor will

a granting of an environmental permit from the Environment Agency as they do not

have any long-term evidence gathered either.

Could the Council please confirm whether each of these have been discussed, share any

correspondence relating to these issues with us (ie any correspondence by e-mail,

12

memo, telephone contact, informal and formal between the Planning Department and

Cyclamax and their agents) and clarify what bearing, if any, they expect the

Environmental Permit and trip to Dumfries will have, including in these reasons why

these options were not offered or considered earlier by Cyclamax? Yet again this

applicant when it suits them gives the impression at the special meeting in October last

year that the Dumfries plant was ‘up and running’, why was not a trip offered and

planned then?”

Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Julie Harrington please.

MS HARRINGTON: Julie Harrington, also from Chesterfield. Again my question

relates to the incinerator in Chesterfield or planned incinerator.

“I know many of you may be fed up of hearing about this planning application but it is a

very big issue and a very serious one for thousands of residents and business owners in

Chesterfield and North Derbyshire, and my question here relates to the planning process

not the reasons for or against the application.

We are not planning experts and nor are the general public and we are struggling to

understand the reasons behind the recent sequence of events and delays.

We appreciate that following the County Council elections last year a new Planning

Committee was formed and, in October last year, were grateful of the opportunity of a

second special meeting to voice our concerns to the new Committee. At the end of that

meeting we were told that a date for the final hearing was imminent and expected in

November or December at the latest. This did not materialise.

By mid-December we understood the case officer’s report was ready, subject to legal

checks and review by his manager, the Head of Planning. Further dates for the final

meeting were suggested and then postponed in January and then also in February.

We then heard that at the end of March planning meeting a request by the applicant,

Cyclamax, had been made, asking for the final decision to be postponed until after the

general election. We were encouraged to hear that as the officer’s report was finally

ready for hearing this request was refused, and in that same meeting a date of 27 April

was agreed for the final hearing, subject to any legal issues.

Then last week the situation changed again. The 27 April meeting had been postponed

until at least June. An officer and the media have suggested that the delays are at the

applicant’s request. The applicant did not want a decision before the general election,

even though this should not be their concern, when the planning process and the

Committee are above politics. Since then, however, we have been told the delays are

not because of the applicant, but because the Planning Committee want to wait until the

outcome of the Environmental Permit application and visit a similar plant in Dumfries.

We appreciate this is a complex application. It is controversial and the Council is likely

to have the challenge of an appeal if refused, or a judicial review if approved. So we

can understand that the Council wants to feel as ready as possible to make a decision,

but we have had our hopes of a decision raised so many times now and the reasons for

being let down each time still seem unclear.

13

Could we therefore please have some clarity as to how we have got from the report

being ready at the end of December to the situation now, where more information and

further visits are required, including who it is that is suggesting and securing these

further delays? Is it the applicant, the officers, the Head of Planning, the legal

department, the Planning Committee, or a combination? Who, therefore, should we be

addressing our concerns to and how the Council intends to communicate these issues to

the public?

There are thousands of people waiting on the outcome of this decision. Businesses have

decided not to invest in the area. People have decided not to buy homes. The

application process itself is already affecting our quality of life. The public need some

certainty and some clarity about the delays and who it is that is influencing them.”

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Ford.

CLLR FORD: I would like to thank Sally and Julie for their questions. I have a

prepared statement which all members will be getting a copy of and obviously Julie and Sally

will be getting a copy too when I have answered.

This proposal remains hugely controversial. The County Council have received over

11,000 objections to the application for planning permission for it. Before the meeting of the

Regulatory Planning Committee on the 29 March the applicant verbally requested that the

matter be deferred until after the general election. However, at that meeting the Committee

provisionally earmarked the 27 April as the date for a Committee meeting when the application

would be considered.

Shortly before the Committee next met on the 12 April, the applicant supplied the

following two points of information which has a key bearing on this issue of timing the report,

of the application to Committee.

(1) The Environment Agency is in the final stages of determining the environmental

permit application for the facility. They have indicated that a draft permit will be

issued by the 20 May 2010.

(2) The Scottish Environmental Protection Agency has granted an environmental

permit for a facility in Dumfries and Galloway which utilises the same technology.

This facility is currently in its final stages of process hot commissioning and will

shortly be fully operational.

At the close of this meeting on the 12 April the members of the Regulatory Planning

Committee then present, and the officers who were in attendance, discussed the timing issue

again and with reference to these two additional points. The consensus view of members and

officers was in favour of deferring it beyond the date which had previously been suggested,

despite the extra delay involved.

The majority of the representations received appear to assert that:

(1) The scheme will generate unacceptable levels of atmospheric pollution, and

(2) The proposal represents an unproven technology. Residents are concerned that the

Sheepbridge area will effectively become a test bed for this approach to waste

14

management.

It was considered that a delay would offer the opportunity to firstly gain a formal view from the

Environment Agency on whether this specific design is suitable to receive a permit, especially

in terms of air quality and health risk implications and, secondly, to our officers and members

of the Planning Committee to take up the option of seeing at first hand a functioning example

of the design. While neither of these steps would per se dictate the decision of the Committee,

they may help members to make a decision based upon the best available information.

The delay means that the decision the County Council makes either to refuse or allow

the planning application can take into account any latest informed opinion concerning this

technology which is about to become available. Given the high profile of this planning

application, this is particularly prudent. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Ford. Sally or Julie, have you a

supplementary?

MS CHISHOLM: It is just some responses to the procedures. One of the questions I

asked was was this usual, the procedure, to grant an applicant an extension without asking them

to withdraw it and to resubmit it? I do not feel that has been answered.

Secondly, SEPA, although the plant in Dumfries I think uses the same technology and

you said will shortly be fully operational, Cyclamax have been saying it is fully operational

since last October, they said it here, so I cannot understand why if they wanted the councillors

to see it that they could not do it then? I just wanted to underline whether or not, as you

yourself said, an environmental permit is granted, that this is not a planning consideration.

Finally, with regard to delays, now we are in this situation the Council themselves,

County Council, are in the process of compiling the Big Choices report, which is the Waste

Core Strategy, and we would like for the delay to continue until the findings and results of that

have been concluded. Thank you.

A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC: Can I just reply to that, Mr Chair please, very

quickly?

THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry no, you are not allowed to speak. Julie.

MS HARRINGTON: I just have an additional question. To try and reduce the amount

of uncertainty for people it would be a great help if either now, or in advance, we can agree a

process for arranging the final meeting so once you are 100 per cent certain that the report is

ready we know what to expect.

Unlike the applicant, Cyclamax, this is not our full-time occupation. We have

businesses, jobs and families to try and juggle in order to make time to work on this. When

dates have been suggested for the final meeting people have been booking annual leave and

making alternative childcare arrangements. For the special meetings businesses on

Sheepbridge shut down for the afternoon to make sure that they could be there. The original

date for the second special meeting was fixed for a date last August at short notice in the

summer holidays when many of us, including our solicitor, were away. It was only after we

complained the date was eventually moved. Could we have some assurances, or set some kind

of parameters, as to how the process will work at the final stage which would include who will

alert us to the date of the final meeting so we do not have to keep pestering Kevin Finn or

15

scanning the websites and the local press to try and find out; agree some kind of fair warning of

the final meeting so we have at least four or six weeks’ notice of when the final meeting will be

so we can make arrangements, and to also have some realistic timeframe for the public to digest

the officer’s report? We understand it is some 100 plus pages long and it obviously needs to be

disseminated to 11,000 plus people. We are just wondering whether we can have a realistic

timeframe for us to go through that and try and understand it all?

CLLR FORD: Thank you for those. If I answer Julie first. It is obviously very

complex and I appreciate the fact you have taken that on board. If it is any reassurance this is

not my full-time job either so I am having to juggle trying to get things sorted out.

I think the meetings we have suggested so far have only been provisional meetings in all

fairness and when the date of the final meeting is set that will be well communicated because of

the need to get as many people informed of that date as possible. Rest assured that will happen.

Coming back to what Sally talked about. Waiting until after the “Big Choices” comes

out, that is an interesting thought. What we will possibly need to do is to take that back and see

again if that is acceptable. It will obviously delay it even further.

The point about the applicant asking for a delay on its own without re-submitting I do

not think - and I might be wrong on this because I am not a planning expert - they have not

altered in any way their planning application they are just waiting to get the back end of the

permit sorted out.

As regards going to Dargavel, my latest information is it is what they call hot

commissioning, it is going through the final stages now of trials before it does go into full

production. Dates have been provided by Cyclamax, which I will let you and Julie have and

anybody else. Primarily it is going to be for objectors. They have been offered the opportunity

to go and have a look at this. Chesterfield Borough Council would also like to go and see, as an

objector in principle, so we will get those dates put about to you as soon as we possibly can.

You have the right to refuse that trip but I would suggest to get the full benefit of what is

available you do take up that option. Thank you, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Councillor Ford. You will all receive these

responses in writing within the next seven days. Thank you very much for coming anyway.

7 COUNCIL QUESTIONS

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 7, to consider Council questions. There are none.

8 QUESTIONS ON THE FUNCTIONS OF THE DERBYSHIRE POLICE

AUTHORITY OR THE DERBYSHIRE FIRE AUTHORITY

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 8, to answer questions on the functions of the

Derbyshire Police and Derbyshire Fire Authority. There are none either.

9 COUNCIL MINUTES

THE CHAIRMAN: I would like to move agenda Item 9, that the minutes of the

Council meeting held on the 3 February 2010 be approved as a correct record. Have I a

seconder please?

16

CLLR MACDONALD: I second.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 1, page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5, page 6, page 7,

page 8, page 9, page 10, page 11, page 12, page 13, page 14, page 15, page 16, 17, 18, 19, 20,

21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30.

10 CABINET MINUTES

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 10, to receive the minutes of the meetings of the

Cabinet held on the 26 January, 2 and 16 February, 2, 16, 30 March 2010.

