Minutes of Meeting of the Highland Council held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Thursday, 12 May 2011 at 11.00 a.m.
Mr A Rhind opened the meeting with prayer.
1. Calling of the Roll and Apologies for Absence
Present:
Mr G Farlow, Ms L Munro, Mr R Rowantree, Mr D Mackay, Mr J Rosie, Mr B Fernie, Ms G Ross, Mr G Smith, Mr D Bremner, Mr R Coghill, Mr D Flear, Mr W MacKay, Mrs D Mackay, Mr J McGillivray, Mr I Ross, Mrs I Campbell, Mr R Greene, Dr A Sinclair, Mrs J Urquhart, Mr M Finlayson, Mr M Rattray, Ms M Smith, Mrs C Wilson, Mr R Durham, Mr A Rhind, Mr P Cairns, Mrs A MacLean, Mrs M Paterson, Dr D Alston, Mr B Barclay, Mr C Fraser, Mrs I McCallum, Mr H Fraser, Mr J Laing, Mr D Millar, Mr I Renwick, Mr B Clark, Mr A Henderson, Mr E Hunter, Mrs H Carmichael, Mrs M Davidson, Mr D Hendry, Mr H Wood, Mr A Graham, Mr A Christie, Mrs P Munro, Miss J Campbell, Mr P Corbett, Mr D Kerr, Mrs B McAllister, Mr N Donald, Mr J Finnie, Mr D Henderson, Mr F Parr, Mr I Brown, Mr J Gray, Mr K MacLeod, Mr J Ford, Mr B Wynd, Mr L Fraser, Mrs L MacDonald, Mr G Marsden, Mr A S Park, Mr J Holden, Mr R Pedersen, Mr T Prag , Mr S Black, Ms J Douglas, Mr D Fallows, Mr G Rimell, Mr D Cameron, Dr M Foxley, Mr B Gormley, Mr B J Murphy.
In Attendance:
Chief Executive
Depute Chief Executive
Director of Education, Culture and Sport
Director of Housing and Property
Assistant Chief Executive
Director of Planning and Development
Director of TEC Services
Director of Social Work
Mr A S Park in the Chair
Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Lady M Thurso, Mr D Chisholm, Mr R Balfour, Mrs G Sinclair and Mr J Crawford.
Preliminaries
(i) Prior to the commencement of the formal business, the Convener paid tribute to
the late Mr Alan Torrance and extended the sympathy of the Council to his wife
and family.
(ii) The Convener also expressed condolences on behalf of the Council to Mr
Roderick Balfour and his family on their recent bereavement and confirmed that
Mrs Rosemary Balfour’s funeral was to be held that afternoon.
In this regard, it was AGREED that the meeting would therefore adjourn at 1.00pm to allow Members of the Council to attend the funeral.
(iii) The Convener made reference to the recent Scottish Parliamentary Election and
extended his congratulations to the Scottish National Party on their success.
Specifically, and on behalf of the Council, he congratulated Mr John Finnie and
Mrs Jean Urquhart on being elected as MSP’s and wished them well in their new
roles.
He also welcomed Ms Gail Ross to her first meeting of the Highland Council following her election as the Member for Ward 3 (Wick).
2. Declarations of Interest
The Council NOTED the following declarations of interest –
Item 8 – Mr P Cairns (Non Financial)
Item 18 – Mr D Kerr, Mr J Finnie, Mrs P Munro, Mr A Christie, Mr N Donald, Mr A Graham, Mr F Parr, Mr P Corbett, Mr H Wood, Mrs B McAllister and Miss J Campbell (Non Financial)
Item 27 – Mr G Farlow and Mr D Kerr (Financial)
Item 27 – Mrs J Urquhart, Mr J Laing, Mr I Ross and Mr J Gray (Non Financial)
3. By-Election – Ward 3 (Wick)
It was NOTED that, at the By-Election held on 7 April 2011, Ms Gail Elizabeth Ross, 62 Argyle Square, Wick, KW1 4HA had been elected as the Member for Ward 3 (Wick).
4. By-Election – Ward 8 (Tain and Easter Ross)
It was NOTED that the Returning Officer had put in place arrangements for the By-Election for Ward 8 (Tain and Easter Ross) to be held on 9 June 2011.
5. Confirmation of Minutes
There had been submitted for confirmation as correct records the Minutes of Meeting of the Council held on 3 March 2011 and of the Special Meetings held on 3 March and 10 March 2011 as contained in the Volume which had been circulated separately – which were APPROVED.
