Archived decisions
AT A MEETING of the CABINET of HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL held at The Castle, Winchester on 27 October 2008.
Chairman:
p Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE
Councillors:
p |
Mrs P.G. Banks |
a |
M.J. Kendal |
p |
Dr. R.J. Ellis |
p |
D.A. Kirk |
p |
J.K. Glen |
p |
R. Perry |
p |
Felicity Hindson, MBE |
a |
Mrs M.D. Snaith |
Also present with the agreement of the Chairman: Councillors M.F. Cartwright; K.G. Chapman; B.D. Dash; P.R. Edgar; K. Evans; Mrs C.A. Leversha; Mrs P.A. West
454. APOLOGIES
Apologies for absence were received from Councillor M.J. Kendal who was on County Council business elsewhere on behalf of the Leader and Councillors A.P. Collett and Mrs M.D. Snaith.
455. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Members were mindful that where they believed they had a personal or prejudicial interest in any matter considered at the meeting declared that interest at the time of the relevant debate and, having regard to the circumstances described in paragraphs 9, 10, 11 and 12 of the County Council's Code of Conduct, considered whether to leave the meeting whilst the matter was discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with paragraph 12 of the code.
456. MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting held on 22 September 2008 were confirmed as a correct record. There were no matters arising.
457. CHAIRMAN'S COMMUNICATIONS
The Chairman:
(a) welcomed Joanne Weeks who had recently joined Democratic
Services from West Sussex County Council. Joanne will be
supporting several Executive Members with their decision
making programme and observed the meeting as part
of her personal development;
(b) welcomed Kevin Butcher of Hampshire Fire and Rescue
Service who is currently shadowing Yinnon Ezra, Director of
Recreation and Heritage and for the purpose of this meeting, the
Chief Executive; and
(c) welcomed Lydia Strand, who is a journalism student at the
University of Winchester. Lydia has observed a number of
Cabinet meetings recently, therefore a further warm welcome
extended to her.
458. THE SOUTH EAST HAMPSHIRE BUS RAPID TRANSIT
The Cabinet considered the report of the Director of Environment (Item 5 in the Minute book) that sought approval to submit a full business case to the Department for Transport/Department for Communities and Local Government for the first phase of a proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Scheme along the disused railway corridor between Fareham and Gosport. The report was supported by a brief powerpoint presentation; copies of the slides were circulated together with the information leaflet that supported consultations held on 16, 17, 18, 20, 21 and 22 October 2008. The presentation focused on detailed elements of the business case and highlighted the benefits and risks of the project, funding sources, public consultation feedback and project timescales.
The Chairman requested that it be recorded that there are 10 local County Councillors in Fareham and Gosport of which seven support the proposals, two have not responded to date and one Gosport Councillor who did not oppose the proposals but felt that upgrading the A32 and the Stubbington By-Pass would be a more effective option. The Chairman also reported that Gosport Borough Council had not formally considered the proposals at this time, albeit County Council officers had met with Gosport Borough Council Members to present the proposals. The Cabinet were hopeful that both Fareham and Gosport Borough Councils would view these proposals in the context of the benefits of providing a dedicated route for high speed bus travel which will avoid congested sections of the A32.
During the course of a detailed discussion, Members expressed concern at the approach of BRT as a piecemeal solution to what it is a total transport problem in the Fareham/Gosport area and were mindful of the disappointing outcome of the previous Light Rapid Transit (LRT) Scheme despite revisions to meet the Government's requirements. The Cabinet were also mindful at the lack of commitment by the Government to provide adequate, timely funding for infrastructure to those areas that most need it and therefore sought reassurance that approving the proposals would not prevent alternative options being considered in the future to maintain maximum flexibility, particularly if the Government's thinking on LRT schemes should change.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report subject to an additional resolution requesting the Director of Environment to report back on the views of Fareham and Gosport Borough Councils. A copy of the substantive decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 1.
459. NEW FOREST NATIONAL PARK PLAN AND NEW FOREST NATIONAL PARK RECREATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY CONSULTATION DRAFTS
Councillor Mrs P.G. Banks declared a personal interest as a local resident of the New Forest.
Councillor B.D. Dash declared a personal interest as residing within the National Park boundary.
Councillor R. Perry declared a personal interest as a resident of Romsey which is adjacent to the National Park boundary and for the record, that Councillor Perry's wife is Chairman of Wellow Parish Council and his daughter is a recreational horse owner.