CLLR LEWER: Chairman, I propose that the minutes you have just referred to be

received and adopted.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Seconder?

CLLR JACKSON: Second, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 26 January, page 1, page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5,

page 6, page 7, page 8, page 9, page 10, page 11.

2 February, page 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18.

16 February, 19, 20.

49/10 REVIEW OF CAR PARK CHARGING POLICY AT COUNTRYSIDE SITES

CLLR FORD: Chairman, as the local member who takes in Willington I would like to

thank the Cabinet for noting my serious concerns and comments made about

Recommendation 3, and that is Willington car park, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Councillor Lucas.

CLLR LUCAS: Thank you. On the same number, 49/10, this came to Cabinet as you

have identified, Chair, on the 16 February after quite a number of meetings had taken place

over the review of the car parking charges for our countryside sites. A huge number of benefits

were concluded at the end of that meeting under the stewardship of the Chair, Councillor

Twigg. They were put forward at that Cabinet meeting.

Could I ask, it now seems such a long time, if there has been any furtherance on arriving

at a decision on this? As I say other than making charges, which is not popular with anyone

really, there was a huge benefit for our countryside services and for our car parking spaces on

security and maintenance which would benefit the users and it just seems quite a lengthy time

before we seem to arrive at what I would say is quite a simple decision really. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Jackson.

CLLR JACKSON: Thank you, Chairman. Yes, time has gone on but the officers are

just making their final recommendation on this and I hope that very very shortly we will put

this matter to rest and have a positive decision on this.

CLLR LUCAS: Thank you.

17

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 21, 22.

51/10 REQUEST FOR CONTRIBUTION – ASHBOURNE INNOVATION AND

ENTERPRISE BUSINESS CENTRE

CLLR MOESBY: Minute 51/10, Request for Contribution – Ashbourne Innovation and

Enterprise Business Centre. I notice that this £79,000 is coming out of the Regeneration

Treasure Chest Fund. Two questions, if I may, Chair: one is, how much is this fund worth,

what money is in this fund and, secondly, what is the criteria for applying to this particular fund

so we can have an idea what we can get out of it?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Spencer.

CLLR SPENCER: Thank you, Chairman. I thank the councillor for the question.

With regard to this particular note in the report, 51/10, this particular application will no longer

be going ahead and the £79,000 will be going back into the Council’s reserves and carried

forward, as usual. The Cabinet Members’ Regeneration Treasure Chest has been funded in the

same way for many years and I am quite sure you already know what the figure is. It is

£200,000 and the principle for application is just the same as it was in the past, councillor.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.

CLLR MOESBY: Could I just come back because Councillor Spencer has made a

couple of remarks there that he presumes I know the amount that is in it, which I didn’t that is

why I asked the question, and secondly the criteria to apply, which I don’t, so if Councillor

Spencer does not know the rules for it all maybe we could get a written answer to the members

so we do know how to apply for this money? Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: I am sure Councillor Spencer will give you the answer.

CLLR SPENCER: Yes Chair, I do know the rules. Of course I know the rules. The

Regeneration Fund in the Cabinet Chest, if you wish to call it that, is a fund for worthy

regeneration schemes and as is normal every scheme is put forward in front of Cabinet for

consideration with a recommendation for which fund the regeneration chest should be used

from. We have the regeneration fund within the Regeneration Department, we have the

Cabinet Members’ Chest and we have several other funds we can apply to. All I would say to

you today is the programme has been laid down in the past, the procedure has not changed. I

am sure your colleagues who were former Cabinet members in the past will be well aware of

the situation. I am not being evasive, I am saying the situation has not changed from the past.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Booth.

CLLR BOOTH: Thank you, Chair. There are a lot of new members on all Parties and I

just feel when you are in a public meeting like this it is common courtesy to not stand up

arrogantly and assume that everybody knows the criteria. I think it is a fair question and it

deserves a fair answer.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Spencer.

CLLR SPENCER: Yes Chairman. Councillor Moesby knows full well, I think he

would agree, that we have a good working relationship, he is the Shadow Cabinet member.

18

There is no arrogance, there is an open debate on every occasion, there always has been, and if

the councillor on the other side believes I stand up in an arrogant way I apologise for that. I do

not believe that is the case and I am more than happy at any time to answer any questions the

Opposition put to me.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Spencer. Page 23.

52/10 SAFER AND STRONGER COMMUNITIES CAPITAL FUND – 2010/11

ALLOCATION

CLLR LEWIS: I have a question on 52/10. I would like to express my profound

disappointment at the halving of the Safer and Stronger Communities Capital Fund allocation

for 2010/11, especially at a time when issues surrounding community safety and antisocial

behaviour are so prevalent in people’s minds.

Can the Cabinet member tell us how we are to deliver so much for so impossibly little?

Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Hart.

CLLR HART: Thank you, Mr Chairman and thank you, Councillor Lewis for his

question. It gives me chance to express my great concern about the funding from the Safer and

Stronger Communities Capital Grant for 2010/11 being halved.

Community safety is a top priority and to cut not just our budget but the national budget

by 50% in this important area is a matter of serious concern. Everybody understands that

money is going to be tight and budgets have to be monitored carefully but a savage cut of 50%

is really not acceptable.

I did register my concerns with the Home Secretary and indicated that it could have

serious implications on the delivery of projects with our partners. I do realise that the Home

Secretary is a busy man and of course the rest of it is passed on to something called the Direct

Communications Unit. Basically they are saying “You have to cut your cloth according to the

funding” but the last paragraph also says we are still expected to build a more positive

perception of safety within the communities.

We will continue to work with our partners to deliver but it is going to be tight and we

are going to have to really concentrate on our priorities.

I have sent a copy of the reply of the letter to the members of the Safer Communities

Board. I am quite happy for every member to have a copy of this. When you receive it if you

just look at it it actually says our funding of £258,000 has been halved by 50% and we will be

receiving £190,000. That is fine, if they can do maths like that if we can keep them to the

written word we have £190,000 but I have a horrible feeling it might be reduced to £129,000.

Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Booth.

CLLR BOOTH: Thank you, Chair. I am sure you want to know the answers, Carol,

and being a good politician you have probably already lobbied your Conservative

Parliamentary prospective candidate, Jessica Lee. I certainly would have done if you have

those sort of questions and I am sure you have her answer as to what sort of funding she will be

19

lobbying for should she be successful on May the 6th

.

THE CHAIRMAN: If that is relevant, Councillor Hart.

CLLR HART: Well it is relevant. I am in mid-Derbyshire for the general election not

Jessica Lee, but I will be lobbying anybody to increase the funding in this sort of area because

it is a priority for us.

THE CHAIRMAN: Page 24, 25, 26. 2 March, page 27, 28, 29, 30. Councillor Patten.

75/10 YOUTH OPPORTUNITIES FUND AND YOUTH CAPITAL FUND

CLLR PATTEN: Thank you, Chairman. I have a question on 75/10. I am really

pleased to see that the Youth Council have been able to fund a multitude of schemes to help

other young people within Derbyshire. I am also aware that this Youth Council has just

finished its term of office. Therefore, I would like to ask Councillor Critchlow, could you

please give us an update on the big vote for the new Youth Council?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Critchlow.

CLLR CRITCHLOW: Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the question. Yes, this Youth

Council did some excellent work but they also paved the way forward for a new phase in the

Youth Council. The old Council was 16 members. We have just had the big vote and it has

gone up to 62 members now. All the schools took part in it, all the secondary schools. They all

put candidates forward from every single school. Some of the schools had multiple candidates

in there. They all did their own manifesto, were out campaigning to get the other youngsters to

vote for them. It all culminated in the big vote at the end of March. We had the results night in

here on the 1 April. It was a spectacular sight to see over 200 young people sat on these green

benches in here as all the results were read out as to who the representative was for each school

in the area. We also got some from the colleges and looked after children representative as

well. From this 62 member Youth Council now they have just formed their own Cabinet so

they can specialise in various subjects and they meet for the first time next Tuesday. I look

forward to working with them again to achieve more good results for the young people of

Derbyshire, so thank you for the question.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Councillor Lucas.

73/10 CONSULTATION ON CHANGES TO TRAVEL CONCESSIONS AND

ELIGIBILITIES OFFERED BY THE GOLD CARD

CLLR LUCAS: Thank you, Chair. It is on page 30, (Resolved) but to point 73/10,

Consultation on Changes to Travel Concessions on the Gold Card.

I think it is quite plain that in a Council like Derbyshire where they have been used to

the provision of the Gold Card as we once knew it, people have enjoyed concessionary travel,

but that changed under the All England Concessionary Fares Scheme. In your service plan you

have put down where you wish to encourage more use of public transport and to have an impact

in this county, but I am a little confused in the wording of how it is written in your service plan

and how you refer to the “Gold Card” or the “Gold Card Concessionary Schemes” which is

namely set out for the half price fares that are used for rail and the other local benefits. In your

service plan it says “To encourage greater use of County’s public transport system”. Yes. “We

will continue to offer half fare travel to 11-18 year olds who hold the b_line card…” Yes.

20

“…and free off peak travel on local buses throughout England to those people aged 60 or over

and some people with a disability to qualify for a Gold Card”.

I am a little confused on that wording because surely are we not making reference to the

All England Concessionary Scheme which is Central Government funded?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Jackson.

CLLR JACKSON: Thank you, Brian. The Concessionary Travel Scheme in

Derbyshire is part of the national scheme, ie the English National Concessionary Travel

Scheme. It provides free off peak travel on local buses for people aged 60 and over and people

with certain disabilities.

The introduction of the scheme and recent changes in the age of eligibility has meant

that Derbyshire has had to adjust its own scheme to fit in with the national scheme. In

Derbyshire the Gold Card gives effect to the national scheme but offers additional benefits in

that it also acts as a shopping discount card and a library card. The Gold Card also provides

additional travel concessions, including half fare travel on local trains and free off peak travel

on community transport Dial-a-Bus services.

