present.brighton-hove.gov.uk€¦ · Democratic Services [email protected] Title: Cabinet Date: 22 September 2011 Time: 4.00pm Venue Council Chamber, Hove Town

Democratic Services [email protected]

Title: Cabinet

Date: 22 September 2011

Time: 4.00pm

Venue Council Chamber, Hove Town Hall

Members: Councillors: Randall (Chair)

Bowden, Davey, Duncan, Jarrett, Kennedy, J Kitcat, Shanks, Wakefield and West

Contact: Tanya Davies Acting Democratic Services Manager 01273 291227 [email protected]

The Town Hall has facilities for wheelchair users, including lifts and toilets

T

An Induction loop operates to enhance sound for anyone wearing a hearing aid or using a transmitter and infra red hearing aids are available for use during the meeting. If you require any further information or assistance, please contact the receptionist on arrival.

FIRE / EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE

If the fire alarm sounds continuously, or if you are instructed to do so, you must leave the building by the nearest available exit. You will be directed to the nearest exit by council staff. It is vital that you follow their instructions:

• You should proceed calmly; do not run and do not use the lifts;

• Do not stop to collect personal belongings;

• Once you are outside, please do not wait immediately next to the building, but move some distance away and await further instructions; and

• Do not re-enter the building until told that it is safe to do so.

Democratic Services: Meeting Layout

Members in Attendance

Press Public Seating

Chief Executive

Councillor Randall

Monitoring Officer

Democratic Services Officer

Leader of the Labour &

Co-operative Group

Leader of the Conservative

Group

Speaker

O F F I C E R S

O F F I C E R S

O F F I C E R S

O F F I C E R S

Councillor Bowden

Councillor Kitcat

Councillor West

Councillor Kennedy

Councillor Wakefield

Councillor Davey

Councillor Shanks

Councillor Jarrett

Councillor Duncan

Strategic Director, Place

Strategic Director, Resources

Director of Finance

Strategic Director, People

Strategic Director,

Communities

CABINET

AGENDA

Part One Page

56. PROCEDURAL BUSINESS

(a) Declarations of Interest by all Members present of any personal interests in matters on the agenda, the nature of any interest and whether the Members regard the interest as prejudicial under the terms of the Code of Conduct.

(b) Exclusion of Press and Public - To consider whether, in view of the

nature of the business to be transacted, or the nature of the proceedings, the press and public should be excluded from the meeting when any of the following items are under consideration.

NOTE: Any item appearing in Part 2 of the Agenda states in its heading either that it is confidential or the category under which the information disclosed in the report is exempt from disclosure and therefore not available to the public.

A list and description of the categories of exempt information is available for public inspection at Brighton and Hove Town Halls.

57. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 1 - 16

Minutes of the Meeting held on 14 July 2011 (copy attached).

58. MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING, 1 SEPTEMBER 2011 17 - 20

Minutes of the Special Meeting held on 1 September 2011 (copy attached).

59. CHAIR'S COMMUNICATIONS

60. ITEMS RESERVED FOR DISCUSSION

(a) Items reserved by the Cabinet Members

(b) Items reserved by the Opposition Spokespeople

(c) Items reserved by Members, with the agreement of the Chair.

NOTE: Public Questions, Written Questions from Councillors, Petitions, Deputations, Letters from Councillors and Notices of Motion will be reserved automatically.

61. PETITIONS

No petitions received by date of publication.

CABINET

62. PETITIONS DEBATED AT COUNCIL

(a) Gypsies & Travellers in Brighton & Hove 21 - 36

(i) Report of the Strategic Director, Place: Traveller Strategy Update (copy attached).

(ii) Draft extract from the proceedings of Council on 21 July (copy

attached). (iii) Responsibilities Towards Travelling Communities – Notice of

Motion proposed by Councillor West (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Geoff Raw Tel: 29-7329 Ward Affected: All Wards

63. PUBLIC QUESTIONS

(The closing date for receipt of public questions is 12 noon on 15 September 2011) No public questions received by date of publication.

64. DEPUTATIONS

(The closing date for receipt of deputations is 12 noon on 15 September 2011) No deputations received by date of publication.

65. LETTERS FROM COUNCILLORS

(The closing date for receipt of letters from Councillors is 10.00am on 12 September 2011) No letters have been received.

66. WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILLORS 37 - 38

(The closing date for receipt of written questions from Councillors is 10.00am on 12 September 2011) (copy attached).

67. NOTICES OF MOTION

(a) Legal Aid 39 - 40

Proposed by Councillor MacCafferty (copy attached).

(b) Community Covenant 41 - 42

Proposed by Councillor G Theobald (copy attached).

CABINET

FINANCIAL MATTERS

68. Targeted Budget Management (TBM) 2011/12 Month 4 43 - 74

Report of the Director of Finance (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Jeff Coates Tel: 29-2364 Ward Affected: All Wards

STRATEGIC & POLICY MATTERS

69. Brighton & Hove City Council Corporate Plan 2011-15

Report of the Strategic Director, Resources (copy circulated separately).

Contact Officer: Matthew Wragg Tel: 29-6805 Ward Affected: All Wards

70. Home Energy Efficiency Investment Options - Installation of Solar Panels to council owned homes

75 - 84

Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Martin Reid Tel: 29-3321 Ward Affected: All Wards

71. Equality Impact Assessment 85 - 104

Report of the Strategic Director, Communities (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Mary Evans Tel: 29-1577 Ward Affected: All Wards

72. Revised Local Development Scheme for the Local Development Framework 2011-2014

105 - 136

Report of the Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Lisa Marshall Tel: 29-2612 Ward Affected: All Wards

73. Terms of Reference for the Cross-Party Working Group on the Core Strategy: extract from the proceedings of the Council meeting on 21 July 2011

137 - 140

Draft extract from the proceedings of the Council Meeting on 21 July 2011 (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Mark Wall Tel: 29-1006 Ward Affected: All Wards

74. National Illegal Money Lending Team: Delegation of Powers to Birmingham City Council

141 - 154

Report of the Strategic Director, Communities (copy attached).

Contact Officer: John Peerless Tel: 29-2486 Ward Affected: All Wards

CABINET

75. Open Government Licence 155 - 164

Report of the Strategic Director, Resources (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Paul Colbran Tel: 29-0283 Ward Affected: All Wards

76. Surveillance Policy 165 - 170

Report of the Director of Finance (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Jo Player Tel: 29-4086 Ward Affected: All Wards

77. Consultation on Proposed Merger of West and East Sussex Fire and Rescue Services

171 - 196

(a) Draft extract from the proceedings of the Overview & Scrutiny Commission meeting of 13 September 2011 (copy to follow).