Councillor T.K. Thornber declared a personal interest as a local resident of the New Forest and for the record, that Councillor Thornber's wife is a recreational horse owner.
A written statement submitted by Councillor Mrs K. Heron (not present) was noted as was Mrs Heron's declaration of interest as a local resident of the New Forest.
The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive, Director of Environment and Director of Recreation and Heritage (Item 6 in the Minute book) that sought approval of a proposed strategic response to the consultation on the draft New Forest National Park Plan and the New Forest National Park Recreation Management Strategy, both of which have impacts on the delivery of the County Council's duties and responsibilities. The Director of Environment expanded on the main points contained in the report, particularly highlighting the detailed recommendations in response to the various issues arising from the consultation documents.
During the course of a detailed discussion, Members expressed strong concerns that the policies being proposed by the National Park Authority are too restrictive and due regard had not been given to the potential impact on areas adjacent to the National Park. Members highlighted the importance of striking the right balance to ensure conservation of the Forest whilst promoting enjoyment of the National Park as well as looking after the economic and social wellbeing of local communities within its boundaries, for example taking account of the emerging personalisation agenda and provision of extra-care housing. It was felt that the proposed Plans did not strike this balance. In terms of recreational use, it was important that the interests of horse riders, cyclists and dog walkers be taken into account together with those of disabled people to ensure the National Park can be accessed and enjoyed by all. The Cabinet were of the view that it was extremely regrettable that proposals for the future of the New Forest National Park had not been drawn up following constructive consultation with the different communities that live and work within the New Forest to achieve management strategies agreeable to all.
In regard to the final sentence of paragraph 5.2 of the main report, it was noted for the minute record that the Cabinet agreed the deletion of the following text:
"Whilst the principle of focusing development in locations that are sustainable is supported".
The Cabinet also emphasised that the County Council has no intention of introducing or investigating road pricing and that the County Council emphasised its statutory responsibility for highway/traffic matters and street lighting on which it would make the appropriate decisions in the context of wider objectives.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report subject to a strengthening of the resolution detailed in 1.3 that due regard be given to the potential impact on areas adjacent to the National Park. A copy of the substantive decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 2.
460. COPORATE EFFICIENCY
The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 7 in the Minute book) setting out a strategic approach to address the Government's target of 3% cashable efficiency savings for 2008/09 to 2010/11 and to further embed efficiency savings into the management of the Council. The Chief Executive expanded on the key elements of the report and answered Members detailed questions.
During the course of the ensuing discussion, the Cabinet emphasised the importance of securing value for money for the council taxpayer and were keen to continue to build on the County Council's successful record of savings that have been invested back into services over the last four years. The Cabinet particularly welcomed the opportunity to explore sharing services with other local authorities and the reshaping of services to meet changing needs, such as the emerging personalisation agenda for social care.
In respect of Appendix 2 to the report listing the various areas of activity for the savings and efficiency programme, the Cabinet requested that the Corporate Reviews and the section on cross cutting issues be moved to the top of the list.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 3.
461. GREEN PAPER CONSULTATION RESPONSE "THE CASE FOR CHANGE - WHY ENGLAND NEEDS A NEW CARE AND SUPPORT SYSTEM"
Councillor J.K. Glen declared a personal interest having given evidence to the Personalisation Commission on 19 September 2008.
Councillors Mrs P.G. Banks, Felicity Hindson and T.K. Thornber declared a personal interest as Commissioners.
The Cabinet considered the report of the Acting Director of Adult Services (Item 8 in the Minute book) that sought approval for the formal response to the Green Paper consultation to be made through the report of the Personalisation Commission. The Acting Director of Adult Services expanded on the main points in the report and answered Members questions.
During the course of the ensuing discussion, the Cabinet welcomed the excellent work being done by all the Commissioners to help shape the future delivery of the adult care system to meet the needs of people requiring care, their families and their carers.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 4.
462. PROPOSAL FOR A NEW SPECIAL SCHOOL PROVISION AT CROFTON SCHOOL
The Cabinet considered the report of the Director of Children's Services (Item 9 in the Minute book) that sought approval of prudential borrowing following the `in principle' decision by the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education) on 16 October 2008 about a proposal to establish resourced provision for pupils with severe Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD) at Crofton School, Stubbington. Key elements of the report were expanded on and Members detailed questions answered.
