AT A MEETING of the CABINET of HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL held at The Castle, Winchester on 26 June 2006

Chairman:

p Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE

Councillors:

Also present: Councillors Mrs E.M. Byrom; KR. Chapman; A.P. Collett; B.D. Dash; Dr R.J. Ellis and Mrs C.A. Leversha.

154. APOLOGIES

There were no apologies for absence.

155. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Members were mindful that, where they believed they had a personal or personal prejudicial interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting, they should normally at the time of the debate, declare their interest, and, having regard to the circumstances described in paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the County Council's Code of Conduct, consider whether to leave the meeting whilst the matter was discussed.

156. MINUTES

The minutes of the meeting held on 22 May 2006 were confirmed as a correct record.

157. CHAIRMAN'S COMMUNICATIONS

(i) Welcomed Kevin Greenhough from the South East County Leaders
forum.

(ii) Called forward Item 9 on the published agenda "Response to Government Consultation on the draft South East Plan" for consideration as the first item of business. Due to the close link of Items 9 and 10 "Draft Regional Economic Strategy", the latter item would be considered as the second item of business.

158. DEPUTATIONS

There were no deputations.

159. RESPONSE TO GOVERNMENT CONSULTATION ON THE DRAFT SOUTH EAST PLAN (DRAFT)

(Item called forward)

The Cabinet considered the report of the Director of Environment (Item 9 in the Minute Book) outlining the proposed response of the County Council to the Government consultation on the South East Plan. A replacement decision sheet and Annexe 1 to the main report was circulated at the meeting; the Minute Book would be updated accordingly.

The Deputy Director of Environment expanded on the report, highlighting the key points of the proposed response and confirmed that representations by other authorities and organisations would be made. It was noted that the Partnership for Urban South Hampshire (PUSH) considered their response last week. The Environment Policy Review Committee met on 22 June 2006 to consider the paper and they generally supported the proposed response, but requested the Cabinet to consider two amendments. These were circulated and attached to these minutes for information.

During the course of a full debate, the Cabinet expressed strong concerns about the proposed average housing density target of 40 dwellings per hectare (Policy H5). They were of the firm view that this target, which was above the current planning guidance figure of 30 dwellings per hectare, would not be appropriate in all locations in Hampshire in terms of the potential impact of high density development on the character and amenity of different local areas and strain on infrastructure. They agreed with the point raised by the Environment Policy Review Committee in regard to market towns, that the definition be amended to refer to populations of between 2,000 and 20,000 rather than 3,000 and 10,000 which is out of step with the characteristics of market towns in Hampshire. In respect of Sub-Regional gaps (Policy SH3), it was agreed that a strategic gap be designated between Rowlands Castle and Havant. Attention was drawn to some text in the main report that was inconsistent with the proposed representations set out in Annexe 1 to the report in respect of the reserve housing provision for South Hampshire. The text was therefore to be removed and Hantsweb updated as follows:-

Paragraph 5.1 (vi) - delete the remaining text after the second sentence.

Paragraph 6.6 - delete the remaining text after the first sentence.

The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report subject to the final response taking into account the points detailed above. A copy of the substantive decision sheet is attached to these minutes as Appendix 1.

160. DRAFT REGIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY

(Item called forward)

The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 10 in the Minute Book) outlining the proposed response of the County Council to the draft Regional Economic Strategy. The deadline for a response to be submitted to the South East England Development Agency is 29 June 2006. The report was expanded on by the Head of Economic Development in the context of global competitiveness, whilst highlighting key points such as the need for smart growth to support the region's future prosperity.

During the course of a full discussion, the Cabinet were of the strong view that the designation of south Hampshire as a `diamond for growth' needed discussion as to the precise boundaries" and seriously doubted the capacity of Basingstoke to absorb substantial increases in growth until the local infrastructure issues are resolved. They urged that "diamonds for growth" should be carefully delineated so as not to destroy the quality of the environment in adjacent rural areas; emphasised the importance of increasing the skills of the existing labour force to include younger disabled people who need worthwhile occupations; and agreed that the proposed specific reference to the Blackwater Valley sub-region in the final response be clarified and strengthened.