(b) Report of the Strategic Director, Communities to the Overview &

Scrutiny Commission (copy attached for information only).

Contact Officer: David Murray Tel: 29-7329 Ward Affected: All Wards

PROPERTY & REGENERATION MATTERS

78. Investment in City Infrastructure - Car Park Improvements – Phase II 197 - 208

Report of Strategic Director, Place (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Austen Hunter Tel: 29-2245 Ward Affected: Queen's Park; Regency;

St Peter's & North Laine

79. Response to the request for an urgent review of the sale of council land, Whitehawk

Verbal update from the Strategic Director, Communities.

CONTRACTUAL MATTERS

80. Procurement of the Corporate Security Contract 209 - 216

Report of the Strategic Director, Resources (copy attached).

Contact Officer: Angela Dymott Ivan Watts

Tel: 29-1450 Tel: 29-5047

Ward Affected: All Wards

CABINET

Part Two Page

81. PART TWO MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 217 - 218

Part Two Minutes of the Meeting held on 14 July 2011 (copy circulated to Members only).

82. PART TWO ITEMS

To consider whether or not any of the above items and the decisions thereon should remain exempt from disclosure to the press and public.

The City Council actively welcomes members of the public and the press to attend its meetings and holds as many of its meetings as possible in public. Provision is also made on the agendas for public questions to committees and details of how questions can be raised can be found on the website and/or on agendas for the meetings. The closing date for receipt of public questions and deputations for the next meeting is 12 noon on the fifth working day before the meeting. Agendas and minutes are published on the council’s website www.brighton-hove.gov.uk. Agendas are available to view five working days prior to the meeting date. Meeting papers can be provided, on request, in large print, in Braille, on audio tape or on disc, or translated into any other language as requested. WEBCASTING NOTICE This meeting may be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s website. At the start of the meeting the Chairman will confirm if all or part of the meeting is being filmed. You should be aware that the Council is a Data Controller under the Data Protection Act 1988. Data collected during this web cast will be retained in accordance with the Council’s published policy (Guidance for Employees’ on the BHCC website). Therefore by entering the meeting room and using the seats around the meeting tables you are deemed to be consenting to being filmed and to the possible use of those images and sound recordings for the purpose of web casting and/or Member training. If members of the public do not wish to have their image captured they should sit in the public gallery area. If you have any queries regarding this, please contact the Head of Democratic Services or the designated Democratic Services Officer listed on the agenda. For further details and general enquiries about this meeting contact Tanya Davies, (01273 291227, email [email protected]) or email [email protected].

Date of Publication - Wednesday, 14 September 2011

CABINET Agenda Item 57 Brighton & Hove City Council

BRIGHTON & HOVE CITY COUNCIL

CABINET

4.00PM 14 JULY 2011

COUNCIL CHAMBER, HOVE TOWN HALL

MINUTES

Present: Councillors Randall (Chair), Bowden, Davey, Duncan, Jarrett, J Kitcat, Shanks, Wakefield and West Also in attendance: Councillors Peltzer Dunn (Opposition Spokesperson) and Mitchell (Opposition Spokesperson) Other Members present: Councillors Fitch (The Labour Party), Gilbey (The Labour Party), Hawtree (Green Party), MacCafferty (Green Party), Mears, Morgan, A Norman, K Norman, Simson and Wealls (Conservative Party)

PART ONE

26. PROCEDURAL BUSINESS 26a Declarations of Interest 26a.1 Councillors Mitchell and West declared personal and prejudicial interests in Item 48, a

report of the Strategic Director, Resources concerning the business case for Brighton & Hove Estates Conservation Trust, as Councillor Mitchell chaired the Trust and Councillor West was a member.

26a.2 The Chair and Councillor Wakefield declared personal, but non-prejudicial interests in

any Items were the Local Delivery Vehicle (LDV) for housing management was discussed as they were both members of the LDV.

26b Exclusion of Press and Public 26b.1 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the Act’), it was

considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press or public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100I(1) of the Act).

26b.2 RESOLVED – That the press and public be not excluded from the meeting.

1

CABINET 14 JULY 2011

27. MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 27.1 RESOLVED - That the minutes of the meeting held on 9 June 2011 be approved as a

correct record. 28. CHAIR'S COMMUNICATIONS 28.1 The Chair noted that the meeting would be webcast. 28.2 The Chair noted that Pride would take place between 6 and 14 August and wished

members of the LGBT Forum success in representing the council. He also wished attendees of the St James’ Street Party a safe and happy time.

28.3 The Chair advised that he had attended an informal reception of GEMS (the Gay Elderly

Men's society) in recognition of their Queens Award for the services they delivered to the community. Their support for and with older gay men had been recognised nationally and the award was much deserved.

28.4 The Chair reported that Brighton was once again the top city in the country for Civil

Partnership services. 28.5 The Chair advised that 55 staff had been invited to attend a ceremony in recognition of

long service at the council. He welcomed recent suggestions received from staff about innovations that the council might make as an employer and provider and stated that he was keen to capitalise on the talent and ideas that council staff possessed and would be developing a number of the ideas.

28.6 The Chair reported that he had formally opened the Housing Super Centre in the

previous week; the development of the project and its realisation were providing dividends for the city as a whole and particularly for housing services. It was hoped that a learning centre could be provided on the site and its use extended to communities across the city to help the council move towards on targets for reducing inequalities.

29. ITEMS RESERVED FOR DISCUSSION 29.1 RESOLVED – That all the items be reserved for discussion. 30. PETITIONS 30.1 There were none. 31. PUBLIC QUESTIONS 31.1 There were none. 32. DEPUTATIONS 32.1 The Chair reported that one deputation had been received.

2


32.2 The Cabinet considered a deputation presented by Mr Stewart Gover concerning the housing allocations policy and the impact of giving any additional groups priority on the waiting list. He stated that it would be unfair to those on the waiting lists who had waited patiently for improved housing to allow a new priority group to move above them.