During the course of the ensuing discussion, the Cabinet welcomed the comprehensive and flexible service that this third provision in the south east of the county would represent as it would offer more choice to families of children with special educational needs and would help to reduce pressure on non County placements. In determining their decision, the Cabinet noted that the Schools' Forum were fully supportive of the proposal and were also pleased to note that the South Hampshire ASD Group had expressed their support too.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 5.
463. MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL STRATEGY 2008/09 TO 2010/11
The Cabinet considered the report of the County Treasurer (Item 10 in the Minute book) that sought approval of the Medium Term Financial Strategy for 2008/09 to 2010/11. The County Treasurer expanded on key elements of the report, particularly the impact of the current financial crisis and the consequential effect on the capital receipts programme, inflation, the latest position with the national pay award and the outcome of consultation with the County Council's Citizens' Panel on service spending priorities.
In considering the three year Strategy, the Cabinet were mindful that further action later in the year would be required in respect of the capital receipts programme due to the sharp decline in the demand for new residential sites. Concern was expressed again that the County Council's grant per head was in the lowest quartile. Despite the many challenges posed by the continuing low grant settlement by the Government, the Cabinet congratulated the Leader and the County Treasurer for maintaining strong budgetary management to ensure the delivery of quality services to the people of Hampshire, whilst levying the lowest council tax in the South East and at the lower quartile of County Council taxes.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 6.
464. CONSULTATION ON REFORM OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY BUSINESS GROWTH INCENTIVES (LABGI) SCHEME
The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive and County Treasurer (Item 11 in the Minute book) that sought approval of a proposed response to the consultation on the reform of the LABGI scheme for submission to the Department for Communities and Local Government. The County Treasurer reported that the proposed reformed scheme was an improvement on the previous one; emphasised the importance of getting as much business growth rate returned to the County Council as possible given the reduced amount of money available in 2009/10 and 2010/11; and that the latest proposals sees Hampshire, together with Portsmouth, Southampton and the Isle of Wight grouped together into a sub-region.
During the course of the ensuing discussion, the Cabinet welcomed the further opportunity to comment on the latest set of proposals and were pleased that a number of points in their response to the issues paper in November 2007 had been taken account of. The Cabinet were particularly pleased that the proposed scheme recognises Hampshire, together with Portsmouth, Southampton and the Isle of Wight as a sub-region and hoped that this message will filter through to other Government departments.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report. A copy of the decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 7.
465. AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION: STANDARDS COMMITTEE - TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Cabinet considered the report of the Chief Executive (Item 12 in the Minute book) proposing a recommendation to the County Council that the terms of reference of the Standards Committee set out in Part 1: Chapter 9 of the Constitution be revised in response to statutory guidance.
The Cabinet adopted the recommendations set out in the report albeit that reservations were expressed in terms of the requirement to establish four, rather than two, sub-committees to deal with complaints received by the Standards Committee. A copy of the decision record is attached to these Minutes as Appendix 8.
APPENDIX 1
(Item 5)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet |
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 |
Decision Title: |
The South East Hampshire Bus Rapid Transit |
Decision Reference: |
315 |
Report From: |
Director of Environment |
Contact name: |
Keith Willcox | |||
Tel: |
01962 846997 |
Email: |
||
1) Summary |
The following decisions were made: |
1.1. That final approval be given to submit a Full Business Case to the Department for Transport/Department for Communities and Local Government by 31 October 2008 for the first phase of the proposed Bus Rapid Transit Scheme along the disused railway corridor between Fareham and Gosport and thereafter to report to Cabinet following the announcement by Department for Transport of the successful bids in February 2009. 1.2. That, in view of the timescales for implementation of the first phase of the proposed Bus Rapid Transit Scheme, delegated authority be given to the Director of Environment, in consultation with the Head of Corporate and Legal Services, to undertake an appropriate procurement process for the selection of contractors and consultants to work with the Council to develop the preparation and design of the Bus Rapid Transit Scheme, and thereafter, if appropriate, to retain them to implement the Scheme. |
2) Reasons for the decision |
2.1. To benefit from external funding which is time limited. |
3) Other options considered and rejected: |
3.1. Option 1: |
That no bid for external funding is submitted; but this was rejected as this could have affected the financial viability of the whole scheme. |
4) Conflicts of Interest: |
4.1. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: |
None |
4.2. Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: |
None |
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: |
None |
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent: |
None |
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: |