To qualify for this, under the national scheme, the English National Concessionary

Travel Scheme, people aged 60 or over and people with certain disabilities are entitled to free

travel on local bus services but between 9.30 am and 11 pm on weekdays and all day on

Saturdays, Sundays and bank holidays, but with effect from the 6 April changes in the age of

eligibility for the national scheme are being introduced. This will eventually increase the age of

entitlement to 65. The age will be gradually increased on a sliding scale over a ten year period.

People under 60 who have a disability qualify for concessionary travel if they are blind

or partially sighted, profoundly or severely deaf, without speech, have a disability or have

suffered an injury which affects their ability to walk, or without arms or have long-term loss of

the use of both arms, have a learning disability, are unable to drive for medical reasons, or

would be automatically refused a driving licence if they applied. This may include people with

severe mental illnesses.

In Derbyshire the County Council supplements the concessionary travel allowed by the

national scheme to provide two things:

(a) half fare local train travel at any time, on any train services in Derbyshire and on

some journeys outside Derbyshire but only where the journey starts or finishes in

this county.

(b) free travel on community transport, Dial-a-Bus services, between 9.30 am and

11 pm on weekdays and all day on Saturday, Sunday and bank holidays.

I hope that answers your question.

CLLR LUCAS: If you can remind me of my question! (Laughter)

THE CHAIRMAN: I think Councillor Jackson has given you your answer there,

Councillor Lucas.

CLLR BRADFORD: Chairman, I was just interested in what Councillor Lucas said

21

with reference to the National Concessionary Scheme at the moment funded by government.

That is not absolutely honestly true, is it, because it is funded largely by local authorities

currently. I know that for a fact. It hopefully will be in the future but it is not currently fully

funded. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Page 31, 32, 33. 16 March, page 34, 35, 36. Councillor Western.

97/10 VETTING AND BARRING SCHEME AND RELATED CRIMINAL

BACKGROUND CHECKING ARRANGEMENTS

CLLR WESTERN: 36, Chair, 97/10. I have a question on this Vetting and Barring

Scheme in relation to the paragraph on the next page relating to elected members.

Just a bit of background, Chair. At the end of 2006, beginning of 2007 I think it was,

there was a particularly disturbing incident involving a former member of Derby City Council.

As a result of that the Derby Telegraph started a campaign, I think it was called “The Anything

To Declare” campaign, where they were asking individual elected members to declare if there

was anything in their past history that the public should know. As a result of that both Derby

City Council and Derbyshire County Council introduced a policy of CRB checking all elected

members. At the time, I think I am right in saying, all members agreed to that process and it

was done comprehensively.

Now it seems to be that the position is shifting slightly under the guise of this Vetting

and Barring Scheme. It is quite complex but as I understand it the Vetting and Barring Scheme

is aimed primarily at people who work with, or have regular intensive and frequent contact with

children, young people and vulnerable adults and it is perhaps more tightly prescriptive than

previous regimes have been, and I can understand why that is, but even so I would argue that if

an elected member is doing their job properly as a member of this Authority, which has

responsibility for Children’s Services and Adult Care Services, there may well be occasions

when members, all local members meet the criteria within the guidance that was circulated with

this report. The guidance does refer to specific elected member roles that do need to be

checked, but I think within the scope of that guidance there would be other members who

would meet the criteria.

As well as that in terms of checking people, the vetting and barring, the ISA Scheme is

not the only scheme outside of that which is tightly focused. There is still the potential to CRB

check other people, whether they are employees, members, volunteers or whoever for other

reasons. I would suggest, Chair, that as a public confidence measure we ought, as an Authority,

to be considering that for all members. All our members in the course of their everyday role as

a local member will have access to schools, Children’s Centres, Youth Centres, Old People’s

Homes, whether they are residential or as individuals. Quite a lot of us do do case work that

involves visiting people and we do put ourselves in situations where we are having one-to-one

discussions with vulnerable people, so I think from a public confidence point of view it is

important that people know we have been checked.

We have had the discussion within the Labour Group and all our members are willing

and ready to undertake a CRB check. I would hope that the other two Group Leaders will have

similar conversations with their members and I would hope that this Authority will do all it can

to make sure that the policy we have had since 2007 of checking our members can be

continued, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Western. Councillor Harrison.

22

CLLR HARRISON: Thank you, Chairman, thank you ma’am for your question. The

answer is that we will be implementing the new vetting and checking policy. We will be

following Government guidelines without any gold plating. Thank you.

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, that does not answer the question really and it seems to be a

“no” to any consideration of the points that I have made. I think that is regrettable, Chair.

CLLR HARRISON: There are occasions when it is very sensible, even more desirable

on sensitive issues such as this to follow the guidelines which have been enacted by Parliament

and by the government of the day. Therefore I repeat, we will be implementing those

guidelines as laid down. We have of course considered them, considered them in great detail

and depth. I am pretty sure that all the members of my Group will be only too delighted to

subject themselves to a CRB check, that is not required by the guideline, and as I said in my

initial response, we will implement it without any gold plating.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43. 30 March, page 44, 45,

46, 47, 48 and 49.

11 REGULATORY – LICENSING AND APPEALS COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 11, Regulatory – Licensing and Appeals. Councillor

Parkinson to move please?

CLLR PATTEN: I think it is actually me, Chairman. I would like to move the minutes

of the Licensing and Appeals Committee on the 29 March.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Patten. Seconder?

CLLR PURDY: I am happy to second that, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 50, 51, 52, 53.

12 REGULATORY – PLANNING COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 12, Regulatory – Planning Committee, 25 January, 22

February, 8 March, 29 March. Councillor Ford please.

CLLR FORD: Thank you, Chair. I rise to move the minutes of the Regulatory –

Planning Committee held at County Hall, Matlock, on the 25 January 2010.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have we a seconder?

CLLR LEWIS: I will second that, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 54, 55, 56, 57, 58. 22 February.

CLLR FORD: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I rise to move the minutes of the meeting of

the Regulatory – Planning Committee held at County Hall on the 22 February 2010.

THE CHAIRMAN: Seconder again?

23

CLLR LEWIS: I second that, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68. Regulatory

– Planning, 8 March.

CLLR LEWIS: Chairman, I would like to move those minutes. I think it falls

incumbent on me as the Chair at the time to do that. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Seconder?

CLLR LACEY: I second those, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 69, 70, 71, 72, 73. Yes, Councillor Camm.

33/10 MATTERS DETERMINED BY THE STRATEGIC DIRECTOR –

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES UNDER DELEGATED POWERS

CLLR CAMM: 73, Mr Chairman please. I note with a considerable amount of pleasure

that at last we have something positive in an item as such appertaining to car park facilities for

Sawley Infant and Sawley Nursery School. It has been a long long while since efforts were

made to acquire improvements in parking facilities. May I express my gratitude that at last

something has happened which will improve the services for the school, cut down on the

number of vehicles parked outside, which is causing grave problems, and all I wish to say in

conclusion: at last we have made some positive progress.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Camm for those few words.

Regulatory – Planning Committee, 29 March.

CLLR FORD: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I rise to move the minutes of the Regulatory

– Planning Committee held at County Hall on the 29 March 2010.

THE CHAIRMAN: Seconder?

CLLR LEWIS: I second that again, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 74, 75, 76, 77.

37/10 OUTSTANDING APPLICATION LIST

CLLR CHAPMAN: Chair, 37/10. I am asking a question for clarification, obviously

not on the planning application itself.

(1) I would like to ask the Chair, first of all can he confirm that there was a request to

delay this application until after the general election at this meeting and the Committee took

exception to this and agreed the provisional date of the 27 April?

(2) Can he confirm that the officers were quite happy with that date, they thought they

had come prepared to come up with a recommendation on the 27 April?

(3) Subsequently, the application has been deferred until the Environment Agency

permit has been issued.

24

(4) Can the Chair explain the relevance of the Environment Agency permit, which is

only relevant to the waste licence?

(5) Can he also confirm that this Authority has never ever before waited for the

environmental permit before considering a planning application?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Ford.

CLLR FORD: Thank you. Yes, if I take the back one first, we have never had an

application of this complexity before, Councillor Chapman, that is why we are waiting for the

environmental permit.

The other issues he raised, questions 1, 2 and 3, we did decide the meeting on this

particular point, on this particular item, 37/10, that the 27th

would have been a date. It was all

agreed. It was only after that - if you remember we talked about the general election the

applicant wished to take it after the general election - we decided against that course of action

and put the date in for the 27 April. It was at the last meeting, which unfortunately both

yourself and Peter Riggott were not at, that again further discussions took place on the back of

the written answer I gave to the two questioners, it was decided again to defer until after we had

seen the environmental permit. Thank you, Chair.

CLLR CHAPMAN: Chair, regarding a complicated application, we have just had an

application at Arkwright on my patch, a very complicated one. We did not wait for the

environmental permit there and we did not defer that till after an election. That was very

contentious, very lengthy, and in terms of complexity the same as this. That answer is not

acceptable. A precedent has been set which is not necessary.

THE CHAIRMAN: I think Councillor Ford has given you the answer, Councillor

Chapman.

CLLR FORD: I am prepared to take it further, Chairman. We were talking here apples

and pears, Chairman, one was a completely different process to the other and as we are waiting

for the environmental permit the perfectly right thing to do was to defer this until we had the

environmental permit on the 20th

. Councillor Chapman will be invited to go to Dargavel if that

trip takes place so he can see for himself.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, I am very concerned about this. We have heard two long

and detailed questions from members of the public today who are obviously very distressed

about what is happening, they have great concern. We know the strength of feeling there is not

just in Dunston but in the whole Chesterfield North East Derbyshire area. I think it is

regrettable really that this application has now been delayed again because whatever the

reasons given the public perception is that the applicant is being favoured in some way. The

applicant made a request and the meeting is now being deferred. I think public confidence is an

important thing in relation to planning.