32.3 The Chair proposed that a review of the Housing Register Allocations policy be

undertaken by housing and children’s services commissioners with heads of delivery, and that a joint report be brought to the Housing Cabinet Member Meeting (CMM) in October 2011. The aim of the review would be to ensure that the policy was fair, transparent, was applied consistently and properly reflected the council’s duties in relation to care leavers. As part of the review, consultation would be undertaken in accordance with the council’s Community Engagement Framework and would include care leavers and their representative bodies as well as social and supported housing agencies, and other recognised referral bodies. The review would also look at the Joint Protocol in place in relation to care leavers to ensure that it was consistent with the Allocations Policy and best met the needs of Care Leavers and the council’s responsibilities as Corporate Parent. Any proposals that emerged from the review would be brought to the Housing CMM in October with a view to considering any proposals for change on that date. Pending the review, the council would ensure that care leavers being assessed for accommodation would not be disadvantaged by the current allocations policy at the point that they were considered ready for independent housing.

32.4 RESOLVED – That the deputation be noted and a report on the review of the Housing

Register Allocations Policy be brought to the 19 October 2011 Housing CMM. 33. LETTERS FROM COUNCILLORS 33.1 There were none. 34. WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILLORS 34.1 The Chair reported that one written question had been received. 34.2 Councillor Fitch had submitted the following question:

“Does Cabinet a) recognise the importance of the Palace Pier to the people of this city and b) will they assure me that every effort will be made to work with any new owner of the pier to ensure that they officially return to the landmark’s original name: Palace Pier?”

34.3 The following response from Councillor Bowden had been circulated:

“The short answer to Cllr Fitch's question is: yes. I am supporting the Argus' campaign to revert to the original name, as is the Leader of

3


the Council, Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas and, judging by press reports, colleagues from all parties.”

34.4 Councillor Fitch did not have a supplementary question to ask, but welcomed the cross-

party support for the campaign to persuade the new owners of the Palace Pier to restore its original name.

35. NOTICES OF MOTION 35.1 There were none. 36. TARGETED BUDGET MANAGEMENT (TBM) 2011/12 MONTH 2 36.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Finance concerning the council’s

revenue and capital forecast outturn position for 2011/12 as at Month 2. 36.2 Councillor J Kitcat explained that the report was the first to reflect the council’s new

structure and contained more detailed information than previous TBM reports. He advised that action plans were in place to tackle the overspend and thanked officers for compiling the report.

36.3 Councillor A Norman highlighted a number of concerns, in particular lost income caused

by delays to car park improvements, the cost of allowing travellers to gain access to 19 Acres after the site had been re-bunded, and the level of spending on union duties.

36.4 In response to questions from Councillor A Norman the following comments were made:

§ The deficit in the Collection Fund was due to a higher than anticipated number of exemptions and discounts, and the matter would be investigated.

§ The overspend on the travellers budget was similar to previous years figures and could not be resolved until permanent sites were identified.

§ Work would be undertaken to consider the gap between union duties and the resources available. A written response containing more detailed information on the total budget sea aside for union matters would be provided.

§ Each department had its own communications budget, therefore savings had not shown up in the central Communications Team budget; future plans included reviewing City News.

§ Consideration of the Investment in City Infrastructure report about car park improvements had been deferred in order to address access issues at the Regency Square car park before work commenced. It was anticipated that a report would be considered in October.

§ The decision to reopen the bund at 19 Acres had been made by officers under delegated powers and it was regrettable that ward councillors had not been informed. The work had been carried out at no cost to the council.

§ A written response would be provided concerning savings lost from the decision to reinstate half a refuse collection round, which would have affected only agency staff.

36.5 Councillor Mitchell noted the overspend position and that it had occurred within a short

period of time. She questioned why the Cabinet was continuing to implement the

4


previous Administration’s budget rather than resisting the spending cuts as promised prior to the local elections.

36.6 In response to questions from Councillor Mitchell the following comments were made:

§ Councillor Kennedy was leading on the discussions about the progress of the Local Delivery Vehicle for housing management and the latest position was currently being reviewed.

§ With regard to phase three of the Value for Money Programme, a voluntary severance programme had been initiated, which would help meet savings targets without the need for redundancies.

§ The council was confident that it would deliver on the school places detailed within the report and achieve the savings identified within Children’s Services.

§ Any decisions about provision of permanent traveller sites would be programmed into the budget.

§ The Director of Finance acknowledged that the reference to ‘in-year issues’ had not been helpful and explained that the overspend was significantly lower than reported at the same time in previous years. Although new issues had arisen, including some uncertainty around Value for Money savings due to longer lead-in times, savings were on track.

36.7 Councillor J Kitcat stated that Value for Money targets were being carefully monitored

along with the risks. He explained that the new Administration had encouraged proposals for in-year savings from all political groups, but few had been received; timing was such that it would not be possible to implement an alternative budget and it was necessary to provide officers with a framework for proceeding with the budget process for 2012-13, which would include participation for opposition Members in the Budget Review Group and Star Chambers.

36.8 The Chair reported that the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government,

Eric Pickles MP, had declined a meeting to discuss the council’s grant settlement and that a meeting with Bob Neill MP, Parliamentary Under Secretary, had been offered.

36.9 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the

report, the Cabinet accepted the following recommendations:

(1) That Cabinet notes the provisional outturn position for the General Fund, which is an overspend of £0.941m.

(2) That Cabinet notes the forecast outturn for the Section 75 Partnerships and

Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for 2011/12. (3) That the Cabinet note the provisional outturn position on the capital programme. (4) That the Cabinet approve the following changes to the capital programme:

i) The new schemes as set out in Appendices 1 & 2. ii) The ICT Fund as shown in Appendix 3.

5


37. BUDGET UPDATE & BUDGET PROCESS REPORT 2012/13 37.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Finance concerning the process for

preparing the 2012/13 budget and the basis and principles on which it would be planned.

37.2 The Chair explained that a broader and more transparent approach to consultation and

engagement in the budget process would be adopted, offering trade unions, the community and voluntary sector and the other political parties the opportunity to have a say in setting the budget priorities.

37.3 Councillor J Kitcat reported that the intention was set Council Tax at 3.5% and that

equalities and sustainability issues would be highlighted during the budget process. 37.4 Councillor A Norman noted the early announcement of the intention to increase Council

Tax and stated that more work on potential savings should have been undertaken before such a decision was made.

37.5 Councillor J Kitcat advised that a figure was required in order to enable financial

modelling to commence, but that the final decision on the level of Council Tax would be taken by the Full Council. He added that the proposed increase was reasonable as it would below the rate of inflation.

37.6 In response to questions from Councillor Mitchell, the Director of Finance made the

following comments:

§ Changes to Council Tax subsidy would begin in 2013-14 and were reflected in the pressure projections, but not within the text of the report.