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman of the Cabinet Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |
1799Decn/315/KAW
APPENDIX 2
(Item 6)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet |
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 |
Decision Title: |
New Forest National Park Plan and New Forest National Park Recreation Management Strategy Consultation Drafts |
Decision Reference: |
296 |
Report From: |
Chief Executive, Director of Environment and Director of Recreation and Heritage |
Contact name: |
Andrew Smith, Alison Quant, David Carman | |||
Tel: |
023 8038 3407 |
Email: |
||
1) Summary and Statement of Intent and Response to Consultation The County Council has long supported the sustainable development of the New Forest in a way that both conserves and recognises the communities which live and work within the New Forest. The County Council has no intention of introducing or investigating road pricing. The County Council does not foresee any circumstances in which it will share its statutory responsibility for highway, traffic matters or street lighting. The relevant recommendations are given below in the summary. The purpose of this section, which Cabinet is asked to adopt, is to make clear the County Council intent, irrespective of, and in place of any earlier plans. |
The following decisions are proposed: |
1.1 That Hampshire County Council will not investigate nor implement road 1.2 That the following issues and the underlying discussion in this report are (i) Issue 1. The restrictive nature of policies in the National Park Plan do not reflect fully the duty on the National Park Authority to foster the economic and social well-being of local communities across the whole Park. Given the relatively small size of the National Park and the relatively high density of settlement, greater degree of balance is required between the purposes of designation and the duty to foster the socio-economic wellbeing of its communities. (ii) Issue 2. The `zero growth' approach to activity in the vast majority of the National Park through the zoning of activities and facilities, combined with the proposed relocation of activities and facilities, will impact on the economic viability of the Park. It also imposes additional pressures on the County Council's facilities at Lepe Country Park and the rural lanes leading to it, and the Calshot Activities Centre. (iii) Issue 3. The priorities for the National Park Authority in relation to highway and transport matters are not in accord with those being set at a national level, and are in contradiction to the County Council's own policies for which it has a statutory responsibility. This will have a severe impact on the availability of the County Council's resources to deliver the targets and actions in the National Park Plan. (iv) Issue 4. Limitations on opportunities for development will in turn limit the availability of developer contributions to support highway network and transport objectives in the Plan. (v) Issue 5. The approach to recreation management must be subject to a rigorous assessment of the social and economic costs/benefits of the policy approach. (vi) Issue 6. The extent of degradation as a result of minerals working is overstated in the Plan and does not recognise the measures taken by the County Council to ensure that appropriate restoration is undertaken. (vii) Issue 7. The restrictive policies for development will impact on the County Council's abilities to deliver sustainable solutions for the management of waste and material resources as set out in the Materials Resources Strategy. The policies run counter to the National Park Authority's stated objective of reducing its environmental footprint. (viii) Issue 8. The restrictions on development will impact on the County Council's ability to deliver the development and rationalisation needs of schools, older persons' homes and other public service/front of house provision. (ix) Issue 9. The National Park Plan sets a specific and challenging target for reducing the environmental footprint of the Park. Whilst such aspirations are welcome, there is a lack of clarity about the individual activities that would deliver this and the implications of this for the Council. 1.3 The County Council recognises the importance of a sustainable Recreational Management Strategy. In which case it would urge the authority to ensure that adequate arrangements are in place to research the impact of recreational pursuits in the New Forest; consult adequately with the different communities which live and work within the New Forest; and give due regard to the potential impact on areas adjacent to the National Park. 1.4 That any further technical comment, observation or communication on the NPA proposal be agreed by the Director of Environment and the Chief Executive in consultation with the Leader. |
|
2) Reasons for the decision |
a. To respond to the consultation on the statutory New Forest National Park Plan and the non-statutory New Forest Recreation Management Strategy, which have impacts on the delivery of the County Council's duties and responsibilities. |
3) Other options considered and rejected: |
b. Option 1: |
i. To provide only officer technical comments. This would not give sufficient weight to the serious concerns that the County Council has with aspects of the National Park Plan. |
4) Conflicts of Interest: |
c. Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: |
None |
d. Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: |
None |
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: |
None |
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : |
None |
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: |
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |
1785Decn/296/DC
APPENDIX 3
(Item 7)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet |
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 |
Decision Title: |
Corporate Efficiency |
Decision Reference: |
294 |
Report From: |
Chief Executive |
Contact name: |