6. Minutes of Meetings of Committees
There had been submitted for confirmation as correct records, for information as regards delegated business, and for approval as appropriate, the Minutes of Meetings of Committees contained in the Volume circulated separately as undernoted:-
|Link to Minutes Index|
- Housing and Social Work Committee, 9 March
- Education, Culture and Sport Committee, 10 March
- Planning, Environment and Development Committee, 16 March
- Transport, Environmental and Community Services Committee, 17 March
- Joint Committee on Children and Young People, 18 March
- Resources Committee, 6 April
- Audit and Scrutiny Committee, 7 April
- Gaelic Committee, 7 April
- Inverness City Committee, 18 April
The Minutes, having been moved and seconded, were, except as undernoted, APPROVED - matters arising having been dealt with as follows:-
Planning, Environment and Development Committee, 16 March
Page 70: Item 17: Development Plan Scheme 2011
AGREED that the following amendment should be made to the Minute:-
“In response to questions raised, and specifically in relation to the Sandown Development Brief, Members were given assurances that the costs of community engagement workshops were met from the Planning and Development budget…”
Transport, Environmental and Community Services Committee, 17 March
Notice of Amendment – Item 7 – Review of Burial and Cremation Charges
With reference to Page 78, Item 7, of the Minutes of Meeting of the Transport, Environmental and Community Services Committee of 17 March 2011 as contained in the Volume and circulated separately, the following Notice of Amendment had been received in accordance with Standing Order 10.3 –
“That Highland Council roll out the increase to recover full costs for burials and cremations over a 3 year period as opposed to the agreement in the Transport, Environmental and Community Services Committee on 17 March 2011 which was an immediate increase. The increases of 19% for burials and 21% for cremations must be affordable and we, the undersigned, propose one third increase over a 3 year period”.
Signed
Mr D J Fallows Mr J Finnie Mrs P Munro
Mr D Hendry Mrs L MacDonald Ms M Smith
Mr R Pedersen Mr G Farlow
In this connection, there had been re-circulated Report No. TEC-17-11 dated 4 March 2011 by the Director of Transport, Environmental and Community Services.
Speaking in support of the Notice of Amendment, a number of Members commented that, in the current difficult economic circumstances, to implement a full increase in the current year would place an additional burden on bereaved families and it would therefore be fairer to implement any increase over a 3 year period.
Thereafter, Mr J Laing, seconded by Mr B J Murphy, MOVED that the Council should uphold the decision of the Transport, Environmental and Community Services Committee, namely that charges for burials, lair purchase and ancillary items be increased by 19% with effect from 1 April 2011, that in cemeteries where it was not possible to provide a double lair due to the difficult ground conditions two single lairs should be provided at the same cost as a double lair and that the charges for cremation and ancillary items be increased by 21% with effect from 1 April 2011.
As an AMENDMENT, Mr D Fallows, seconded by Ms M Smith, moved that the Council should roll out the increase to recover full costs for burials and cremations over a 3 year period.
On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 47 votes and the AMENDMENT received 23 votes and the MOTION was therefore CARRIED, the votes having been cast as follows –
For the Motion:
Alston, D, Barclay, B, Black, S, Campbell, I, Carmichael, H, Christie, A, Coghill, R, Corbett, P, Davidson, M, Donald, N, Douglas, J, Durham, R, Fernie, B, Finlayson, M, Flear, D, Ford, J, Foxley, M, Fraser, H, Fraser, L, Graham, A, Gray, J, Greene, R, Laing, J, Mackay, D (W5), MacKay, W, MacLean, A, MacLeod, K, Marsden, G, McAllister, E, McCallum, I, McGillivray, J, Millar, D, Munro, L, Murphy, B, Park, S, Parr, F, Paterson, M, Prag, T, Rattray, M, Rimell, G, Rosie, J, Ross, I, Rowantree, R, Sinclair, A, Smith, G, Wilson, C, Wood, H
For the Amendment:
Bremner, D, Brown, I, Cairns, P, Cameron, D, Campbell, J, Clark, B, Fallows, D, Farlow, G, Finnie, J, Fraser, C, Gormley, B, Henderson, A, Hendry, D, Hunter, E, Kerr, D, MacDonald, L, Munro, P, Pedersen, R, Renwick, I, Ross, G, Smith, M, Urquhart, J, Wynd, B
Abstentions:
Mackay, D (W2)
Decision
The Council AGREED as follows:-
(i) that the charges for burials, lair purchase and ancillary items be increased by
19% with effect from 1 April 2011;
(ii) that, in cemeteries where it was not possible to provide a double lair due to the
difficult ground conditions, two single lairs should be provided at the same cost
as a double lair; and
(iii) that the charges for cremation and ancillary items be increased by 21% with
effect from 1 April 2011.
Inverness City Committee, 18 April
Page 136: Item 5.1: Inverness Common Good Fund Monitoring Statement
AGREED that the following sentence should be added to the Minute:-
“It was also noted that a request had been made to the Audit and Scrutiny Committee to investigate the accuracy of the monitoring.”
7. Equalities Working Group
There had been circulated Minutes of Meetings of the Equalities Working Group held on 9 February and 8 April 2011 - which were APPROVED.
8. Classroom Support Needs Cross Party Working Group
Declaration of Interest – Mr P Cairns declared a non financial interest in this item on the grounds that his wife was employed by the Council but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that his interest did not preclude his involvement in the discussion.
There had been circulated Minutes of Meetings of the Classroom Support Needs Cross Party Working Group held on 29 March and 18 April 2011 - which were APPROVED.
9. Community Benefit Working Group
There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Community Benefit Working Group held on 19 Apr 2011 – which were APPROVED.
In this regard, there had also been circulated Report No. HC-1-11 dated 27 April 2011 by the Corporate Manager (Ross, Skye and Lochaber) which set out a suggested revised remit for the Community Benefit Working Group – which was AGREED.
10. Budget Information Group
There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Budget Information Group held on 21 Apr 2011 - which were APPROVED.