§ The decision had been taken to account for the incremental drift pressure from Single within services’ allocated budgets. The Single Status Reserve had been considered sufficient and was currently being reviewed.

§ Any changes resulting from the Localism Bill would need to be considered and any costs determined and built in to the budget.



(1) That Cabinet notes the resource and expenditure projections for 2012/13 to 2014/15 set out in table 3, paragraph 3.27.

(2) That Cabinet instruct Directors and relevant Cabinet Members to produce options

for working within a budget allocation over the next 2 years of -5%, -10% and -15% based on their 2011/12 adjusted budget as exemplified in appendix 1.

(3) That Cabinet notes the resource projections for the capital investment programme

as shown in appendix 2. (4) That Cabinet agrees the timetable for budget reports set out in paragraph 3.52.

6


38. TREASURY MANAGEMENT POLICY STATEMENT (INCORPORATING THE ANNUAL INVESTMENT STRATEGY) 2010/11 - END OF YEAR REVIEW

38.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Finance concerning action taken

during the second half of the financial year 2010/2011 on the Treasury Management Policy Statement (TMPS), including the investment strategy.

38.2 Councillor J Kitcat stated that the council had coped well in difficult financial

circumstances and noted the importance of the ethical investment statement. 38.3 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the


(1) That Cabinet endorses the action taken during the second half year to meet the treasury management policy statement and practices (including the annual investment strategy).

(2) That Cabinet notes the maximum indicator for risk agreed at 0.05% has not been

exceeded. (3) That Cabinet notes the authorised limit and operational boundary set by the

Council have not been exceeded. 39. 2008-11 LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT (LAA) 2010/11 AND 2010/11

ORGANISATIONAL HEALTH REPORT 39.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources concerning Local

Area Agreement (LAA) performance information to the end of March 2011, the closing data for the LAA, and information regarding the organisational robustness (‘health’) of some key council operations.

39.2 Councillor Peltzer Dunn noted that data was incomplete in some areas. He welcomed

the move away from Government-dictated targets and advised that questions should be asked about areas of concern in order to understand how to tackle them, such as why the level of staff sickness was high and what number of invoices were paid late due to legitimate queries.

39.3 The Strategic Director, Resources explained that work had been undertaken to reduce

the levels of staff sickness and that it was anticipated that this, along with the imminent Peoples’ Strategy, would result in improvements.

39.4 Councillor Mitchell welcomed continued improvements in reducing the level of bullying in

school and the rate of teenage pregnancies, but noted concerns around alcohol-related hospital admissions and the level of NEETs.

39.5 Councillor J Kitcat advised that the next report would deal with the approach to

performance monitoring and noted that the council had become better at choosing measurable targets.

7


39.6 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet accepted the following recommendations:

(1) That Cabinet notes results against the 2008-11 Local Area Agreement and our

current organisational health. (2) That Cabinet notes that the Government has made changes to the national

performance management framework. This affects the LAA in that performance is no longer monitored centrally and that the Performance Reward Grant previously attached to targets was removed.

(3) That Cabinet notes that this will be the final LAA, since local authorities and

strategic partnerships are no longer required to produce them. (4) That Cabinet notes that a new Performance and Risk Management Framework is

being developed that contains city-wide performance priorities. 40. CITY PERFORMANCE PLAN & BHCC ORGANISATIONAL HEALTH REPORT 40.1 The Cabinet considered a joint report of the Strategic Director, Resources and Strategic

Director, Place concerning an overview of the Performance and Risk Management Framework (PRMF) and presenting the City Performance Plan and the Organisational Health Report.

40.2 Councillor Peltzer Dunn welcomed the more localised approach to performance

monitoring, but questioned whether the number of proposed targets would result in a more streamlined approach. He requested that the report be forwarded to the Full Council for approval, as had been the case with the LAA.

40.3 Councillor J Kitcat explained that targets were not being renegotiated and that, unlike

the LAA, there were no financial incentives involved. He advised that the City Performance Plan was owned by Brighton & Hove Strategic Partnership, not the council, and that final approval rested with them.

40.4 Councillor Mitchell advised the Overview & Scrutiny Commission had considered the

documents thoroughly. 40.5 The Chair stated that he was happy to refer the report to the Full Council, but that the

agreement of the Strategic Partnership would be required. 40.6 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the


(1) That Cabinet notes the new Performance and Risk Management Framework for the council.

(2) That Cabinet endorses the City Performance Plan and recommends it to the Public

Service Board (PSB) for final agreement.

8


(3) That Cabinet approves the Organisational Health Report as being an appropriate suite of indicators to support the Strategic Leadership Board’s management of the organisation.

41. RESPONSE TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY

COMMISSION'S PANEL ON RENEWABLE ENERGY POTENTIAL 41.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place concerning the

executive response to the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Commission’s Panel on Renewable Energy Potential.

41.2 Councillor West thanked the panel and stated that council would be embarking of a

significant programme of work on renewables and working with partners to ensure a citywide approach of this priority area of work.

41.3 The Chair thanked the panel and the scrutiny team for their contributions and invited

chair of the panel Dr Adrian Smith, Senior Lecturer at the University of Sussex, to introduce the panel’s report.

41.4 Dr Smith acknowledged that opportunities for using renewable energy were changing at

a rapid pace and that, while prospects within the city were tremendous, expert knowledge would be needed. He welcomed the flexible response to the panel’s recommendations and advised that defined leadership would be required in order to make legitimate demands of budgets and enable citywide planning. A strategy was urgently required to co-ordinate priorities and make use of central government programmes, as well as a commitment to timescales, and monitoring and learning from outcomes would be key to making progress.

41.5 Councillor Mitchell echoed Dr Smith’s call for leadership and urgent co-ordination of the

priorities and thanked the panel for their time and expertise. 41.6 Councillor West welcomed the comments and advised that an ongoing dialogue would

be maintained as work progressed. 41.7 The Strategic Director, Place explained that significant progress had been made using

the resources available, but that care had to be taken with regards to procurement. Working groups would be set up to drive the work forward and inject the desired pace.

41.8 Councillor Peltzer Dunn noted that the list of priorities lacked specific detail and that the

financial implications were not extensive; he stated that it would be necessary identify the most likely sources of funding.

41.9 The Chair advised that the council must be prepared to take advantage of any upcoming

schemes and tariffs, and that resources would be moved around to enable this. He welcomed the citywide and cross-party support for prioritising this work.