To say it is important to wait for the Environment Agency permit process I think is a bit

spurious because they are two separate and distinct processes and one is not reliant on the other.

You made great stress in your opening remarks about listening to people in Derbyshire and

delivering quality of life and so on, and it does feel as if we are falling down in this respect. To

25

some extent the integrity of this Council is being put in question here.

THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, Councillor Western, I take your point. Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: I think it is important to point out how uninvolved the political process

is in planning. Councillor Ford has gone a long way to explaining those points within the

narrow parameters he has in his regulatory role. We will all recall that when this issue has been

discussed before there has been an exodus of Labour members because of the difficulties of

raising issues of this kind at a meeting, so I would suggest for the purposes of clarity that

Mr Stephenson gives an account of the procedural basis of this without trying to drag

unnecessary references to Party politics into it, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Councillor Higginbottom.

CLLR HIGGINBOTTOM: Mr Chairman, a discussion on this item or this matter I

can’t stay out of because as the Leader of the Council has just pointed out, when this

application first came about in August 2008, I as the local member representing the Division

where the plant is proposed to be sited raised this at the Council meeting and on many

occasions, if not all occasions, there was always consternation from the Labour Group about

this application, they were not prepared to sit and listen to me ask a simple question for a

simple answer, they said I was prejudicing the route of considering the planning application,

which I sincerely did not. My intention as always, when Labour were chairing the Committee

and now the Conservatives chairing the Committee, was simply to get an answer about when

the people of Dunston and the surrounding area can have their concerns allayed or confirmed,

the matter brought to a close.

This is not a new issue to be brought today. Councillor Western is standing up talking

about the concerns of the people of North Derbyshire. They had those concerns in August 2008

onwards. It is nearly two years and for her to suggest - it is for the Majority Group to say this

but in my opinion as the Division member - for her to suggest that the current administration is

favouring the applicant is quite a serious accusation and it is not one that I have ever suggested

the Labour Party might have done or otherwise to suit their political purposes when controlling

this Council.

The Conservative Group have kept this moving since they have taken control. I thank

the Chairman for keeping me fully briefed and informed about the process, as he does at every

Council meeting whenever I have raised any questions with him, and indeed I have been able to

raise this issue at Council meetings to make sure the voice of the people of Dunston is heard.

Mrs Harrington has herself brought her concerns here this afternoon, made a clear and

concise detailed submission about the concerns we have about this planning application and I

would once again, as I have done since August 2008, say the sooner we can take a decision on

this the better for all concerned. Thank you, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: With your indulgence, Chairman, I would invite Mr Stephenson to

make some comments on an official and regulatory basis on this application.

MR STEPHENSON (Strategic Director Environmental Services): Just that, Chairman,

my duty and those of officers within the Planning Department is to ensure that the County

Council is protected and that is in all aspects of dealing with planning applications. We try to

26

deal with any applications as speedily as possible but, more importantly, we try to ensure that

proper and due process has been taken. I am absolutely certain that in respect of this

application we have taken every step to ensure that whatever the decision of the Planning

Committee is at the end of the day, that the County Council’s interests are protected. It was our

advice to defer a decision on this and I think that is right and proper advice under all the

circumstances. Thank you, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to take that as the end of that.

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, I have a point of clarity because there has been an accusation

made against me. I did not suggest that either politically or administratively this Council was

favouring the applicant. What I said was the public perception will be that. Because of the

chain of events the public perception will be that the applicant has been favoured.

In relation to Party politics it is the applicant that has raised the issue of politics in this

by asking that this be deferred until after the election, so it is the applicant that has brought the

political dimension into it.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Western, I took your point. I have heard

Mr Stephenson. We will move on. Page 78, page 79.

13 AUDIT COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 13, Audit Committee. Councillor Bradford.

CLLR BRADFORD: Thank you, Chairman. I move that the minutes of the meeting of

the Audit Committee on the 31 March be received and adopted.

While I am on my feet can I, for better information for members they will see the

Committee have agreed to almost publish the work programme and the anticipated---

THE CHAIRMAN: Can we get a seconder for this, Councillor Bradford first?

CLLR PURDY: I am happy to second those, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Councillor Bradford.

CLLR BRADFORD: Chair, I would like to point that out for members’ better

information.

Also for clarification on page 7, just in case anyone wonders, on the “Resolution” it

talks about the “technical manager”. That actually, of course, is the technical manager in

relation to corporate finance.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 1, page 2, page 3, page 4, page 5, page 6, page 7,

page 8, page 9.

14 STANDARDS COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 14, Standards Committee. Mr Richard Tomlinson

please.

27

MR TOMLINSON: Yes Chair, I would like to move that the minutes of the Joint

Meeting of the Standards Committees of the County Council and the Fire Authority held on the

12 March 2010 be received and adopted.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. A seconder? (Formally seconded) Page 80, 81, 82,

83.

15 INVESTMENT COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 15, Investment Committee. Councillor Ellis.

CLLR ELLIS: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to move that the minutes of the

meeting of the Investment Committee held on the 22 March be received and approved.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have we a seconder?

CLLR LACEY: I will second those, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89.

16 PENSIONS COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 16, Pensions Committee. Councillor Makin.

CLLR MAKIN: Thank you, Mr Chairman. Could I move that the minutes of the

Pensions Committee held on the 31 March, both as an administrative Authority and an

employing Authority, be received and adopted.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have we a seconder?

CLLR MACDONALD: I will second that, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 90, 91, 92. Pensions Committee for the 31

March, 93.

17a IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – ADULT HEALTH AND

CARE

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 17a, Improvement and Scrutiny Committee – Adult

Health and Care. Councillor Farrington.

CLLR FARRINGTON: Thank you, Chair. I would like to move the Improvement and

Scrutiny Committee – Adult Health and Care held at the County Hall, Matlock, on the 9 March.

THE CHAIRMAN: Have we a seconder?

CLLR PURDY: I am happy to second those, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 94, 95, 96. Councillor Allen.

28

14/10 COUNCIL PLAN

CLLR ALLEN: Chair, page 96 and the two points on page 97, including the

Resolution. Could I ask Councillor Farrington if she is happy with the fact that these seem to

be completely sidelined in the comments of the Council Plan when the decision both on the

comments and the resolution was unanimously accepted by the whole of the Committee from

all members from all political parties? I will comment on the Council Plan later but it was

really a question to Councillor Farrington.

CLLR FARRINGTON: I am sorry, Chair, I just could not hear that.

CLLR ALLEN: I will start again then. Sorry, Councillor Farrington. The comment I

am raising is on the resolution on 14/10 there were two comments which were unanimously

accepted by all parties at that Scrutiny Committee but appeared to be completely ignored by the

Council Plan comments. I wish to comment further on the Council Plan when we get to that,

Chair, but it is really the Chair’s feelings about the way Scrutiny appears to be sidelined.

Thank you, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Allen. Councillor Farrington.

CLLR FARRINGTON: Well, Councillor Allen, the way I see it as Scrutiny we can put

anything forward to the Executive and if they choose not to put it into the Council Plan then

Scrutiny has no remit to force that.

CLLR CHARLES: How do you feel about that?

THE CHAIRMAN: Is that a question, Councillor Charles? Would you like to do it

through the Chair please.

CLLR CHARLES: Sorry.

CLLR ALLEN: Chair, in a sense that was my question. I accept the factual account but

I was asking whether the Chair was happy that the “Executive” as you call it, and a Group of

which you are a member of, completely ignored a resolution that you agreed to support?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Farrington.

CLLR FARRINGTON: Well of course I do not really agree with it. I would like to

possibly have another look at this but you know it has gone forward and if the Executive

decides not to take this forward Scrutiny just can’t force the issue, we have no remit to do that.

CLLR GILLOTT: Councillor Farrington, if the Executive decides not to agree to it, my

understanding is this has not been to the Executive yet, is that correct, this has come straight to

here. There has been no formal Executive meeting to discuss the Council Plan?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: Point of order, Chairman. That question relates to taking the Council

Plan forward. Councillor Farrington’s answer was in relation to the comments that were put

forward. Her Committee discussed them, they were put forward. They were discussed and

they are in the appendix as discussed. Councillor Gillott’s question relates to the Council Plan

item on the agenda and not this one.

29

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 96, 97, 98.

17b IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – COMMUNITIES,

CULTURE AND THE ENVIRONMENT

THE CHAIRMAN: 17b, Improvement and Scrutiny Committee – Communities,

Culture and the Environment. Councillor Twigg.

CLLR TWIGG: I would like to move that the Improvement and Scrutiny Committee –

Communities, Culture and the Environment held at County Hall on March 17th

be approved as

a correct record.

THE CHAIRMAN: Have we a seconder?

CLLR WILSON: I would like to second that, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 99, 100. Councillor Moesby.

12/10 COUNCIL PLAN

CLLR MOESBY: Again it is 12/10, the Council Plan there. It is not dissimilar

question to the one Councillor Allen has put forward. We did resolve to put into the Council

Plan extra funding for roads. I just wonder how you feel as Chair of that Scrutiny Committee

the fact it does not appear to have got into that Council Plan?

CLLR TWIGG: We passed our comments on to the Scrutiny Officer who drew them

altogether and put them into the Plan. I think you will find that ours are in the Plan.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We will be on the Council Plan in a minute so you

will see then. Page 101.

17c IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – EDUCATION AND

YOUNG PEOPLE

THE CHAIRMAN: 17c, Improvement and Scrutiny Committee – Education and

Young People. Councillor Wharmby.

CLLR G D WHARMBY: I would like to move that the minutes of the 10 March be

received and adopted.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Seconder?

CLLR MURRAY: I would like to second those, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 102, 103. Councillor Western.

04/10 COUNCIL PLAN

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, Council Plan again, 04/10. The point I made at that Scrutiny

Committee that was resolved and accepted by the Committee, and I believe again was without

any dissent, was around emphasising the importance and the significance of mental health

30

issues in relation to the safeguarding of children.