11. Membership of Strategic Committees, etc
Members were advised that, as a result of the Wick By-Election, the political make-up of the Council was now as follows –
Ind Lib Dem SNP Lab IMG Ind Alliance Non Aligned Vacant
24 20 17 7 6 4 1 1
The formula in respect of the number of places on Strategic Committees was unaffected at 7/5/5/2/2/1/0.
In this regard, Updated Membership in relation to Strategic Committees, etc had been circulated and were APPROVED.
12. Question Time
The following Question had been received by the Assistant Chief Executive in terms of Standing Order 42:-
(i) Mr Donald Cameron
To the Convener
“There are increasing concerns within the construction and civil engineering industries regarding the trend for companies outwith the Highlands and Scotland winning major public contracts and bringing in their own labour force to the detriment of local sub contractors, tradesmen and labourers. The constraints of the public procurement process are recognised but there are measures which can be taken to ensure that there are benefits for the local economy. In awarding the recent £11.9 million contract for a new Aviemore Primary School, did Highland Council use a community benefit clause to encourage the successful Irish contractor to maximise their use of local sub contractors?”
The response had been circulated.
In terms of a supplementary question, Mr Cameron queried as to whether it would be possible to arrange a Briefing for Members on what could be done to increase the use of local Sub Contractors in both public and private contracts.
In response, the Convener confirmed that this would be arranged.
Decision
The Council NOTED the position.
13. Notices of Motion
The following Notices of Motion had been received in accordance with Standing Order 10.1 –
(i) “At the Standards Commission Roadshow on 22 February 2011, informal verbal
advice was given that a Councillor expressing a wider view on a particular issue
did not necessarily preclude them from taking part in a specific planning
application concerning the issue.
We, the undernoted Members, would request that the Council write to the Standards Commission to get clarity on this issue”.
Signed
Mr R J Coghill Mr R Balfour
Decision
The Council AGREED TO DEFER consideration of this Notice of Motion until the next meeting on 23 June 2011.
(ii) “The new operators of Gatwick Airport, Global Infrastructure Partners,
successfully applied to the Civil Aviation Authority for permission to raise their
landing fees. The new charges represent a 20% rise for smaller aircraft,
predominantly those flown by operators such as Flybe, with only a 10% rise for
larger aircraft.
These increased charges will also apply to flights operated by Flybe from Inverness Airport to London Gatwick. The resulting price rises that will inevitably be passed on to customers will begin to have an impact on the route’s profitability as well as upon the attractiveness of Inverness and the Highlands as both a tourism destination and as a place to do business.
There has been a recent decline in the number of air links into London Airports generally from many of the regions of the UK. For many areas, there are alternatives in the form of rail links, for example Plymouth which recently lost its flight to Gatwick is still only three hours away from London by rail. Many of the areas set to benefit from the Government’s proposals for high speed rail connections already have satisfactory links with the country’s capital city. The Highlands does not have this option with rail links to London still taking upwards of eight hours.
In view of the importance of good air links with the UK’s capital city, the Leader should write to Flybe and offer the Council’s support for their case that the increased landing fees imposed upon them at London Gatwick Airport are discriminatory and act against the interests of operators from the regions of the UK.
Furthermore, the Leader should also write to the Highland MP’s, highlighting the potential that this action by London Gatwick’s operators could have on the overall competitiveness of the Highlands”.
Signed
Dr M E M Foxley Mr J Laing Mr J Gray Mr J Finnie
Speaking in support of the Motion, and in stressing the critical importance of air links for the Highlands, a number of Members made reference to the current situation whereby Gatwick Airport was now competing with Heathrow Airport for long haul traffic and, due to the lack of new capacity at Heathrow, they now stood to benefit from this group. As such, they had increased their charges for smaller aircraft by 15.7% (in comparison with increased charges for larger aircraft of 5%) and what had become increasingly clear was that this was not just an issue for Inverness but for Regional Airports across the United Kingdom. The obvious implications for the Highlands were that there would be higher fares and a reduced frequency of service which would ultimately lead to the service not being profitable and it would cease. There was also information which appeared to suggest that consideration was being given to shifting the Gatwick services to Southampton which would not be acceptable for the Highlands.
Therefore, in view of the importance of the issue, it was suggested that meetings should also be sought at various levels with the UK and Scottish Governments and with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities in order to undertake discussion on the matter.
Decision
The Council AGREED the Notice of Motion as detailed.
It was also AGREED that meetings should be sought at various levels with the UK and Scottish Governments and with the Convention of Scottish Local Authorities in order to undertake discussion on this issue.
14. Capital Programme Review
There had been circulated Report No. HC-2-11 dated 4 May 2011 by the Depute Chief Executive and Director of Finance which set out a revised General Fund Capital Programme covering the period from 2011/12 to 2016/17.
In this regard, it was confirmed that the proposed Programme was based upon the priorities agreed by the Council on 24 June 2010, with updated affordability assumptions, and project costs and phasing.
During a summary of the report, it was advised that the Capital Programme which had been agreed by the Council in June 2010 had been based upon Outline Business Cases and the use of Option Appraisal to prioritise new project proposals. Given the uncertainty at the time over future levels of capital funding, and the recognition that the prioritised Programmes in each year were likely to exceed affordable and deliverable levels, it had also been agreed that a final decision on affordability would have to be taken later in the year.