9


(1) That Cabinet approves the responses in Appendix 1 and the timetable, subject to further reports identifying the business cases and funding etc., as set out in paragraph 3.3.1 of the report.

42. WITHDRAWAL OF CORE STRATEGY TO UPDATE AND AMEND 42.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place concerning proposals to

withdraw the Core Strategy from the examination process to allow essential updating and amendments in response to new circumstances relating, in particular, to emerging legislation and housing delivery.

42.2 The Chair explained that redrafting the Core Strategy would enable a more robust city

wide plan to be written, which would guide the future development of the city and be a positive tool for attracting and directing investment, as well as delivering much needed jobs, high quality housing, including affordable housing, and encouraging sustainable forms of development. He advised that withdrawal would also provide an opportunity for full and effective consultation with residents.

42.3 The Chair welcomed Councillor MacCafferty, Chair of the Planning Committee, to the

meeting. 42.4 Councillor MacCafferty thanked officers for their work on the Core Strategy to date and

reported that circumstances had changed significantly since submission of the Strategy in April; these included the need to address the Inspector’s concern with the proposed housing delivery strategy, the publication of the Localism Bill and the comprehensive spending review. He advised that redrafting the Strategy would allow the council to submit a more robust local housing target supported by up to date evidence and update the sustainable buildings policy to raise the standards of sustainable building. Proposed options and amendments would be considered by the Cabinet in October with consultation with residents and stakeholders to follow.

42.5 Councillor Mitchell stated that it made sense to withdraw the Strategy to take account of

recent and forthcoming developments and welcomed the re-introduction of a cross-party working group to consider the Strategy.

42.6 Councillor Peltzer Dunn welcomed the proposal and noted the short timescale laid out in

the report. 42.7 The Chair welcomed the cross-party support for withdrawal of the Strategy. 42.8 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the


(1) That Cabinet recommends to Council that the Secretary of State’s direction to withdraw the submitted Brighton and Hove Core Strategy from the examination process be sought for the reasons set out in Part 3 of the report.

(2) That Cabinet agrees that a Cross Party Working Group be set up in accordance

with the terms of reference in appendix 2.

10


43. GYPSY ROMA TRAVELLER ACTION PLAN 2011/12 43.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Place concerning Gypsy,

Roma and Traveller matters and recommending a review of the current Traveller Strategy.

43.2 The Chair noted that paragraph 5.1 of the report should have stated that the

Environment & Community Safety Overview & Scrutiny Committee would be asked to consider setting up a panel to review the strategy at their meeting in September. He stated that the Cabinet welcomed the involvement of Overview & Scrutiny throughout the revision of the Traveller Strategy and actively seek their support during the process.

43.3 Councillor West advised that the council sought to be firm, but fair and work with the

Police when necessary to support travellers and local communities, and protect the city’s parks and open spaces by urgently seeking to identify a permanent site. He stated that the council would openly challenge hatred and intolerance and was focussing on a constructive and calm approach.

43.4 The Chair highlighted the importance of working with other local authorities and thanked

the Traveller Liaison Team and Police for ongoing support. 43.5 Councillor Peltzer Dunn stated that a balance had to be achieved between the needs of

travellers and the impact on local residents; he welcomed the consultation, but advised that residents wanted to know how short-term tolerated sites were determined and what sites were designated to have higher or lower impact. He added that the timetable for review of the strategy appeared to be overly ambitious.

43.6 In response to a question from Councillor Peltzer Dunn, Councillor Wakefield explained

that ‘locally-based’ travellers were those who remained in the same area for a number of years or had family in the area.

43.7 The Head of Planning Strategy advised that when considering the provision of a

permanent site, it was necessary to take account of the number of locally based travellers, of which there were a number within the city. In response to a question from Councillor Mitchell, he explained that planning consent may be required if structures were to be built on tolerated sites, but that the primary aim was to achieve planning consent for a permanent site once identified.



(1) That Cabinet approves the following measures that form part of an action plan for this year under the current Traveller Strategy:

(a) To commence a review of the 2008 Traveller Strategy to deal with the annual

summer increase in unauthorised encampments (b) To prioritise the provision of a permanent Travellers site

11


(c) To continue to offer appropriate support to assist Gypsy, Roma and Travellers with their welfare needs

(d) To promote cohesion between settled and travelling communities (e) To focus site protection measures on those areas that are the most unsuitable

for toleration (f) To take firm enforcement and eviction action in partnership with the Police (g) A commitment to examine new ways of managing the seasonal summer

increase in Travellers, including consideration of the appropriate use of limited toleration on lower impact sites

(h) To ensure that Gypsy, Roma and Traveller groups, local residents and their

representatives are consulted as part of the development of the refreshed strategy

(i) To encourage and work with neighbouring authorities to play their part in

supporting the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller way of life (2) That Cabinet approves the outline action plan in Appendix 1 based on these

recommendations for 2011-15 and authorises the Strategic Director of Place, Lead Commissioner for Housing and Head of Housing & Social Inclusion to take all steps necessary or incidental to the implementation of the plan.

(3) That Cabinet instructs officers to refer the refreshed Traveller Strategy, once

drafted, to Cabinet for approval. 44. PROVISION OF THE COMMERCIAL PORTFOLIO’S ESTATE MANAGEMENT

CONSULTANCY CONTRACT 44.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources concerning a

review of the method of service provision of the Estate Management consultancy contract for the council’s Commercial portfolio.

44.2 Councillor J Kitcat explained that the council’s commercial portfolio was currently

managed in two parts with separate external consultants managing the Urban and Downland Estates portfolios respectively. He advised that the Cabinet was seeking to bring the estate management of the Downland Estate in-house to enable increased control and allow the council to have greater influence in implementing a revised Downland Initiative policy.

44.3 Councillor West stated that the advent of the South Downs National Park had brought

many new opportunities, including the potential to improve access, increase eco-tourism and provide new employment prospects. By bringing the Downland Estate management in-house the council would be able to achieve closer management of such opportunities.

12


44.4 Councillor Peltzer Dunn requested that the meeting move into confidential session as he wished to request more detailed financial information, which could be commercially sensitive.

44.5 Councillor J Kitcat stated that adequate financial information had been included in the

report and explained that the Cabinet was seeking to agree to tender for management of the Urban portfolio and not to tender for the management of the Downland portfolio; a decision on how to proceed with the structures for management of the Downland portfolio was not included in the report.

44.6 In response to a question from Councillor Peltzer Dunn, Councillor J Kitcat advised that

a seafront surveyor had already been employed, but that the council would need to recruit staff to ensure that it had the necessary expertise available in-house.