The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report subject to the final response taking into account the points detailed above. A copy of the decision sheet is attached to these minutes as Appendix 2.

161. VALUE FOR MONEY STRATEGY AND CORPORATE REVIEW PROGRAMME

The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 6 in the Minute Book) setting out the Value for Money Strategy and the Corporate Review Programme for 2006/07. The Chief Executive expanded on the report and emphasised that the Strategy had been prepared in close liaison with the County Treasurer and was in line with the County Council's financial management policy and the efficiency savings agenda. During the ensuing discussions, the Cabinet supported the new approach to detail value for money and considered it to be an improvement. They were particularly keen to see the new approach developed, to have individual examples of value for money published, for example in the HOG magazine, and give the opportunity for new ideas to be suggested.

The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision sheet is attached to these minutes as Appendix 3.

162. CORPORATE PERFORMANCE REPORT - 2005/06 FULL YEAR RESULTS

The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 7 in the Minute Book) setting out the corporate performance summary of the full year results for 2005/06. The report highlighted the key areas for action, which will inform the development of the Corporate Business Plan for 2007/08. The Chief Executive expanded on the report and drew particular attention to the key areas for action (detailed in paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3) and performance in relation to the Corporate Strategy targets (detailed in paragraphs 4.6 to 4.10 and Appendix 3 of the report).

During the course of the ensuing discussion, the Cabinet welcomed the overall performance achieved during the last financial year, which had been challenging in many ways. They were particularly supportive of the suggestion that for very stretching `aspirational' targets, in future years a minimal acceptable threshold figure be set and only performance below that threshold be reported as a matter of concern. Although there were many results that were pleasing, the Cabinet were of the view that there was no room for complacency and focus should be directed to those targets where there had been no improvement.

The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision sheet is attached to these minutes as Appendix 4.

163. FINAL ACCOUNTS 2005/06

The Cabinet considered the report of the County Treasurer (Item 8 in the Minute Book) setting out the final accounts for the last financial year. The County Treasurer expanded on the key points of the report and in particular the exceptional problems in respect of the Adult Services budget. Attention was drawn to Appendix 5 of the report on treasury management and also to Appendix 7, the Annual Efficiency Statement backward look 2005/06 which was required for submission to the Department of Communities and Local Government by 6 July 2006. It was also reported that the deadline for approval of the final Statement of Accounts had been brought forward from September to the end of June over a three year period. In order to address this, the Governance Committee would from now on approve the Statement of Accounts and a Part II information report would be submitted to the meeting of the County Council on 13 July 2006.

The County Treasurer reported that a monitoring report on progress with the 2006/07 budget will be submitted to the Cabinet in July along with the capital programme. There will be a number of issues to consider, namely: the removal of increased grant to match additional supported borrowing, funding of the Contact Centre and costs associated with the Pay and Benefits project. In September, the budget guidelines for 2007/08 will be submitted to consider rebalancing cash limits between services because of continued grant loss and increased demographic pressures for Adult Services, to allow Executive Members time to work with their Chief Officer to plan appropriately, and to carry out earlier budget consultation.

The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision sheet is attached to these minutes as Appendix 5.

Contact: Stuart Roberts, ext 6782 email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 Individuals and organisations have been invited to make representations on the draft South East Plan which has been submitted to Government by the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA). This report recommends the representations which should be made by the County Council. They focus on three key themes: the amount of development proposed; infrastructure provision; and sustainable development and quality of life. Some of the proposed representations are in support of various policies in the draft Plan; others seek amendments to the document.

1.2 Issues arising from the representations made by all parties will be discussed at an informal public inquiry called an Examination-in-Public (EiP) during winter 2006/07. Selected issues only will be discussed and participation will be by invitation. It is proposed that the County Council should state its wish to participate in the EiP.