Since that meeting, a UK Spending Review had been published which had set out UK Spending Proposals up to and including 2014/15 and a Scottish Government Budget and Finance Settlement had been notified to Councils for one year only, namely 2011/12. There remained uncertainty over future levels of capital and revenue funding beyond 2011/12 but a review of the June 2010 Capital Programme had now taken place to allow the Council to have an up to date Capital Programme in place and the outcome of that review had been set out in the report.
In this regard, the basis of the proposed Capital Programme had been set out in two phases as follows –
Phase 1 – 2011/12 to 2013/14 – a firm 3 Year Capital Programme for decision by the Council; and
Phase 2 – 2014/15 to 2016/17 – an indicative Programme for these years due to uncertainty over funding levels and the extent to which the revised Programme still exceeded a likely affordability limit – these years would be subject to further review.
Further information on affordability assumptions and the basis of the revised Capital Programme were also set out in the report.
During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-
- this was a much better position for the Council than had been anticipated in light of the flexibility which had been introduced by the Scottish Government and the change in Treasury rules and this was good news for everyone, especially businesses and people in the Highlands;
- a firm 3 Year Capital Programme had been identified but there would be further clarity in the autumn about future capital and that would be the time to identify what could be done within the budget available for future years;
- clarification was being sought in relation to the Scottish Government funding model for Wick High School. In this regard, the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) proposal would see Scottish Government/SFT financial contributions in revenue rather than capital form but, pending further clarification, the Council’s net contribution to the project continued to be shown meantime as capital and reflected within the Capital Programme.
Decision
The Council AGREED the revised 3 Year Capital Programme for the period 2011/12 to 2013/14 as set out in Annex 1 to the report.
The Council also NOTED the indicative Programme for the subsequent years 2014/15 to 2016/17 and that the Programme would be subject to further review once there was greater certainty on future funding from the Scottish Government Spending Review of Autumn 2011.
15. Review of the Programme of the Highland Council ‘Strengthening the Highlands 2011/12’
There had been circulated Report No. HC-3-11 dated 3 May 2011 by the Chief Executive which detailed proposed amendments to ‘Strengthening the Highlands’ commitments and the Council’s Performance Framework to reflect progress to date to put in place a refreshed Corporate Plan for the period 2011/12.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that the changes proposed to the commitments within the Programme had been detailed at Appendix 1 to the report along with the reason for the change. In this regard, changes had been made where an original commitment had been achieved, refreshed to reflect changes at national or local level or duplicated and where commitments timed for 2011 or containing particular targets now needed to be carried forward into 2011/12. Three new commitments were also now proposed to reflect the development of the Arms Length Organisation for Community Leisure and Learning functions, the work to protect adults at risk of harm and the policy of avoiding compulsory redundancies.
In regard to the proposed changes to the performance framework, and following a review of indicators with Council Service Management Teams during March and April 2011, a number of recommendations had been proposed and had been detailed at Appendix 2 to the report along with information on the rationale for change.
It was confirmed that the agreed commitments and performance indicators would be presented in a revised Corporate Plan for 2011/12 which would include revised context statements and a review of progress made with the Programme from 2008/9 to 2010/11.
During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-
- whilst welcoming the successes within the Programme for the Highlands, there was a need to recognise that there were targets which had stretched from 2010 into 2011/12;
- in terms of the future Programme to be presented, it would be helpful to ensure that targets set were realistic in terms of future delivery; and
- in regard to Programme Ref. 1.09 – ECS – ‘We will place all schools at the centre of our communities and will work to secure their long term future by developing community schools with a wide range of activities and services extending beyond the traditional school day’ – this needed to recognise the work being undertaken by Classroom Assistants and, as such, there would be continued close scrutiny by Members on this particular issue to ensure delivery of this commitment.
Decision
The Council AGREED the changes proposed to the ‘Strengthening the Highlands’ commitments and the Council Performance Framework as detailed in Appendices 1 and 2 to the report.
It was also NOTED that an action had been omitted in error from Appendix 2 in regard to the provision of elections support to Community Councils to support Programme Ref 2.20.
The Council further NOTED that a revised Corporate Plan for 2011/12 would be produced to reflect these changes.
16. Audit Scotland – An Overview of Local Government in Scotland 2010
There had been circulated Report No. HC-4-11 dated 3 May 2011 by the Chief Executive which provided a draft response from the Council to the Overview Report of Local Government in Scotland.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that Audit Scotland produced a report each year to provide an overview of Local Government in Scotland with the purpose being to highlight the main issues arising from the annual audits, identify strengths and areas for improvement and provide action points against which Councils were expected to review their position. For 2010, the main issues which had been highlighted were that public finances were under greater pressure than at any time, Councillors faced difficult choices and decisions and fundamental changes to service delivery were needed.
The challenges for 2011 and beyond had been identified as follows – the scale of the financial challenge was substantial especially when combined with demand pressures and reducing income, Councils were taking the financial challenge seriously, service users’ and citizens’ needs were central to effective service planning, partnership working offered substantial potential, approaches to service provision were changing, good performance management remained vital and strong governance and leadership provided the basis for success.