I have been at a couple of occasions, I think one was Scrutiny and one was certainly the

County Annual Safeguarding Conference where great stress was laid on parental mental health

problems as being a significant risk factor for children in terms of safeguarding. It is one of

three. I think it is parental mental health, alcohol and substance abuse and domestic violence,

three significant risk factors for children. That point went forward and it was not a Party

political point, it was a genuine effort to try and improve the Council Plan by asking for some

reference to be made for better liaison and information sharing with Mental Health Services.

In the consultation response that we see later on I think the point has been

misunderstood. It seems to have been referred to as something about encouraging healthy and

active and something else lifestyles. I think the point has been missed. My question to

Councillor Wharmby is: did anyone discuss this issue with you in order to clarify it because

the point has been completely missed, it seems to me?

CLLR G D WHARMBY: No, I did not discuss it with anyone else only with the

relevant officers. We put the amendment, as you suggested it, through in this as it states in the

minutes. It is resolved “that the suggested amendment as set out above be submitted as part of

the consultation.”

THE CHAIRMAN: Chief Executive.

MR HODGSON (Chief Executive): Chairman, could I just suggest we really ought to

tackle this when we get to the Council Plan and when we can look at Appendix B with all the

different comments, where we highlight the different comments, whether they are from

Improvement and Scrutiny Committee consideration or others. We actually then detail where

we have responded and whether we have included it in the Plan or not.

THE CHAIRMAN: I quite agree with you, Chief Executive, I think we will do that.

Page 104, 105.

17d IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE – FINANCE,

MANAGEMENT AND REGENERATION

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 17d, Improvement and Scrutiny Committee –

Finance, Management and Regeneration. Councillor Blake please.

CLLR BLAKE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I would like to ask that this Council

receives and adopts the minutes of the Improvement and Scrutiny Committee – Finance,

Management and Regeneration meetings held on 27 January 2010 and 24 March 2010, pages

106-108 and pages 109-112 respectively.

THE CHAIRMAN: Seconder?

CLLR MACDONALD: I second both those meetings.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Page 106, 107, 108, 109, 110.

11/10 COUNCIL PLAN

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, I was going to raise some issues again on that but I take note

31

of what the Chief Executive has said. I reserve the right to come back to that page when we get

to the Council Plan.

THE CHAIRMAN: Fine, thank you.

CLLR FLITTER: Chair, just to say I also was going to make a statement on pages

110/111 but take your and the Chief Exec’s view and I shall comment at a later stage.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Flitter. 111, 112. Councillor Gillott.

14/10 WORK PROGRAMME

CLLR GILLOTT: Chair, it is obviously slightly difficult to ask this question because I

notice from the papers we agreed earlier that Councillor Blake will no longer be chairing this

Committee, but at the end of the March meeting I think Councillor Blake announced that the

Leader was not able to attend the May meeting “he has another commitment”. That is the

second time he has been due to come where he has had diary clashes. She did not actually

explain why he was not able to attend so perhaps she could explain what is more important than

actually coming before a Scrutiny Committee, a democratic process where members of this

Council on behalf of their constituents can ask the Leader questions and hold him to account? I

would like to ask the new Chair a question. I do not know whether that is permitted at this

stage?

CLLR SPENCER: Point of order, Chairman. Can I just say to you, if I may, I

understood and perhaps you will correct me if I am wrong, that questions referring to Scrutiny

minutes are there purely for accuracy purpose. This minute is accurate, Councillor Lewer was

unable to attend and that should be good enough.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I accept what Councillor Spencer says.

CLLR CHARLES: Point of order, Chair. Could I have a ruling please from the

outgoing County Secretary, we can’t stifle debate like this, especially when you have sat and

talked to us for half-an-hour about the open democracy that you want.

MR TYSOE (County Secretary): It is the County Council minutes that are here only for

accuracy, the other minutes are here for accuracy and matters arising.

THE CHAIRMAN: Are we moving on?

CLLR GILLOTT: Chair, my question was, in effect, what was more important, that she

agreed to the Leader of the Council not coming to a Scrutiny Committee meeting to answer

questions for elected members of the Authority?

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Blake.

CLLR BLAKE: Thank you, Mr Chairman. I do not believe, as the ex-Chairman of this

Committee, that there is any requirement for me to interrogate the Leader as to why he cannot

attend a future meeting. I consider it is for him to say to me that he cannot come and for me to

accept that in good faith that there is a very important reason why he cannot attend and to agree

to reschedule the meeting at a future date. I think that is perfectly reasonable, Mr Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Councillor Blake. I happen to agree with that.

32

(Applause) Page 111, 112.

17e IMPROVEMENT AND SCRUTINY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE

THE CHAIRMAN: Improvement and Scrutiny Management Committee. Councillor

Wharmby.

CLLR G D WHARMBY: I would like to move the minutes of the Improvement and

Scrutiny Management Committee held on the 17 March 2010.

THE CHAIRMAN: Page 113…

CLLR TWIGG: I will second that.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I “twigged” on at the end. (Laughter) Page 114. The

Police Authority is a report. Derbyshire Fire Authority just a report.

18 REPORTS

(a) Council Plan 2010/14

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 18, Reports. Council Plan. I will ask the Chief

Executive to present please.

MR HODGSON: Thank you, Chairman. You mentioned earlier that this was an

important day for the Council. It is an important day for the Queen; an important day for Dave

Molyneux, it is also an important day for me. The good news is it is my wedding anniversary,

the bad news is I forgot, so this is going to be a very very long presentation and I am hoping we

will get a robust debate because I do not particularly want to go home tonight. (Laughter)

To more serious matters. This is the Council Plan for the period from now to 2014.

The overall aim of the plan is to set the direction, set the vision, spell out the key priorities for

the Council over the next three years or so. It sits under the Derbyshire Community Strategy,

the Derbyshire Partnership Forum Strategy. It creates the framework for other service plans

that come later on in the agenda and it reflects the Local Area Agreement priorities that we

have shared in the past in terms of delivering improvements and performance.

The plan is built around five key priorities, to which I think all the services can

contribute. It is carefully structured so that it is not a series of service plans joined together,

this is very much a cross-cutting Council Plan. We will target in it things that we are going to

achieve and there are measures of success in it as well. One of the comments we have had from

inspectors in the past from the CPA, the CAA inspectors, the service inspectors, has been the

“so what” question. “So what are the outcomes?” This is aiming to address that point and

actually spell out the measures of success.

It was agreed as a draft for consultation by Cabinet early February so therefore we have

had nine/ten weeks of consultation and a very very good response as you will see in

Appendix B, both internally from the Improvement and Scrutiny Committees; from members of

staff; from members of the public; from third sector organisations etc.

All the comments we have received are spelt out in Appendix B. Some of them are

general ones we have just accepted, welcomed and taken on board, we have not changed the

33

plan, some we felt were already covered. The wording might be different, two differences in

emphasis, but the general gist of the comments were already in the plan. Some were taken on

board and we changed the wording, and some we have referred on to the services to consider as

part of their ongoing service development and planning because they are perhaps a bit too

detailed for this over-arching plan.

I think it is a good one. I think it is well structured. I think it is perhaps the most

comprehensive one we have had and it is certainly the one where we have done more

consultation than ever before. As I say the only important thing is it includes those outcome,

output and measures as well.

In recommending it to you, I hope Chair you will just let me say thank you to Sarah

Eaton who is sat at the back. Sarah has killed herself putting all this together. She has been

burning the midnight oil getting all the wording right and briefing me, so I would say “thanks”

to Sarah and I would recommend the plan to you. Thank you.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Chief Executive. Can I ask members, are there any

questions of fact for the Chief Executive? Councillor Wilcox.

CLLR WILCOX: I am very conscious, Chair, that there are headings running across

Appendix B. We get a “Summary of comments”, the “Type of comment”, we get the “Who”

but then we get the “Response including comments”. I am not sure whose “response including

comments” that is because I understand it has not been to the Cabinet and therefore the extent

to which it represents the views of members or the Authority is quite unclear to me. I would

appreciate clarification on the “Who” of “Response including comments” please?

THE CHAIRMAN: Chief Executive.

MR HODGSON: Chair, if I just respond to David. The responses are my suggested

responses, David, and they are my comments as well. In putting the revised plan together we

have taken account of all the different comments that were made and the suggested response

and comments explained in the response are mine.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Any other questions of fact? Can I ask Councillor

Lewer to move the recommendations.

CLLR LEWER: Thank you, Chairman. I would like to open the debate part of this

agenda item by reflecting that this Council Plan, new in design and broad and cross-cutting in

scope, has been through an unprecedented wide and long consultation period as regards its

content, as well as its thrust already having the endorsement of the people of Derbyshire by the

ballot box and our manifesto, and also through its considerable linkage with the Sustainable

Community Strategy (as already endorsed by all our partners at the Derbyshire Partnership

Forum) and via a February to April consultation period when elected members directly, and

through Scrutiny Committees were invited to comment, as were a large number of stakeholders

and outside bodies. I think it is a welcome indication of the openness of the Council that points

that were raised by members from other parties in Scrutiny Committees were agreed to go

forward for consideration so that they could be looked at and decided upon. It is a measure of

the confidence in the Council’s openness that the four Scrutiny Chairman were happy to put

points forward, which were not always those of the Majority Group, for them to be able to be

considered before the Council Plan was adopted by the full Council.

The detail of relevant comments received forms an appendix to the report as part of the

34

open nature of this process, a more open process than has ever been undertaken by this Council

before. Having experienced many examples and forms of consultation what I think is most

significant about this one is that it actually has led to alterations and to recognitions that people

had useful extra views to contribute, some of which have been incorporated into this final draft.

It has, therefore, been a real and extensive consultation and it gives me further confidence that

it is the document we want for the years ahead with opportunities for refresh as we go along as

described, and in the format of this final draft presented here today.