44.7 Councillor Mitchell raised concerns about the decision to bring the management of the

Downland portfolio in-house based on the information in the report and the risks posed to the Council; she advised the Cabinet to be mindful of its duty to its tenant farmers. She stated that it was unsafe to make such a decision while the costs remained unclear and that the benefits must be demonstrated to the taxpayer before proceeding.

44.8 Councillor Peltzer Dunn queried the lack of a strategy for the in-house management of

the Downland portfolio and the need for more detailed financial information. 44.9 The Chair stated that the Administration felt it necessary to bring the management of the

Downland portfolio in-house to make the most of the opportunities presented by the South Downs National Park and that he was confident it would be successful. He stated that the necessary financial information was included in the report and that a detailed strategy would be drawn up.

44.10 Councillor J Kitcat explained that closer control of the Downland portfolio was key to the

Administration’s plans to create a biosphere reserve and that it would bring significant opportunities for external funding and benefits for the city. He reiterated that the Cabinet was simply agreeing not to tender for the management of the Downland portfolio and that structures for the in-house management would be considered by the Cabinet at a future meeting.

44.11 In response to comments from Councillor Peltzer Dunn, the Head of Legal & Democratic

Services advised that recommendation 2.2 presented the Cabinet with two options and that Councillor J Kitcat had moved a motion to bring management of the Downland portfolio be in-house. He stated the revised wording of recommendation 2.2, to reflect Councillor J Kitcat’s motion, would be: “That Cabinet agrees to bring in-house to bring the estate management of the Downland Estate as set out in the body of the report” and advised that recommendation 2.3 had become obsolete.

44.12 Councillor J Kitcat noted that a revised version of Appendix 2 had been circulated. 44.13 The Chair put the recommendations, including the revised wording of paragraph 2.2 to

the vote.

13


44.14 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the report, the Cabinet accepted the following recommendations:

(1) That Cabinet authorises:

(a) The retendering of the Estate Management consultancy service for the commercial Urban portfolio, for a 5 year period, with an option for up to a 2 year extension. The timetable and process, are set out in paragraph 3.13 and Appendix 2.

(b) The granting of delegated powers to the Strategic Director, Resources in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Finance and Central Services to, a) award the contract following the recommendations of the evaluation panel and the results of the tendering process and b) approve an extension of up to 2 years to the contract if required dependent on performance.

(c) That the tender specifications be reviewed to ensure a quality service monitored by specific performance indicators with a positive attitude to income generation.

(2) That Cabinet considers the options of continuing to outsource or agrees to

bringing in-house the estate management of the Downland Estate as set out in the body of the report, and agrees on a way forward.

(3) That in the event that Cabinet decides on the outsourcing option for the estate

management of the Downland Estate, Cabinet grants the corresponding authorisations as per 2.1 a), b) and c) above for the retendering of the Estate Management consultancy service for the Downland Estate.

45. RE-TENDERING OF HOME CARE CONTRACTS 45.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Director of Adult Social Care & Health and Lead

Commissioner, People concerning the tender and award of contracts for the provision of Home Care services for three years from April 2012.

45.2 Councillor Mitchell welcomed the purchase of an Electronic Care Monitoring System,

which would ensure that service users were safe in their homes. She also welcomed the Equalities Impact Assessment focussing on the needs of the low-paid predominantly female workforce.

45.3 In response to a question from Councillor Mitchell, the Director of Adult Social Care &

Health confirmed that Trade Union members would be included in the planned consultation.



(1) That Cabinet approves the re-tendering of the Home Care services through an approved procurement process during the financial year 2011-12 for the subsequent three to five years (i.e. contract period April 2012 to March 2015 with an option to extend by up to a further two years).

14


(2) That delegated authority be granted to the Director of Adult Social Care and Health / Lead Commissioner People to approve the award of contracts to the successful bidders following recommendations of the tender evaluation panel and consultation with the Cabinet Member for Adult Social Care and Health.

46. WIDE AREA NETWORK PROCUREMENT 46.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources seeking approval

to procure a new Wide Area Network contract in compliance with EU and UK Public Procurement legal requirements.

46.2 Councillor J Kitcat advised that the proposals would enable increased flexibility and

partnership working. 46.3 In response to a question from Councillor Mitchell regarding opportunities for not-for-

profit organisations, Councillor J Kitcat explained that the procurement would have to follow the OJEU tender process and that bids from all sectors were welcomed, but would have to meet the necessary requirements. He added that the council encouraged open procurement and that bids from not-for profit organisations, social enterprises and other similar organisations were welcomed and, wherever possible, would be considered.



(1) That Cabinet approves the procurement of a new Wide Area Network contract to replace the Data element of the existing Voice and Data contract in August 2013. The period of the contract will be 5 years with an option to extend for a further period of up to 2 years.

(2) That Cabinet authorises the procurement to take place jointly with East Sussex

County Council and potentially other (as yet unidentified) local public sector partners under suitable contractual arrangements.

(3) That Cabinet grants delegated authority to award the new Wide Area Network

contract to the Strategic Director, Resources

15


PART TWO SUMMARY 47. PART TWO MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 47.1 RESOLVED - That the Part Two minutes of the meeting held on 9 June 2011 be

approved as a correct record. 48. BRIGHTON & HOVE ESTATES CONSERVATION TRUST - BUSINESS CASE 48.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources concerning

Brighton & Hove Estates Conservations Trust. 48.2 Councillors West and Mitchell had declared personal and prejudicial interests and left

the meeting during consideration of the report. 48.3 RESOLVED – That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the

report, the Cabinet accepted the recommendations as detailed in the Part Two confidential report.

49. PART TWO ITEMS 49.1 The Cabinet considered whether or not any of the above items should remain exempt

from disclosure to the press and public. 49.2 RESOLVED – That items 47 and 48, contained in Part Two of the agenda, remain

exempt from disclosure to the press and public.

The meeting concluded at 6.36pm

Signed

Chair

Dated this day of

16



CABINET

4.00PM 1 SEPTEMBER 2011

COUNCIL CHAMBER, HOVE TOWN HALL

MINUTES

Present: Councillors Kennedy (Chair), Bowden, Jarrett, J Kitcat, Shanks, Wakefield and West Also in attendance: Councillors G Theobald (Opposition Spokesperson) and Mitchell (Opposition Spokesperson) Other Members present: Councillors Jones, MacCafferty, A Norman, Peltzer Dunn, Summers and Wealls Apologies: Councillors Randall, Davey, Duncan

PART ONE

50. PROCEDURAL BUSINESS 50a Declarations of Interest 50a.1 Councillors Mitchell and West declared personal, but non-prejudicial interests in the

single item before the Cabinet, as they were both members of the Brighton & Hove Estates Conservation Trust and other members of the Trust included an employee of Smiths Gore, the council’s managing agent for the downland estate portfolio.