In all, the report had identified 22 action points for Councils to consider along with six key questions for Councillors and these had been listed at Appendix 1 to the report along with a draft assessment of Highland Council’s position against the points raised. In this regard, it was advised that, whilst these points and questions were for the Council to consider, Audit Scotland was monitoring the way in which Councils were responding to the report.
Specifically in relation to Highland Council, it was confirmed that many of the points made had been included in the Best Value 2 audit of the Council in 2010 and were mostly positive findings although they also included some areas for improvement for which actions were planned. Other points raised reflected more recent activity (such as the recent budget consultation and the development of new service delivery models for children’s services, community care services and community learning and leisure services) or were directly related to commitments in the Council’s Programme (such as supporting the third sector and pressing on with improvements to asset management). Consequently, no further new action was proposed to the points which had been raised in the report.
Decision
The Council NOTED the key messages and the main points made in the Overview of Local Government in 2010.
The Council also NOTED the assessment of the Council’s progress against the action points and questions raised as set out in Appendix 1 to the report.
17. Response to Local Government Boundary Commission – Consultation on Councillor Numbers
There had been circulated Report No. HC-5-11 dated 29 April 2011 by the Assistant Chief Executive which detailed the consultation being undertaken by the Local Government Boundary Commission for Scotland on Determining Councillor Numbers.
In this regard, a full copy of the Consultation Paper had been attached as Appendix 1 to the report with the draft response for Highland Council having been attached as Appendix 2 for consideration.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that the Commission was responsible for making recommendations to Scottish Ministers on Local Authority Boundaries and Electoral Arrangements in Scotland in the interests of effective and convenient local government. In this regard, consideration was currently being given to the factors which might be used in the future to determine Councillor numbers for each Council area when the next general review of electoral arrangements was undertaken. The Commission’s assumption was that this general review would take place for each of the current 32 Local Authorities in Scotland between 2013 and 2016. However, before those reviews began, the Commission wished to consult on the general principles with regard to Councillor numbers.
Having considered responses to the consultation, the Commission intended to consult further on possible methodologies for establishing Councillor numbers (probably in 2011/12) before deciding on how precisely to approach each Council review (in 2012/13). It would then aim to complete these reviews in time for any changes to take effect at the 2017 Local Government Elections.
It was also confirmed that the deadline for responses had been late March 2011 but it had been agreed that Highland Council could submit a draft response in mid April on the basis that this draft would be considered by the full Council on 12 May and a final response confirmed thereafter. In addition, the Council would also have a further opportunity to comment on the methodology to be used during 2011/12.
Decision
The Council APPROVED the draft response to the consultation as detailed in the report.
18. Setting Up the Arms Length Company for the Delivery of Community
Learning and Leisure Activity
Declarations of Interest
Mr D Kerr, Mr P Corbett, Mrs B McAllister and Miss J Campbell declared non financial interests in this item as members of Merkinch Community Centre and the Spectrum Centre Board of Management but, having applied the test applied in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that his interest did not preclude his involvement in the discussion and voting.
Mrs P Munro, Mr A Christie and Mr H Wood declared non financial interests in this item as members of the Management Committee of the Charleston Community Complex and Mr A Graham declared a non financial interest as a co-opted member but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion and voting.
Mr J Finnie, Mr F Parr and Mr N Donald declared non financial interests in this item as members of the Management Committee of Hilton Community Centre but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion and voting.
There had been circulated Report No. HC-6-11 dated 4 May 2011 by the Director of Education, Culture and Sport which, following the decision of the Education, Culture and Sport (ECS) Committee on 10 March 2011 to transfer the management and delivery of Community Learning and Leisure (CLL) services to an Arms Length Organisation (ALO) during the financial year 2011/12, presented the actions required to establish the arms length company.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that, in preparing a business case, Members had agreed at the ECS Committee on 11 November 2011 that, if an ALO was to be formed, it would be a company limited by guarantee (with charitable status) with the Council as the sole member and with the option of a wholly owned trading subsidiary. In this regard, and to enable to the arms length company and its trading subsidiary to be established, the report sought approval for the following issues – setting up of the main charitable company and its trading subsidiary and the Articles of Association for both, the selection criteria and the process to recruit the Board of Directors of both companies, the composition of the Board of Directors of the trading subsidiary, the appointment of the four Council Directors for the Board of the main company, the outline training and development programme for the company Directors, the names of the main charitable company and its trading subsidiary, the schedule of Board meetings for 2011 and the appointment of a Company Secretary for both companies.
During discussion, it was suggested that the Council Directors to serve on the Board of the main charitable company should be appointed by interview on the same basis as the Independent Directors and also that it would be advantageous to give some consideration to the geographical basis of such appointments.
In response, it was contended that, as a great deal of time and consideration had already been given to selecting Council Members with appropriate skill sets to be put forward as nominees for the Board and in view of the need to have these appointments in place by the end of May, the process for appointment should be completed immediately in line with the recommendations in the report.
At this point, Mr P Cairns, seconded by Mr B Gormley, MOVED that recommendation (iv) within the report should be amended and recommendation (vi) should be deleted and replaced with “the Member representatives on the Board (of the main charitable company) be chosen by interview on the same basis as the non Member Directors with delegated authority being given to the Members of the Selection Panel to appoint before the end of May 2011”.