I would like to thank the officers of the Council, particularly the Chief Executive. Nick

has already mentioned Sarah and the Policy Unit and the work they have put in, which I know

has been very considerable. With that I will move that the Council Plan be approved,

Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Have we a seconder?

CLLR JACKSON: I second.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I will open up for a debate. Councillor Allen.

CLLR ALLEN: Thank you, Chair. I did indicate earlier that I wanted to mention the

comment on the resolution from the Scrutiny Committee which talked, as the wording says,

“Continue to provide a free service for vulnerable people in Derbyshire”. That was partly

based on the comments that Councillor Harrison said on the radio when he made it quite

implicit and he has reiterated today, there is no intention of introducing charges.

Where I think the wording was missing, and I notice it said “Discuss with adult care”, it

has revealed the comment is not factually correct. One, I recognise there are parts of the

service which are paid for by people, if you look at the Laundry Service, the Meals on Wheels

Service and bits like that, but the general thrust was looking at the words which Councillor

Harrison himself has said. If I can suggest that we use the words in that “Free Home Help

Service for vulnerable people” then that would fit very clearly within the guidelines that the

Controlling Group have said and their Deputy Leader has said and I think could then be quite

adequately included as an amendment on page 14 to the plan, Chair. I think that would satisfy

me that some note had been made of the consultation at Scrutiny but I accept perhaps a little

unclear on the wording, although I think that is a way round to try to say to “ignore it”, but if

we include the words “Home Help” I think we could have an agreement altogether. Thank you,

Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to move into (b) and let the Chief Executive come up

with that and do both of these together please. Chief Executive

(b) Departmental Service Plans

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE: Chair, if I may just clarify that a bit. It was my suggestion

to Robin, as we have everybody’s comments detailed in Appendix B perhaps we could just go

through page by page and pick up where people want to say something. There will be a bit of a

structure to it and it will also perhaps help me a bit to be able to get a response rather than

flipping backwards and forwards through all the pages.

THE CHAIRMAN: I will obviously have to get the agreement of the Council for that.

Are we all in agreement with that? (Agreed)

35

Appendix B, there are no page numbers. We go to page 1. Yes, Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, I was not anticipating you would be doing this after your

comments at the last meeting about physical incapacity and so on, I thought you would be

wanting to cut the meeting short not prolong it, but anyway…

THE CHAIRMAN: I will cut it short, Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: It is quite difficult to make reference because the pages are not

numbered and the comments are not numbered either, but it is the fourth comment down about

“…there needs to be more recognition of the significant deprivation across the county...” it is

that point there. I raise it on this one but there are similar comments threaded throughout the

consultation document from different people and different organisations about a significance of

inequality and the need to target resources in order to tackle inequality of different types,

whether it be health, education or whatever.

All those comments have been welcomed in some form but not resulted in any change

to the actual Council Plan document. It seems to me it is a very very significant factor for us all

in Derbyshire, the extent to which there are inequalities of all types, and for those comments to

have been made from so many different sources and not to have been given, in my mind, due

regard and incorporated into the plan, I think is a significant weakness of the plan.

MR HODGSON: Chair, if I may just respond to that and explain how we thought the

wording was covering that. If you look at page 6 of the plan on the right-hand column, third

paragraph down, we do talk about:

“Some communities in Derbyshire, particularly in the north east of the county, have

higher levels of deprivation and people out of work on benefits. These areas also tend

to have poorer health and lower skills.”

That is where we were picking up that point in relation to deprivation.

The point about social inclusion and financial inclusion, if you turn to page 11 of the

plan we talk there on again the right-hand column, second bullet point down:

“Support economic recovery and growth and work with partners to deliver the Financial

Inclusion Strategy for Derbyshire.”

We felt there was emphasis in those two points both on deprivation and on the inclusion point.

THE CHAIRMAN: We move on. Next page. Councillor Wilcox.

CLLR WILCOX: I wonder if I could make reference, I am going to use the number in

the second column so it is easier to refer to, and it is the second one of 9. I heard John

Harrison’s response earlier to Mrs Stevenson’s public question when he said he was “conscious

of vulnerable people in need”.

There has also been reference, I think, or implicit reference from Councillor Lewer’s

contribution that although Scrutiny Chairs may have been ambushed by the Labour Group and

may not have agreed with the comments that were necessarily made, they put them forward and

that is a positive element of the consultation process. Whether they were doing that or not, they

were conscious whether they were doing that or not I think is another question.

36

I have also to say that on balance I think the process that the administration have gone

through in relation to the Council Plan is a better one than our administration actually followed

in process terms because there have been many questions asked of people, but there are always

two parts to the process. The first is when you ask the questions, the second is what you then

do as a consequence of the representations that are made.

In some instances you may want to say “It was clearly an ambush, we were not prepared

for it but we accepted it” but the comment I am referring to here is from the Director of Public

Health and the Director of Corporate Strategy on behalf of Derbyshire County PCT. They are

very specific in terms of what they believe should be in the plan. I make this point because in

future our partnership working is going to be with the PCTs and with other parts of the

community in Derbyshire. It is going to be about place and not just about where this Council

stands and what it thinks.

The recommendation which those people make is “resources will be distributed in

proportion to need”. That is not the same as the comments in the final column which suggest

that there is “A commitment to delivering services fairly across the county” because my

concept of “fair” and someone else’s concept of “fair” can be very different. It would be fair,

for instance, to distribute 62 units of this County Council’s resource to 62 councillors

regardless of need and they would all get one unit each, but as soon as you start to discuss

“need” then you are in a quite different situation. The PCT’s objective is to resource in

proportion to need and quite honestly I want to be able to support this Council Plan because it

has much to commend it, and as the Leader says in his introduction to the plan there is a

continuation pulling the best elements from what the previous administration followed and

introducing some new ones, but I have to say that unless you take on board that particular point

I cannot accept this plan because that point is being rejected. I do not accept that as an

Authority resources can be distributed other than in proportion to need, so regretfully I think we

need to vote against something which there may be some virtues in. My other colleagues may

raise some other reasons as well, and I think that is legitimate, but my point would be I just do

not accept that the comment in the final column is the same as the comment which has come

from the PCT and we have to work with them closely in future.

THE CHAIRMAN: Chief Executive.

MR HODGSON: David, I do not half agree with you in terms of the importance of the

relationship with the PCT, I have just written the introduction to the annual report in gushing

terms about the importance of that partnership and the value of that partnership.

In shorthand, in Appendix B perhaps I am misleading you and other members. What

we were referring to on that item, where you talk about “resources will be distributed in

proportion to need”, if you look at page 5 of the plan, the last sentence in it we talk about:

“We will also be reviewing the Council Plan each year to make sure that our priorities

continue to reflect the needs of the communities…”

We go on to talk about “fairness” but it is very clear that we are saying we need to look at the

needs of different communities, in fact there is a comment later on about not just the needs of

communities, about the needs of individuals as well and we have picked that particular point up

in the plan.

CLLR WILCOX: Chair, if I could just respond to that because I do not think that is the

37

same point. What the PCT partners are suggesting is that that is an additional bullet point on

item 9 and it identifies priorities. If that were accepted then I think we could be relaxed and

supportive. If you cannot accept that point then I am afraid we would be forced to vote against

and I do just hope it might be considered. In a sense I am having a dialogue with the Chief

Executive and that is because the end column is from the Chief Executive. I guess really in this

Chamber I would have anticipated we would be having a political dialogue as to what should

and what should not be involved in the Council Plan.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: There are a combination of questions that are appropriate for me and

the Chief Executive to answer. When you say the definition of “need” and when you say the

definition of “fair” there is a semantic argument there. The reason we have made this very

clear is to move away from defining specific geographical areas and have a response to

individual needs. There are people in rural areas who have needs that are not measured in that

quantifiable way they are measured in a different way, and the reason why it is referred to in

the way it is is to broaden that definition out as far as we can to reflect needs in a fair way.

There is much debate about “fair” at the moment. My view is that rather than tying ourselves

down to statistical measures of “need” and “fair” we reflect the comments made here.

What I would also say is the Council Plan is the Council’s plan. We welcome and have

taken on board very seriously responses from the Primary Care Trust and other health

providers. We have responded to their concerns with the comments in the appendix but also by

explaining the meanings of the statements that are within the Council Plan and the Primary

Care Trust, who has the priority that you identify, has indicated that it is happy with the report

as stated.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We will go to the next page and the next one which

has 11 on. The next one which has 12 and the next one is 12 and 13, then 13 and 14.

CLLR ALLEN: Chair, that comes to the point I raised about the good use of public

money. I will not reiterate what I said but if the wording there is “continue to provide a free

Home Help Service for vulnerable people in Derbyshire” that could be added in which would

fit very much with the comments we have had earlier. I would like to move that, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: My understanding is all points raised in that respect will be taken

together. What I would say is that all three national party political manifestos talk about

“uncertain times, complexity and the need for consensus going forward over the provision of

adult care”. I think in that very uncertain climate and not being sure at all about what the

national funding formula or the delivery mechanisms are going to be at the moment, the report

makes clear our commitment to vulnerable people but also personalisation and I think it is

worded in the most fair and reflective manner at present.

CLLR ALLEN: Chair, can I come back to that point just briefly. Less than two hours

ago we had the Deputy Leader making a statement which I accept he clarified to a certain

extent, but he said “We will provide a free Home Help Service”. I have suggested an

amendment which takes out the necessary revision from Adult Care and would fit in with what

you have stated, so there is clearly a vast difference between the Leader and the Deputy Leader,

well whichever, Chair. I would have thought what I am suggesting is perfectly reasonable in

line with what was said earlier. I cannot understand why there is a hesitation to not include

38

those words. If you believe what the Council Plan is saying I have adjusted it, my comments

which were perhaps a little bit vague, and left some room for uncertainty to say clearly what

Councillor Harrison said “We want to provide a free Home Help Service.” I am suggesting

alter those words and everyone will at least be reasonably happy. Thank you, Chair.