1.3 A draft list of the issues and participants will be published on 31 August 2006, with four weeks for comments.

1.4 The following decisions were made:

(i) That the following representations be submitted as the County Council's response to the draft South East Plan:

(a) To seek amendments to the following policies:

CC1 (Sustainable Development)

CC5 (Infrastructure and Implementation)

CC12 (Character of the Environment and Quality of Life)

H4 (Affordable Housing)

H5 (Housing Density and Design)

NRM1 (Sustainable Water Resources, Groundwater and River Water Quality Management)

NRM3 (Sustainable Flood Risk Management)

EN1 (Development Design for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy)

W3 (Regional Self-sufficiency - Waste)

W4 (Sub-Regional Self-sufficiency - Waste)

C2 (Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty)

BE5 (The role of small rural towns (Market Towns)) - support text only

SH3 (Sub-Regional Strategic Gaps - South Hampshire)

SH11 (Transport Management and Integration - South Hampshire)

SH12 (Scale and Distribution of Housing Development - South Hampshire)

WCBV3 (Scale and Distribution of Housing Development - Western Corridor and Blackwater Valley).

(b) To support the following policies:

CC3 (Resource Use)

CC4 (Sustainable Construction)

H1 (Housing Provision - Support Plan, Monitor, Manage)

NRM4 (Conservation and Improvement of Biodiversity).

(c) To make a procedural representation in respect of the need to give adequate publicity to, and allow proper debate at the Examination-in-Public of, the Appropriate Assessment of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area, including extending the Examination-in-Public programme if necessary.

(ii) That the Director of Environment, in consultation with the Leader, be authorised to finalise the formal representation forms for submission to the Examination-in-Public Panel.

(iii) That the County Council should seek an invitation to participate in the debates at the Examination-in-Public on the issues to which the representations relate.

(iv) That the Director of Environment, in consultation with the Leader, be authorised to respond during September on behalf of the County Council to the draft list of Examination-in-Public issues and participants.

1.5 The Environment Policy Review Committee considered a report on this matter on 22 June 2006.

2. Reason

2.1 This decision supports Aim 2 (Stewardship of the environment), Aim 3 (Achieving economic prosperity) and Aim 4 (Building strong and safe communities) of the Corporate Strategy, by ensuring the draft South East Plan protects natural resources and protected landscapes, by supporting economic growth, and by ensuring adequate infrastructure to support employment and housing growth.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 Not to respond to consultation on the draft South East Plan.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or Other Executive Member Consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.

Approved by: ..................................... Date: ...................................

Councillor T K Thornber

765Decn/SR

Contact: John Rees-Evans, extension:6381, email: [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 The following decision is sought:

That Cabinet consider the Draft and agree the basis for the Leader of the Council to respond to the South East England Development Agency (SEEDA) by 29 June 2006.

2. Reason

2.1 The Regional Economic Strategy has significant influence on the allocation of Government funds in Hampshire

2.2 It is important to influence the priorities set out by SEEDA in order to meet the Corporate aim of `achieving economic prosperity'

3. Other options considered and rejected

3.1 Not to respond would lead to lack of influence by the Council in key regional policies

4. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision maker or other Executive Member consulted - none

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - not applicable

6. Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent - not applicable

Approved by: ..................................... Date: ...................................
Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE

Contact: Jenny Heath, ext: 7402 Email: [email protected].

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

· That Cabinet approve appendix one as the Council's Value for Money Strategy.

· That Cabinet approve appendix two as the Council's (Best Value) review programme for 2006/07 and its publication in the statutory update of the Performance Plan on 30 June 20056

2. Reasons for the recommendations

2.1 Value for Money is a key element in the CPA Use of Resources block. Having a strategy will enable the Council to provide evidence of its approach as well as informing staff and Members and supporting the development of the Corporate Business Plan.

2.2 The Council is under a statutory obligation to maintain a programme of Best Value reviews, covering all its functions. The review programme ensures that existing services are fundamentally challenged, both in the way they are provided and whether they should be provided at all.