As an AMENDMENT, Mrs C Wilson, seconded by Mr J Laing, to go ahead with the recommendations as per the agenda papers.
On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 33 votes and the AMENDMENT received 37 votes and the AMENDMENT was therefore CARRIED, the votes having been cast as follows:-
For the Motion:
Bremner, D, Brown, I, Cairns, P, Cameron, D, Campbell, I, Campbell, J, Christie, A, Clark, B, Fallows, D, Farlow, G, Finnie, J, Flear, D, Fraser, C, Gormley, B, Graham, A, Henderson, A, Hendry, D, Kerr, D, MacDonald, L, MacLean, A, Munro, L, Munro, P, Pedersen, R, Prag, T, Rattray, M, Renwick, I, Ross, G, Rowantree, R, Smith, G, Smith, M, Urquhart, J, Wood, H, Wynd, B
For the Amendment:
Alston, D, Barclay, B, Black, S, Carmichael, H, Coghill, R, Corbett, P, Davidson, M, Donald, N, Durham, R, Fernie, B, Finlayson, M, Ford, J, Foxley, M, Fraser, H, Fraser, L, Gray, J, Greene, R, Hunter, E, Laing, J, Mackay, D, Mackay, D, MacKay, W, MacLeod, K, Marsden, G, McAllister, E, McCallum, I, McGillivray, J, Millar, D, Murphy, B, Park, S, Parr, F, Paterson, M, Rimell, G, Rosie, J, Ross, I, Sinclair, A, Wilson, C
Thereafter, nominations were received in relation to the four Council Directors to serve on the Board of the main charitable company as follows:-
Ms J Douglas (Proposed by Mrs C Wilson and seconded by Mrs M Paterson)
Mr D Millar (Proposed by Mr I Ross and seconded by Mr G Marsden)
Mr D Fallows (Proposed by Mr D Hendry and seconded by Ms M Smith)
Mr T Prag (Proposed by Dr D Alston and seconded by Mr K MacLeod)
Mr P Corbett (Proposed by Mr D Millar and seconded by Mr E Hunter)
On a vote being taken, Ms Douglas received 38 votes, Mr Millar received 47 votes, Mr Fallows received 45 votes, Mr Prag received 24 votes and Mr Corbett received 44 votes.
Therefore, Mr Prag, having the least votes, was removed from the list of candidates, the votes having been cast as follows:-
Votes for Ms Douglas:
Alston, D, Barclay, B, Black, S, Bremner, D, Cameron, D, Campbell, I, Campbell, J, Carmichael, H, Clark, B, Coghill, R, Corbett, P, Davidson, M, Donald, N, Durham, R, Fernie, B, Finlayson, M, Flear, D, Foxley, M, Fraser, H, Fraser, L, Greene, R, Henderson, A, Hunter, E, Laing, J, Mackay, D (W2), MacKay, W, Marsden, G, McCallum, I, McGillivray, J, Millar, D, Munro, L, Park, S, Paterson, M, Rimell, G, Rosie, J, Rowantree, R, Sinclair, A, Wilson, C
Votes for Mr Millar:
Alston, D, Barclay, B, Black, S, Cameron, D, Campbell, I, Campbell, J, Carmichael, H, Clark, B, Coghill, R, Corbett, P, Donald, N, Durham, R, Fernie, B, Finlayson, M, Ford, J, Foxley, M, Fraser, H, Fraser, L, Graham, A, Gray, J, Greene, R, Henderson, A, Hunter, E, Laing, J, Mackay, D (W2), Mackay, D (W5), MacKay, W, MacLean, A, MacLeod, K, Marsden, G, McAllister, E, McCallum, I, McGillivray, J, Millar, D, Munro, L, Murphy, B, Park, S, Parr, F, Prag, T, Rattray, M, Rimell, G, Rosie, J, Ross, I, Rowantree, R, Sinclair, A, Wilson, C, Wood, H
Votes for Mr Fallows:
Alston, D, Black, S, Brown, I, Cairns, P, Cameron, D, Campbell, J, Christie, A, Clark, B, Donald, N, Fallows, D, Farlow, G, Finnie, J, Ford, J, Foxley, M, Fraser, C, Gormley, B, Graham, A, Gray, J, Henderson, A, Hendry, D, Hunter, E, Kerr, D, MacDonald, L, Mackay, D (W5), MacLean, A, MacLeod, K, Marsden, G, McAllister, E, Munro, L, Munro, P, Murphy, B, Parr, F, Pedersen, R, Prag, T, Rattray, M, Renwick, I, Rimell, G, Ross, G, Ross, I, Rowantree, R, Smith, G, Smith, M, Urquhart, J, Wood, H, Wynd, B
Votes for Mr Prag:
Alston, D, Black, S, Cairns, P, Campbell, I, Christie, A, Flear, D, Ford, J, Foxley, M, Graham, A, Gray, J, Mackay, D (W5), MacLean, A, MacLeod, K, Marsden, G, McAllister, E, Millar, D, Munro, L, Murphy, B, Parr, F, Prag, T, Rimell, G, Ross, I, Rowantree, R, Wood, H
Votes for Mr Corbett:
Barclay, B, Bremner, D, Cameron, D, Campbell, I, Campbell, J, Carmichael, H, Clark, B, Coghill, R, Corbett, P, Davidson, M, Donald, N, Durham, R, Fernie, B, Finlayson, M, Flear, D, Ford, J, Fraser, H, Fraser, L, Graham, A, Gray, J, Greene, R, Henderson, A, Hunter, E, Laing, J, Mackay, D (W2), Mackay, D (W5), MacKay, W, MacLean, A, MacLeod, K, McAllister, E, McCallum, I, McGillivray, J, Millar, D, Murphy, B, Park, S, Parr, F, Paterson, M, Prag, T, Rattray, M, Rosie, J, Ross, I, Sinclair, A, Wilson, C, Wood, H
It was therefore AGREED to appoint Ms J Douglas, Mr D Millar, Mr D Fallows and Mr P Corbett as the four Council Directors to serve on the Board of the main charitable company.