CLLR HARRISON: Thank you for the promotion, Dave, but I just remain Cabinet

member for Finance and Management.

I hear what you say. In response I would say it has already been mentioned by the

Leader there has never been such a widespread and prolonged consultation ever before in living

memory on such a document in this Authority. The closing date for replies was the 6 April.

You have seen in Appendix B the responses received, considered and decided upon, and if you

felt so strongly about this particular point then it should have been made before the 6 April and

before the document was put to bed. I have no more to add.

THE CHAIRMAN: It is quite true what Councillor Harrison said because everybody

has had this opportunity. I mean even your Leader, Councillor Western said to me, and said it

in a meeting, that we have all had this paper and we have all had the opportunity to respond.

Am I right, Councillor Western?

CLLR WESTERN: You are absolutely right I did say that. That was in response to

something that Councillor Flitter said about not being aware of the Council Plan at that point.

I think there are some significant points raised here. We fed our views through the

Scrutiny process because it is a function of Scrutiny that it comments and assists in the

development of the policy framework, so we felt that that was the way we would want to feed

our comments in and did it through a formal process. A lot of us who are not Scrutiny

members do feel slightly uncomfortable that there seems to be a flaw in the process somewhere

that amendments, formally moved resolutions of Scrutiny have not had a chance for discussion

or feedback, this is the first opportunity there has been for debate. When the Scrutiny

Committee completes a review, for instance, it goes to Cabinet. None of this has been to

Cabinet so we do feel strongly about that.

The point I wanted to make on this page is the point I would have raised on the Scrutiny

if Nick had not intervened, and that is the point after the one Dave made. “We will maintain

high quality in-house services.” That was raised at the Finance and Resources Management,

whatever it is called these days, Scrutiny Panel. It was agreed. In the end column it says

“Welcome and agree with comments”, but it is not in the final report. It is welcomed, it is

agreed, but it is not in the report. That just leads me to wonder what is the point of Scrutiny

doing that part of its function if those comments – even though they are welcome and agreed –

still do not get incorporated into the plan?

I concur with what Councillor Allen has just said. We are in very difficult times at the

moment in terms of an Authority. We have a general election and the result of that will

significantly alter the capacity of this Council to deliver on its programmes, according to which

way the outcome goes, so a lot of the wording within this Council Plan and within the

departmental plans as a consequence is quite ambiguous and it is open to different

interpretations. This question of fairness is just one of them.

The points we are making are an attempt to try for us all to be clear to understand what

it is we are committing ourselves to by voting for this plan. As long as the wording stays

ambiguous, and as long as comments that are well meant are welcomed and agreed but still not

39

incorporated, it makes it very difficult for us to agree to the plan.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: Chairman, Mr Hodgson has a few points to make.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Chief?

MR HODGSON: My thinking behind that, Anne, was that whatever the services,

whether we provide it in-house or whether we provide it from external provision there is an

under-riding thing that we will provide high quality services, that is what we always strive for,

but if what is behind the point is the balance between in-house and external privatisation of

services, I remember it was Pat Coleman when she did the peer review for us before the last

CPA saying how surprised she was that we had a very mixed economy in the County Council.

We do buy a lot externally but we still have a very large in-house workforce as well. My

thought behind welcoming it and agreeing with the comments but not including was that this

will be a basic principle for everything we do, whether it is in-house or out-house we would

want high quality services.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We will move over to page… Councillor Harrison.

CLLR HARRISON: I would just like with your permission, Chairman, to put a small

gloss on what the Chief Executive has said and that small gloss is this: this particular item is

under the subheading “Good use of public money” and to say that we will maintain high quality

in-house services is tantamount to motherhood and apple pie. I am not sure whether it says it in

the report or not, I have not had chance to identify it, but if it is not it is certainly implied. Of

course we mean that and of course that is our spirit and intention to deliver on that basis.

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, if the point is implied and you accept it then why can’t it be

made explicit and put into the report, into the plan?

CLLR LEWER: Chairman, because there are a large number of points that have been

made and the Council document is something we want to shape with some clarity, that is

written in a way that we feel comfortable with. That expression, as has already been proved by

the debate we have just had on it, is ambiguous and unclear and having now debated it I hope

you will accept the point that is behind it, that the over-riding statement is the more important

one and that is the one that is going to stay in the Council Plan.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Move over, page 14 with 15 and 16 on. Then next

page with 16 on. Next page 17. Next page 17/18. Next page 18/19. 19/20/21. Next page 21.

Next page 21/22/23. Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: Chair, at the bottom of this page the final point in relation to

page 23 is the point that I made previously about safeguarding and adults who are parents with

mental health difficulties. As I said previously it was not a Party political point but it was

something that is acknowledged and increasingly acknowledged locally and nationally about

the importance for information sharing and better joint working between Adult Mental Health

Services and Children’s Safeguarding Services. I do think if we cannot agree on anything else

at least we ought to be able to agree on that and just put those words “Better information

sharing and joint working with mental health partners” into the plan.

THE CHAIRMAN: Chief Executive.

40

MR HODGSON: Again Anne, if I may just explain. In terms of Anne’s point if you

can look on page 23 my thoughts were, the left-hand column, first paragraph, we were talking

there about the importance of safeguarding and protecting our children and young people and

vulnerable adults; in the second paragraph we talk about the “importance of working with our

partners” whether it is from mental health or the wide spectrum of partners that we sit down

and work through all these safeguarding matters with. I did not think we needed to single out

the mental health issue, it was implicit that we would work with them and all the other partners

on this very important safeguarding matter.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We will move over then, 23/24. Councillor Moesby.

CLLR MOESBY: I pick up on the point I made previously from the Scrutiny

Committee, if you do not mind. It says on that particular page, “Welcome comments but

believe that the existing comment reflects the suggested amendment.” I will put in there “To

provide additional resources”, that was what I put forward “To provide additional resources”

but if you look on page 24 of the Council Plan it does not mention any “additional” it just says

“Work in partnership to improve road safety and reduce…” I am not against that at all but I am

sure the Council are quite aware that a fatality attracts in excess of £1 million for all the

different departments involved in looking at that and going through it all. I believe it was, I

might have this wrong and I do apologise, John, but I think you said at one stage that the roads

were the worst they had been for a while and I think that in itself could reflect we need to put

more money into roads to get them up to an acceptable standard. Okay it might have been the

bad weather that caused it but the need is there for it at the end of the day.

I am a bit concerned that we have bad figures coming out on KSIs. When I was in

charge of community safety, as it was called then, we actually got £1.9 million reward money

and a green flag I think in CAA at the end of the day to invest because we had made significant

improvements in the killed and seriously injured. We are now slipping back again in it all and I

think if we need any evidence to suggest that we need to spend more money on roads it is the

fact we are now losing that fight as you might say against the killed and seriously injured.

Money does not solve every problem but it has proved if you put money in, put road

safety schemes in and the Government - our Labour Government has put £1.6 million extra in

to be able to improve the roads - I think it is duty bound on this County Council to try and put

money on its own, to improve the roads to make them up to the better standards that we need to

prevent the killed and seriously injured rising more than they are at present.

THE CHAIRMAN: Chief Executive.

MR HODGSON: Clive, again just to repeat what it says on the right-hand column, we

certainly welcome the comments. I think everybody in the Chamber, members and officers

would agree with you that this is a real priority. It is high on all the public satisfaction surveys.

You will see it in Ian Stephenson’s service plan. I was just concerned about committing to

additional resources. We all know what the future looks like. We all know we have to find

perhaps a minimum of £60 million efficiency savings in this Council. We know that the

Government are talking about cutting all capital programmes, perhaps cutting the Revenue

Support Grant as well. Ian has been in meetings with Government officials where they are

indicating there will be reductions in highways capital programmes, LTP programmes, so I was

just very wary about committing to the “additional resources” words, but do say on page 24,

which you have highlighted, that right-hand column, last bullet point halfway down: “Work in

partnership to improve road safety and reduce the number of people killed…” on the roads. It

41

could be working in partnership and a really good example was the total place approach in

Durham where the PCT actually found extra cash. It could be us finding additional resources

but not necessarily from within the Council. I was just a bit wary on behalf of the Council of

committing us to that when we might not be able to deliver it.

CLLR MOESBY: I would like to come back quickly on that.

THE CHAIRMAN: Just a quick one then please.

CLLR MOESBY: All I was going to say, Nick, if that is the answer to it all can’t we

have that bullet point in some way saying that we will be looking to the partners to get money?

Derby and Derbyshire Road Safety Partnership had £1.9 million 18 month ago. Where did that

money go? How has that been used? Let us look to partners, let us look to the PCTs. It has

been mentioned earlier that that is the future in some respects, they seem to have money

coming out of their heads to do anything. Let us have that in there as well, if there was more

money trying to get it in line with partners, something concrete to show we are trying to address

the problem and increase KSIs throughout Derbyshire.

THE CHAIRMAN: Councillor Lewer.

CLLR LEWER: It states very clearly in the report on page 24 that we will indeed work

in partnership. We are not crystal ball gazers. We do not know what Central Government

grant settlements are. We know that all the services we provide will be under severe pressure

and therefore it would be potentially unreasonable to increase as a proportion that budget at the

expense of adult care or education or young people provision or other things we have. We

share the aspiration but we need to work within the financial reality we have and that is why we

have stated it quite as specifically in that wording as we have.

THE CHAIRMAN: Sorry, Councillor Lucas.

CLLR LUCAS: Thank you, Chair. It is on the same numbers. When it goes on within

the report on page 25, we have just had part of a debate on making our roads safer. Obviously

road maintenance and other initiatives play a huge part in that, make no bones about, but on

page 25 it does give quite an emphasis on such problems as potholes and faulty street lights.

Street lighting plays also a high level of importance to road safety.