2.3 These documents contribute directly to the Corporate Strategy aim of `Improving Services' both by identifying ways to improve services and by considering the most economic, effective and efficient ways of doing so.

3. Other options considered and rejected - None.

4. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision maker, or member or officer consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason for matter being dealt with, if urgent - Not applicable

Approved by: Date:
Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE

Contact: Jenny Heath, ext 7402 / Sue Sylvester, ext 7493

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

(a) That Cabinet agree that the `corporate performance summary - key areas for action' will inform the development of the Corporate Business Plan for 2007/08.

(b) That extracts from the corporate performance report and the results are published as part of the Performance Plan website by 30 June 2006.

2. Reasons

2.1 The summary of performance and results are key elements of the Performance Plan which the Council has a statutory duty to publish by 30 June each year.

2.2 Development of performance management and reporting is part of the response to the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) - Corporate Assessment recommendations made in 2002. It therefore has direct relevance to the Corporate Strategy aim of `Improving Services' and the targets for `improving our performance', while also underpinning improvement in all areas of service which contribute to the Corporate Strategy.

3. Other options considered and rejected - None.

4. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision maker, or member or officer consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable

6. Reason for matter being dealt with, if urgent - Not applicable

Approved by: Date:
Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE

Contact: Nick Gibbins, (01962) 847544; [email protected]

1. Summary

1.1 There is an overspending of £5.6m against the 2005/06 revised budget, as a result of an overspending of £11.1m on Adult Services, offset by underspendings of £5.5m on other budgets. The overall position is more favourable by about £2.4m than forecast in the last monitoring report in April.

1.2 The following decisions are sought:

i) that the variations in service cash-limited expenditure, as set out in Table 1, be approved

ii) that the accounts be closed on the basis that:

· Environment retains 50% of its underspending in accordance with the County Council's financial management policy

· Policy and Resources and Recreation and Heritage carry forward their overspendings to 2006/07, also in accordance with the County Council's financial management policy.

· Adult Services' overspending in 2005/06 be written off in accordance with the proposed recovery strategy.

iii) that adjustments and variations on other budgets as set out in Table 3 be approved

iv) that the net overspending of £5.6m be taken from balances, and that a further risk assessment of the minimum level of balances be made in July in the light of the Adult Services recovery plan and action determined to recover £3.5m or more to replenish balances.

v) that contributions to and from earmarked reserves be made as set out in Appendix 4 and the draft protocol set out in Annex 2 to the appendix be approved

vi) that the report on the County Council's treasury management activities as set out in Appendix 5 be approved

vii) that the prudential indicators set out in Appendix 6 be approved for submission to the County Council

viii) that the backward look annual efficiency statement for 2005/06 be approved for submission to the Department for Communities and Local Government, as set out in Appendix 7

ix) that the final accounts of the Hampshire Pension Fund contained in Appendix 8 be approved and submitted to the County Council

x) that the final accounts of the County Council for 2005/06 be approved and submitted to the County Council

xi) that progress in implementing financial management policies as set out in Appendix 9 be noted

xii) that capital payments for the year be financed as set out in Table 3 of Appendix 10

xiii) that the carry forward of capital schemes from 2005/06 to 2006/07 as set out in Annex 2 of Appendix 10 be noted

xiv) that services' capital programme cash limits for 2006/07 be increased by the sums shown in:

a) column 6 of the table in Annex 1 to Appendix 10 (to reflect the carry forward of capital schemes and the balance of cash limits from 2005/06)

b) column 3 of the table in Annex 5 to Appendix 10 (to reflect services' share of capital receipts).

2. Reason

2.1 To enable the Cabinet to review the 2005/06 final accounts prior to their submission to the County Council for approval. Consideration of this report supports Aim 5 of the Corporate Strategy.

3. Other options considered and rejected:

3.1 Not applicable.

4. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision maker or other Executive member consulted

4.1 Not applicable.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

5.1 Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent

6.1 Not applicable

Approved by: Date:

Councillor T K Thornber, CBE