Decision
The Council AGREED:-
(i) to set up a company limited by guarantee (with charitable status) with the
Council as the sole member (“the main charitable company”) for the delivery of
Community Learning and Leisure activities with a wholly owned trading
subsidiary;
(ii) the Articles of Association of the main charitable company and the trading
subsidiary as contained in Appendix 1 and Appendix 2;
(iii) the selection criteria for the Board of Directors of both companies;
(iv) the process by which the Board of Directors for each company would be
recruited;
(v) that the Board of the trading subsidiary be comprised of six Directors, four of
whom would also serve on the Board of the main charitable company;
(vi) the appointment of the following four Council Directors to serve on the Board of
the main charitable company – Ms J Douglas, Mr D Millar, Mr D Fallows and Mr
P Corbett;
(vii) the proposed outline training and development programme for Directors;
(viii) the names of ‘High Life Highland’ and ‘High Life Highland (Trading) C.I.C” for
the main charitable company and its trading subsidiary;
(ix) the proposed schedule of meetings for the Board of each company in 2011;
and
(x) that the Assistant Chief Executive of the Highland Council should be appointed
as Company Secretary to both companies.
19. Shared Risk Assessment Assurance and Improvement Plan
There had been circulated Report No HC-7-11 dated 6 April 2011 by the Chief Executive which confirmed that the annual update of the Assurance and Improvement Plan (AIP) 2011/14 for Highland Council had been produced by Audit Scotland on behalf of five external scrutiny bodies and showed no significant risks for the Council which would require additional external scrutiny.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that an Assurance and Improvement Plan (AIP) was produced each year by Audit Scotland for every Council in Scotland. The AIP for Highland Council for 2011/14 had been appended to the report and had identified no significant scrutiny risks for the Council which was the same assessment as the previous year. Some areas of uncertainty had been reported and related mainly to a lack of information to assess the level of scrutiny required for those inspections which had already been scheduled and it was confirmed that this would be clarified in the planned scrutiny activities over the year.
It was also advised that Audit Scotland would continue to monitor the Council’s financial position as part of the annual audit process in terms of achieving the savings planned and the expected level of balances. Progress would also be monitored with the actions arising from the Best Value 2 audit, notably the action to be more consistent and challenging in the use of options appraisal to assess whether best value was being achieved and explained.
In summary, it was confirmed that the AIP had also been presented by Audit Scotland to the Audit and Scrutiny Committee at the meeting on 7 April 2011.
Decision
The Council NOTED that the Assurance and Improvement Plan (AIP) attached at Appendix 1 to the report had highlighted that no significant scrutiny risks or additional scrutiny had been identified for the Council in 2011/12.
It was also NOTED that the AIP did not provide a comprehensive report on the scale of external scrutiny for the Council in 2011/12.
20. Apprenticeships and Youth Employability Initiatives
There had been circulated Joint Report No. HC-8-11 dated 3 May 2011 by the Assistant Chief Executive and the Director of Planning & Development which provided details of the recruitment and training of apprentices, trainees and graduates within the Council and the support of staff through the Trade Unions Learning Partnership. Other initiatives to support youth employability and training had also been outlined.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that the Council was committed to working with employers, further education colleges and other partners to increase the training and apprenticeship opportunities across the Highlands and in this regard there had been a 33% increase in the number of apprentices employed by 2010/11.
Appendix 1 to the report provided information on the wide range of modern apprenticeship frameworks which currently existed and it was confirmed that a number of these frameworks aligned with the skills sets which were required from staff across the Council. In Appendix 2, details were provided on a number of other initiatives in which the Council was involved which aimed to tackle unemployment among young people, including the following - Young People Work Experience Project, Create and Employ, Training Opportunities in Highland for Early Years Workers, Corporate Parenting Initiative, Highland Council & Trade Unions Lifelong Learning Partnership, Activity Agreements and Make the Right Connections – A Skills Transition Programme for Caithness and North Sutherland.
During discussion, Members welcomed the report and the evidence which had been provided in terms of the commitment and achievements of the Council in making the best use of resources to create additional opportunities.
Reference was also made to the need for more effective engagement from Skills Development Scotland, the requirement for increased promotion and delivery of education and training opportunities linked to expansion of renewables and the need for further work to be undertaken on adult basic education and it was hoped that further reports would be submitted in due course to demonstrate progress on these and other related issues in regard to youth employment.