Andrew Smith | |||
Tel: |
01962 847300 |
Email: |
||
1. Summary |
The following decisions were made: |
1.1 That approval be given to the development of a three year efficiency |
1.2 That the Chief Executive be authorised to identify with Chief Officers those |
1.3 That approval be given to the outline activity identified in Appendix 2 and that |
1.4 That approval be given to the establishment of a corporate efficiency fund. |
1 Reasons for the decision |
2.1 To address the government's target of 3% cashable efficiency savings for |
2 Other options considered and rejected: |
2.1 None |
3 Conflicts of Interest: |
3.1 Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: |
None |
3.2 Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: |
None |
4 Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: |
None |
5 Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : |
None |
6 Statement from the Decision Maker: |
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman of the Cabinet Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet | ||||
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 | ||||
Decision Title: |
Green Paper consultation response - "The case for change - why England needs a new care and support system" | ||||
Decision Reference: |
349 | ||||
Report From: |
Director of Adult Services | ||||
Contact name: |
Nick Georgiou | ||||
Tel: |
01962 847200 |
Email: |
|||
| |||||
The following decision was made: | |||||
1.1 That Cabinet approve that the formal response to the Consultation on the Green Paper "The case for change - why England needs a new care and support system" is made through the report of the Personalisation Commission. | |||||
2) Reasons for the decision | |||||
2.1 To ensure a full detailed response to the Consultation on the Green Paper is | |||||
2.2 The above decision links to all three of the Corporate Priorities; Hampshire | |||||
3) Other options considered and rejected: | |||||
3.1 Option 1: | |||||
To delegate responsibility to the Leader, three other Cabinet members and Councillors Jo Kelly and Dowden, who are all Personalisation Commission members, to agree the Council's response as part of their responsibilities as Commissioners. | |||||
3.2 Option 2: | |||||
To separate the Green Paper finance response from the rest of the report and submit through Cabinet on 24 November 2008. | |||||
4) Conflicts of Interest: | |||||
4.1 Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: | |||||
None | |||||
4.2 Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: | |||||
None | |||||
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: | |||||
None | |||||
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : | |||||
None | |||||
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: | |||||
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman of the Cabinet Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |
APPENDIX 5
(Item 9)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Executive Lead Member for Children's Services | ||||
Date of Decision: |
16 October 2008 | ||||
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet | ||||
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 | ||||
Decision Title: |
Proposal for a new special provision at Crofton School | ||||
Decision Reference: |
340 | ||||
Report From: |
John Coughlan, Director of Children's Services | ||||
Contact name: |
Phil Butler | ||||
Tel: |
01962 847687 |
Email: |
|||
Contact name: |
Phil Butler | |||
Tel: |
01962 847687 |
Email: |
||
| ||||
1.1 Hampshire County Council is discussing with Crofton School a proposal to The following decision was made by the Executive Lead Member for Children's | ||||
That the Executive Lead Member for Children's Services (Education), in respect of a proposal to establish resourced provision for pupils with severe ASD at Crofton School, seek the agreement of the Cabinet to in principle prudential borrowing of £500,000, chargeable to the Schools Budget, with repayments over 6 years to fund the proposed capital outlay with the balance of capital costs coming from the Schools Access Initiative. | ||||
1.2 Accordingly, the following decision was made by the Cabinet: | ||||
That Cabinet approve the prudential borrowing referred to in paragraph 1.1 above. | ||||
2) Reasons for the decision | ||||
2.1 This decision supports the following Hampshire County Council priority: 2.2 It also supports the following outcomes of Every Child Matters · Enjoy and Achieve · Making a positive contribution · Achieve economic well-being The proposed new facility would provide for young people with ASD to be educated in a school where there is a whole-staff awareness of their needs and where the staff are supported by appropriately qualified and experienced specialist colleagues. This would lead to the young people being better understood with consequent improvements for their progress and the qualifications they achieve. It is also anticipated that there would be a reduction in the number of appeals to the special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunal, a reduction in the need for specialist residential school placements which involve the young people having to be educated away from home and their local community and a reduction in the number of young people with ASD in South East Hampshire who leave school without entering further education, employment or training. | ||||
3) Other options considered and rejected: | ||||
3.1 In the past, the option of establishing similar provision on other mainstream school sites in South East Hampshire has been considered but Crofton shares a site with Baycroft School which is a special secondary school for children with moderate learning difficulties; some of the children at Baycroft School are affected by ASD and so it is anticipated there would be opportunities to share expertise and resources between a special school and mainstream provision in a way that would be less practicable elsewhere. | ||||