50b Exclusion of Press and Public 50b.1 In accordance with section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 (‘the Act’), it was

considered whether the press and public should be excluded from the meeting during an item of business on the grounds that it was likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the press or public were present during that item, there would be disclosure to them of confidential information (as defined in section 100A(3) of the Act) or exempt information (as defined in section 100I(1) of the Act).

50b.2 RESOLVED – That the press and public be not excluded from the meeting.

17

CABINET 1 SEPTEMBER 2011

51. CHAIR'S COMMUNICATIONS 51.1 The Chair noted that the meeting would be webcast. 51.2 The Chair explained that the special meeting had been called following the call-in by the

Overview & Scrutiny Commission (OSC) of the Cabinet decision on 14 July 2011 to bring the estate management of the council’s downland estate portfolio in-house. OSC considered the call-in request on 22 July 2011 and decided to refer the decision back to the Cabinet on the basis of insufficient consultation and financial implications.

51.3 The Chair that OSC had raised other issues and that additional information had been

provided to address these matters and was present in the agenda before the Cabinet. 52. PROVISION OF THE COMMERCIAL PORTFOLIO (AGRICULTURAL) ESTATE

MANAGEMENT 52.1 The Cabinet considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources concerning a call-

in by the Overview & Scrutiny Commission of the Cabinet’s decision of 14 July 2011 to bring the estate management of the council’s Downland Estate portfolio in-house.

52.2 Councillor J Kitcat thanked OSC for their thorough consideration of the decision and

noted that all of the issues raised had been responded to in the report before the Cabinet. He stated that the information in the original 14 July report had been sufficient for the Cabinet to come to the decision that was made; specifically, consultation had taken place and the financial implications were explained. He noted that the decision in question concerned the procurement of a contract to manage the downland estate and that a review of the Downland Initiative would be considered at a later date.

52.3 Councillor A Norman explained that she was concerned that neither the original report,

nor the report before the Cabinet contained sufficient information for a decision to bring the service in-house to be made. She noted that none of the tenant farmers questioned were supportive of the move and questioned why such a decision had been taken given the progress made by Smiths Gore and the significant financial and implications, particularly in light on the challenging economic conditions.

52.4 Councillor Peltzer Dunn asked the Cabinet to consider why the tenant farmers felt that

the council would not be able to provide the necessary level of support they required. He stated that the report detailed several areas of concern including the challenge of recruiting a sufficiently experienced surveyor the need for access to highly specialised technical information, both of which were currently provided by Smiths Gore. He stated that report before the Cabinet served to further question the decision made on 14 July and did not provide sufficient information for the Cabinet to affirm their previous decision.

52.5 In response to a question from Councillor Peltzer Dunn, the Director of Finance advised

that some high level costings for the provision of the in-house service had been drafted and were detailed in the report, but that no further details had been prepared.

52.6 Councillor G Theobald stated that the report contained a number of uncertainties; he

noted that bringing the service in-house would cost significantly more and asked what

18


budget the expenditure would come from and what reductions would be made to finance it. He advised the Cabinet to listen to the views of the tenant farmers and questioned how bringing the service in-house would build on the progress achieved by Smiths Gore. He raised concerns about the probability of filling the surveyor position quickly within the budget allocated, the risk and implications of missed rent reviews and the need for access to considerable specialist technical knowledge. He urged the Cabinet to test the market before proceeding with the decision.

52.7 Councillor Mitchell advised that scrutiny of the Cabinet’s original decision had enabled

additional information to be brought to the fore, but that the report before the Cabinet still did not detail any direct consultation with the tenant farmers or clear financial and resource implications. She stated that the report did not demonstrate how the estate management contract for the downland estate was integral to taking the Downland Initiative forward or provide any related costs. She advised the Cabinet to instruct officers to prepare an in-house bid for the contract to enable a proper procurement process to be undertaken.

52.8 In response to a question from Councillor G Theobald concerning TUPE implications,

the Strategic Director, Resources explained that it was likely that one and bit employees would transfer across to the council, but that a TUPE review would not take place until the decision to bring the service in-house had been confirmed.

52.9 In response to questions and comments from opposition councillors, Councillor J Kitcat

gave the following responses: § Smiths Gore had made some progress, but a more direct relationship with tenant

farmers would enable further improvements to be made. § The council had consulted with tenant farmers via Smiths Gore; direct consultation

had not taken place on previous occasions when the contract had been considered. Details of the consultation were not published in the original Cabinet report because Smiths Gore had deemed them to be confidential at that time.

§ There was no intention to make any council staff redundant; it was likely that additional staff would be employed.

§ The Downland Initiative was not the main reason for bringing the service in-house; information had been provided at the request of OSC, but it was not appropriate to present policy ideas when dealing with the procurement issue.

§ The new surveyor would become part of a team and access to external advice would be available if considered necessary.

52.10 Councillor J Kitcat acknowledged that the proposed approach would be challenging, but

that the council’s legal and financial officers were satisfied. The Administration was confident that significant progress could be made by bringing the service in house.

52.11 RESOLVED - That, having considered the information and the reasons set out in the


(1) That Cabinet, in accordance with Part 6, paragraph 16.10 of the Council’s constitution, and having considered the resolution of the Overview and Scrutiny Commission on 22nd July and the additional information provided to OSC and in this paper, confirms its decision of 14 July 2011 in relation to the Downland Estate Management Contract.

19


The meeting concluded at 5.00pm

Signed

Chair

Dated this day of

20

CABINET Agenda Item 62A(i)

Brighton & Hove City Council

Subject: Traveller Strategy Update

Date of Meeting: 22 September 2011

Report of: Strategic Director, Place

Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Environment & Sustainability

Contact Officer: Name: Geoff Raw Tel: 29-7329

E-mail: [email protected]

Key Decision: No

Wards Affected: All

FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 This report considers the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller matters and outlines the

timetable and approach to the review of the current Traveller Strategy.

1.2 The report also considers the petition ‘Gypsies and Travellers in Brighton & Hove’ which has been referred to the Cabinet meeting following the debate at 21 July Council, and the motion ‘Responsibilities Towards Travelling Communities’ which was carried at 21 July Full Council.