Decision
The Council NOTED the opportunities for apprentices, trainees and graduates within the Highland Council and the range of initiatives to support employability and training as detailed in the report.
21. Amendments to Scheme of Delegation
There had been circulated Report No. HC-9-11 dated 4 May 2011 by the Assistant Chief Executive which outlined amendments which were required to be made to Part IV of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation and Administration to Committees and Sub Committees and to Officers in advance of the annual review in September in order to update delegation arrangements following recent Officer appointments arising from the Council’s Management Review within Services.
Decision
The Council AGREED the proposed amendments to Part IV of the Scheme of Delegation and Administration to Committees and Sub Committees and to Officers as detailed in the report.
22. Inverness Common Good Fund – Winter Payments
Members were advised that, following the decision taken by the Council on 3 March 2011 to refer the request for liquidation of a proportion of the share holdings forming capital reserves held within the 1st and 2nd Inverness Benevolent Funds back to the Inverness City Committee, the Depute Chief Executive & Director of Finance had used his delegated powers to authorise a sale.
This had been reported at the Inverness City Committee meeting held on 18 April 2011 with £15,000 of shares being sold to meet a total deficit on revenue balances of £8,508.75.
Decision
The Council NOTED the position as detailed.
It was also NOTED that the Donations Working Group was to consider this issue and report back to the Inverness City Committee in due course.
23. Board of Caithness Heat and Power Ltd – New Director
Members were advised that, following the resignation of Councillor Katrina MacNab, there was currently a vacancy for a Director on the Board of Caithness Heat and Power Ltd.
Decision
The Council AGREED to appoint Councillor Bill Fernie to the Board of Caithness Heat and Power Ltd.
24. Scrabster Harbour Trust
There had been circulated Report No. HC-10-11 dated 3 May 2011 by the Director of Planning and Development which provided an update on the current position in relation to the request for a loan guarantee from Scrabster Harbour Trust.
During a summary of the report, it was confirmed that the Council, at the meeting on 16 December 2010, had agreed to support in principle a request for a loan guarantee from Scrabster Harbour Trust subject to confirmation of a number of conditions which had been specified at the meeting. Since that time, a number of issues had been discussed with the Trust and they had confirmed that they now recognised that any discount which may have been obtained from their bank borrowing being guaranteed by the Council would have been offset by the requirement to pay a premium for the guarantee. They had therefore decided to follow a more traditional funding route with their bank. However, the Council’s support had undoubtedly helped them to secure the necessary public funds and construction work was expected to commence on site in late summer 2011.
During discussion, and in response to suggestions that there should have been due diligence on this matter from the outset, it was confirmed that a great deal of work had been undertaken by Officers in examining the proposal as previously instructed and in working towards a solution which had been valued and appreciated by the Trust. In addition, a very important part of this solution had been a contribution from the Scottish Government and this was welcomed.
Decision
The Council NOTED Scrabster Harbour Trust’s decision not to request a loan guarantee as detailed in the report.
25. Deeds Executed
Members NOTED that the list of Deeds and other documents which had been executed on behalf of the Council since the meeting held on 3 March 2011 were available in the Members’ Library and on the Council’s Website.
As agreed earlier in the meeting, the Council adjourned at this point (1.00pm) and resumed at 4.00pm.
From 4.00pm - Dr M E M Foxley in the Chair
26. Exclusion of the Public
The Council AGREED to resolve that, under Section 50A(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, the public should be excluded from the meeting during discussion of the following item on the grounds that it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 6 & 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A of the Act.
27. Caithness Heat and Power Ltd
Declarations of Interest
Mrs J Urquhart, Mr J Laing, Mr I Ross and Mr J Gray declared non financial interests in this item on the grounds of being Directors of Caithness Heat and Power but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion.
Mr G Farlow and Mr D Kerr declared financial interests in this item as Council house tenants but, in terms of the dispensation granted by the Standards Commission, remained to participate in the discussion.
There had been circulated to Members only Joint Report No. HC/11/11 dated 10 May 2011 by the Chief Executive, Depute Chief Executive & Director of Finance and Director of Housing & Property which provided an update on the outcome of procurement and the reinstatement option.
Decision
The Council AGREED:-
(i) that the procurement process should be terminated immediately without award
of contract and that the Preferred Bidder should be advised of the Council’s
decision;
(ii) that the Director of Housing & Property should be instructed to plan and
implement the reinstatement of independent heating systems in all of the
existing Council houses with a budget of £1.108m;
(iii) that a detailed report should be prepared on the implications of the obligations
and liabilities of Caithness Heat & Power Ltd to its customers. Subject to this
advice, the Depute Chief Executive & Director of Finance, together with the
Director of Housing & Property, should be instructed to work to meet any
Council liabilities in respect of the existing Housing Association and privately
owned houses;
(iv) that a report should be brought to the Council as soon as possible on the
confirmed budget and programme for such liabilities;
(v) that the Council should provide funding to operate the district heating system
until all of the existing customer houses had been offered the means to produce
heat and hot water independently; and
(vi) that the Chief Executive should ensure that the Council’s position was
communicated formally to all stakeholders and interested parties.
The meeting ended at 5.00pm.