I saw on the news this morning that in Leicestershire they are going to switch off road

lights. Can there be some assurances from this Council that to plunge Derbyshire into darkness

and jeopardise road safety will not be an option on that point? Thank you, Chair.

CLLR LEWER: Chair, I can give an undertaking that Derbyshire will not be plunged

into darkness and I can also give an undertaking that safety considerations will be paramount in

considering any change to lighting provision.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I turn over to page 25. It has 18 and 26 on it. Next,

page 26 and the next page is 26. Then page 27, then 28, the last page. Councillor Flitter.

CLLR FLITTER: Sorry Andrew, I did not want to pre-empt you making your speech

but I feel that the Chair might have said that was the end of the debate.

Talk about losing the will. It is now 25-to-5 and I am asking myself what has this

Council meeting actually achieved? To me it is not losing the will, I think some members here

42

today again for the third meeting on the trot have lost the plot.

It has been stated quite clearly that all members have received this and had the

opportunity to respond by the 6 April. As was quite rightly pointed out by Councillor Western,

I was unaware of having this document at the last Scrutiny meeting. In fact I had received it

and I want to put that quite clear, but like all busy people I put all my post and workload in

chronological order so I do not miss anything. Clearly on the direction of debate this was to

take place, all comments by the 6 April to be discussed at this meeting today. Quite clear to

me.

However, I would like to contest what the Labour Party were doing at what I call a

shambolic Scrutiny meeting of Finance and Regeneration where the wording was absolutely

changed to suit their needs. In fact Councillor Western said today she felt that was the way we

ought to do it. That was not the way on the wording of the Scrutiny agenda. On the Scrutiny

agenda it quite clearly stated that it was an update report on an oral basis. We still did not get

that oral report but what we got was a shambolic attempt to go through the whole procedure

putting things forward. My Liberal Democrat colleague who is no longer with us, Keith

Morgan and myself, we actually did not attend with the right paperwork because it was not on

the agenda. Many of your own members, Councillor Lewer did the same. It was not on the

agenda, the papers were not there and all the comments here came from the Labour Group in

the wrong way.

I believe in doing things the right way and that way you get more out of things. I

appreciate and welcome the consultation we had to be able to put our views and of course if

you look through the body of the report it says I personally put these comments forward. That

is not strictly true, that came from a Group meeting, so it was a Liberal Democrat view. We

looked through the whole report, we looked through the wording, we looked through what the

responses were when this had gone through the delegation. Okay, we accept some of the things

there we got put into the plan and some things weren’t. We accepted the reasoning why.

To me this whole business about going through the report has just added to the fact that

people want to take over certain meetings. I do not feel this is the right and proper way to do it.

I think we have gone through the process, we have played our part and I am just here to say if

we carry on the way we are doing with trying to hijack meetings and put personal points of

view forward this is going to be a sad day for Derbyshire politics because I do not want to sit

through another four years – three years now – of being barraged by people coming to meetings

picking through words when the sentiments are already in the report. They are there. Okay, we

may not agree with the words. There are some that were put forward, some amendments, that if

you look at them they were very subtle political points. There are some we did not agree with,

there were some we could have afforded some support to but it went back. We have to rely on

our officers to tell us whether this is achievable. There is no point putting a plan forward that is

not achievable. I think we have gone through the process, we are here to support that process,

and because of that we will be supporting the plan as it stands.

CLLR LEWER: Chairman, in moving a motion that the vote now be put, I think we

have heard from all parties. I think it is worth noting that when the procedure was followed in

the way that was adopted, comments were adopted that were suggested to be made and they are

included. All members received an e-mail from me with an attachment of the Council Plan on

it for comment. That has been brought forward in various ways and those comments that have

been within the consultation period have been heard. I agree it has been a lengthy debate but I

also agree with the point that the consultation period was actually the period for the lengthy

debate, mulling and consideration. I am happy with the report as stated. I hope colleagues are

43

happy that the explanations about the content have been provided but that debate, I think, now

needs to be wound up and I will move that the motion be put and perhaps Councillor Jackson

will second that.

CLLR JACKSON: I will second that.

CLLR WESTERN: A point of information, Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: A point of information. I will let you have that one.

CLLR WESTERN: This is in response to Councillor Flitter. We are here today as a

Council to approve the plan, we are not here just to rubber stamp or to note the plan we are here

to approve it and that means being able to comment on it. I do not accept your points about it

being “hijacked”.

CLLR FLITTER: Did you send your comments in like I did?

THE CHAIRMAN: Come on, let’s just…

CLLR WESTERN: For information, and I have checked the constitution today, “It is

part of the Scrutiny function, and in particular the Finance and Management Committee, to

assist in the development of a policy framework” and it specifically mentions the “Council

Plan”, so our Group took the view that that is the function of that Committee and we should

raise the issues we have to raise there, Councillor Flitter. It is not about “hijacking” meetings

or making political points it is about reading the constitution and complying with that.

CLLR CHARLES: We are doing our job.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. We have a motion to move the vote and I am taking

the vote. Have we a seconder please?

CLLR CHAPMAN: Point of order, Chair, point of order Chair. Councillor Lewer has

already spoken on it so he can’t move a motion and the vote be put, can he?

MR TYSOE: Perhaps he has used his right to reply at the same time. There is nothing

wrong with that.

THE CHAIRMAN: He has the right to reply. He has moved the motion by doing that.

Right, we are going to take the vote please. All those in favour? All those against?

Abstentions?

CLLR STONE: Chair, I am abstaining on the grounds that I had my hand up for five

minutes and was not allowed to speak, otherwise I would have supported the motion.

THE CHAIRMAN: I apologise. I did not see your hand and I have to say I apologise

but it has been carried. The motion is CARRIED.

Have we a motion to vote on 18(b) on the Departmental Service Plan, because we have

done both at once?

CLLR LEWER: 18(b), Chairman, the Chief Executive will present the report.

44

MR HODGSON: Thank you, Chairman, again. The covering report to the Service

Plans, very detailed Service Plans that have then been deposited in Group rooms. The Service

Plans follow the Council Plan that you have just agreed. As I explained earlier the Council

Plan creates the framework for them. For each of the services the plans spell out how we are

going to contribute to the five Council Plan priorities. The plans also include the resource

plans, particularly the Revenue and Capital budgets which you agreed at this Council meeting

at the beginning of February, but you will see more detail in those in relation to each of the

individual services. I would ask you to approve the plans. I would ask you to approve the

detailed service budgets, and you will also note on the recommendations that there are a series

of other detailed recommendations in relation to Environmental Services.

THE CHAIRMAN: Have we any questions of fact for the Chief Executive please?

CLLR LEWER: Thank you, Chairman. There is a great deal of detail in the Service

Plans. All members have had an opportunity to read it and I will therefore move the officer

recommendations.

THE CHAIRMAN: Have we a seconder?

CLLR JACKSON: Yes Chair.

THE CHAIRMAN: Can I take the vote? Councillor Western.

CLLR WESTERN: Thank you, Chair. I think my Group’s comments on the

Departmental Service Plans would be the same as they were for the Council Plan. There is a lot

of ambiguous wording, there is a lot that is not clear. I can understand to some extent why that

has to be the case but I think there is such ambiguity in it I think the interpretation may very

well be different after the 6 May than it is at the moment, so for that reason, Chair, we will not

be voting in support.

THE CHAIRMAN: Have you moved it, Councillor Lewer?

CLLR LEWER: Yes.

THE CHAIRMAN: Seconder?

CLLR JACKSON: Yes.

THE CHAIRMAN: All those in favour? All those against? All those abstaining?

CLLR STONE: Same again, Chair, I did have my hand up for a second time.

THE CHAIRMAN: It was moved, you see. I am going to catch you before long. That

motion is PASSED. Thank you.

(c) Budget Monitoring Report 2009/10

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 18(c), Budget Monitoring Report. Graham Hunt to

report, thank you.

MR HUNT (Director of Finance): Thank you, Chairman. This is the last budget

monitoring report for the year to March 2010. Comments are provided by portfolio and this is

45

brought together in Appendix 1. Overall forecast in underspend of approximately £6.5 million,

just over 1% of the total budget, but a proportion of that will represent commitments into

2010/11. The actual position will be reported when the accounts for 2009/10 are finalised.

Chair, the recommendation is to note the 2009/10 budget monitoring position.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Are there any questions of fact for the Finance

Director? (No response) Councillor Harrison.

CLLR HARRISON: I move those, Chairman.

CLLR LEWER: I second them, Chairman.

THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, we will take the vote on that. All those in favour? All those

against? All those abstaining? CARRIED

(d) Annual report of Standards Committee

THE CHAIRMAN: Agenda Item 18(d), Annual report of Standards Committee.

County Secretary to report please?

MR TYSOE: Yes, again briefly the Standards Committee has been in existence for

eight years now and the term of office of members is four years, so the second term of office of

Keith Wilkinson, Michael Blake and Richard Tomlinson came to an end. There were

interviews last week. Richard Tomlinson was reappointed. The standards for England

recommend that independent members serve two terms only but leave it to the discretion of the

Authorities.

There were two other new members that are recommended for appointment: Denis

Heaney, who is an existing independent member of the Police Authority, and Mrs Dorothy

Wright. Those appointments are recommended to you and the report as a whole is the fourth

annual report to draw a line under the work of the Standards Committee that has been done this

year.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, County Secretary. Are there any questions of fact for

the County Secretary? (No response) Could I have a mover and a seconder please?

CLLR LEWER: Chairman, I believe it is customary for you to move this particular

report?

THE CHAIRMAN: Then I move it. I will move the report. Have I a seconder please?

CLLR G D WHARMBY: I will second that report.

THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. All those in favour? All those against? All

those who abstain? CARRIED. Thank you very much.

Now for Councillor Riggott as he can’t today because he is driving, it is a free bar for

you today. Please everybody go to the bar, drinks are on me as it is the AGM. Thank you very

much for your attendance.

----------------