3.2 The other option is not to further develop provision for ASD children in South East Hampshire. However, the provision at Crofton School would represent a significant part of our strategy to provide a comprehensive and flexible service covering all ages from pre-school to 19 years and beyond. In fact the County Council's strategy is incomplete without it and this makes us vulnerable at Special Educational Needs and Disability Tribunals and does not provide equality of opportunity across the authority since there is already similar provision to that proposed at Crofton School in the North and West of the County. | ||||
4) Conflicts of Interest: | ||||
None | ||||
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: | ||||
None | ||||
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : | ||||
None | ||||
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: | ||||
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE Chairman of the Cabinet |
APPENDIX 6
(Item 10)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet |
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 |
Decision Title: |
Medium Term Financial Strategy 2008/09 to 2010/11 |
Decision Reference: |
257 |
Report From: |
Jon Pittam, County Treasurer |
Contact name: |
Nick Gibbins | |||
Tel: |
01962 847544 |
Email: |
||
1) Summary |
The following decisions were made: |
1.1 To agree the amendment to the Financial Management Policies contained in |
1.2 To agree the basis for setting provisional budget guidelines for 2011/12 and |
1.3 To approve the Medium Term Financial Strategy for 2008/09 to 2010/11. |
2) Reasons for the decision |
2.1 To provide a basis for financial planning over the three year period. |
2.2 Three year budget and capital programme and linked to the priorities of the corporate strategy. |
3) Other options considered and rejected: |
No other options considered as the report brings together the various elements of the County Council's medium term financial strategy into a single document, including financial management policies which underpin the framework for resource allocations decisions. |
4) Conflicts of Interest: |
4.1 Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: |
None |
4.2 Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: |
None |
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: |
None |
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : |
None |
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: |
None |
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman of the Cabinet Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |
APPENDIX 7
(Item 11)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet |
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 |
Decision Title: |
Consultation on reform of the Local Authority Business Growth Incentives (LABGI) Scheme |
Decision Reference: |
339 |
Report From: |
Chief Executive and County Treasurer |
Contact name: |
John Rees-Evans Nick Gibbins | |||
Tel: |
01962 846628 01962 847544 |
Email: |
||
| ||||
The following decision was made: | ||||
1.1 That subject to the comments made by the Cabinet, the response to the consultation on the reform of the LABGI scheme be submitted to the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG), as set out in the conclusion to the report and in Appendix C. | ||||
2) Reasons for the decision | ||||
2.1 Local authorities have been consulted by CLG on proposals for reform of the LABGI scheme. The scheme has an impact on the finances of the County Council and in responding to the consultation, there is a possibility of influencing government thinking on the reforms to the current scheme. | ||||
3) Other options considered and rejected: | ||||
3.1 Option 1: | ||||
The option of not responding to the consultation paper was rejected. | ||||
4) Conflicts of Interest: | ||||
4.1 Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: | ||||
None | ||||
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: | ||||
None | ||||
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : | ||||
Not applicable | ||||
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: | ||||
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman of the Cabinet Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |
APPENDIX 8
(Item 12)
HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
Record of an Executive Decision:
Decision Maker: |
Cabinet |
Date of Decision: |
27 October 2008 |
Decision Title: |
Amendment to the Constitution: Standards Committee - terms of reference |
Decision Reference: |
364 |
Report From: |
Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer |
Contact name: |
Jeff Pattison, Head of Corporate and Legal Services and Monitoring Officer | |||
Tel: |
01962 847321 |
Email: |
||
| ||||
The following decision was made: | ||||
That it be a recommendation to the County Council that the terms of reference of the Standards Committee set out in Part I: Chapter 9 of the Constitution be revised by the replacement of paragraph 9.3(g) with the following: To establish sub-committees to take such action as is necessary to assess, review, investigate, determine and impose appropriate sanctions in respect of, any written allegation that a Member has failed to comply with the Authority's Code of Conduct. (replaces "To deal with any reports from the National Standards Board for England or a Case Tribunal on complaints against members or officers of the Authority"). | ||||
2) Reasons for the decision | ||||
2.1 To respond to statutory guidance. | ||||
3) Other options considered and rejected: | ||||
3.1 Not to respond to the statutory guidance. | ||||
4) Conflicts of Interest: | ||||
4.1 Conflicts of interest declared by the decision-maker: | ||||
None | ||||
4.2 Conflicts of interest declared by other Executive Members consulted: | ||||
None | ||||
5) Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee: | ||||
None | ||||
6) Any reasons for the matter being dealt with if urgent : | ||||
None | ||||
7) Statement from the Decision Maker: | ||||
None | ||||
Approved by: -------------------------------------------------- |
Date: 27 October 2008 |
Chairman of the Cabinet Councillor T.K. Thornber, CBE |