1.3 The report recognises the Council’s duty and responsibility to local residents to

ensure they are able to enjoy the city’s parks and open spaces whilst at the same time we are mindful that Gypsies, Roma and Travellers are an often marginalised group with a way of life that the authority seeks to protect. The council takes a firm but fair approach to discourage Gypsy, Roma and Traveller groups from setting up unauthorised encampments in sensitive locations and reduces the costly and disruptive cycle where travellers move from site to site.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS:

2.1 That Cabinet approves the timetable for the review of the Traveller Strategy as

set out in Appendix 1. 2.2 That Cabinet notes the petition and motion in relation to Traveller matters that

have been referred to Cabinet following 21 July Full Council and agrees to consider them as part of the work on the development of the Strategy.

3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION 3.1 At the 14 July Cabinet meeting of Brighton & Hove City Council, a Gypsy, Roma

and Traveller 11/12 action plan was discussed which recommended a review of the current Traveller Strategy, which was approved in 2008.

Cabinet approved the following measures that form part of an action plan for this

year under the current Traveller Strategy:

21

(a) To commence a review of the 2008 Traveller Strategy to deal with the

annual summer increase in unauthorised encampments (b) To prioritise the provision of a permanent Travellers site

(c) To continue to offer appropriate support to assist Gypsy, Roma and

Travellers with their welfare needs

(d) To promote cohesion between settled and travelling communities

(e) To focus site protection measures on those areas that are the most unsuitable for toleration

(f) To take firm enforcement and eviction action in partnership with the Police

(g) A commitment to examine new ways of managing the seasonal summer


(h) To ensure that Gypsy, Roma and Traveller groups, local residents and their

representatives are consulted as part of the development of the refreshed strategy

(i) To encourage and work with neighbouring authorities to play their part in

supporting the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller way of life

3.2 On 21 July 2011, a petition in relation to Gypsies & Travellers in Brighton & Hove was debated by Full Council. The full text of the petition can be found under Item 62A(ii) on the agenda. Full Council resolved to refer the petition to the Cabinet Meeting for consideration.

3.3 At 21 July Full Council, a notice of motion was carried in relation to

‘Responsibilities Towards Travelling Communities’. The full text of the motion can be found under Item 62A(iii) on the agenda.

3.4 Subsequently, a formal request for scrutiny was requested at the 5 September

meeting of the City Council’s Environment & Community Safety Overview & Scrutiny Committee (ECSOSC). Following discussion ECSOSC agreed to establish a cross party 3-Member Scrutiny Panel to be involved in the Cabinet review of the Travellers Strategy, undertaking additional independent work only if necessary.

4. WHO WE DEFINE AS TRAVELLERS

4.1 ‘Travellers’ is a collective term used to describe different groups who have a

nomadic lifestyle or tradition/heritage of nomadism. Romany Travellers, English and Irish Travellers are recognised in law as ethnic groups and are identified as having a shared culture, language and beliefs. Romany Gypsies have been in England for over 600 years and Irish Travellers have a long history of travelling and living in this country.

22

4.2 Gypsy, Roma and Travellers as a group suffer a high level of inequality, particularly around life expectancy, health and education issues, and face discrimination and racial hatred.

4.3 The term ‘Travellers’ also covers some groups not currently recognised as ethnic

groups including ‘New Travellers’ who are non-traditional travellers (most of whom originate from the settled community, although some children have been born into New Traveller communities) and Travelling showpeople.

5. REVIEW OF TRAVELLERS STRATEGY 5.1 The Brighton & Hove Travellers Strategy was approved in 2008 and is currently

under review. It is anticipated that the revised strategy will be presented to Cabinet for approval before the 2012 season starting at Easter. Appendix 1 outlines the timetable for the review and development of the Strategy.

5.2 The review will include consideration of recommendations made by the Council’s

Environment & Community Safety Overview & Scrutiny Committee (ECSOSC) Panel who will be involved in the review.

5.3 The review of the strategy will aim to find the right balance between the settled

and travelling communities. The council has a duty and responsibility to local residents to ensure they are able to enjoy the city’s parks and open spaces. However at the same time it is recognised that Gypsies and Travellers are an often marginalised group that suffer a high level of inequality, particularly around life expectancy, health and education issues. They also worryingly still face discrimination and racial hatred.

5.4 The review of the strategy will also focus upon the following issues:

§ A review of the health, education and support that is provided to assist Gypsy, Roma and Travellers with their welfare needs

§ The promotion of cohesion between settled and travelling communities § The provision of site protection measures which are focused upon those

areas that are the most unsuitable for toleration § A review of enforcement and eviction action in partnership with the Police § A commitment to examine new ways of managing the seasonal summer


§ Work with other local authorities to seek a regional solution to the provision of Traveller sites

§ Work with Friends and Families of Travellers and other organisations to address the problems faced by travelling communities and with residents’ groups, local action teams etc. to address the problems faced by the local residents

5.5 The Council is working in partnership with the Police on a ‘firm but fair’ approach

in response to reports of anti-social behaviour, disorder or crime associated with a small minority of travellers. Examples of recent actions taken in partnership with the Police are: § Development of a Code of Conduct on Unauthorised Encampments that

outlines behaviour which may result in eviction and sets the same standards of behaviour expected of the settled community

23

§ Development of a leaflet to remind people that the anti-social use of motorcycles on public open spaces could result in the vehicle being seized

§ The introduction of daily visits by the Police to unauthorised encampments to reassure both residents and travellers through Operation Monza

5.6 In accordance with the existing strategy, Officers have taken and continue to take

effective action regarding unauthorised encampments action consistent with the legal position and government guidance. This means each case being considered on its merit and appropriate action being taken ranging from immediate eviction to toleration to directing to an authorised site as is appropriate.

5.7 The strategy review will include a review of the provision of site protection

measures, with a focus upon those areas that are the most unsuitable for toleration. Improvements to site protection at some sensitive sites have recently been introduced at Wild Park and Ladies Mile Road Nature Reserve. Further improvements are planned for Withdean Park.

5.8 A key aim of the revised Strategy will be to create a permanent travellers site.

There is a need for this as many travellers live in the city year round. Nationally, there are not enough suitable sites to meet the accommodation needs of Gypsies, Roma and Travellers and the lack of authorised sites has lead to an increase in unauthorised encampments.

5.9 In 2008 a site selection process was undertaken to choose a suitable location for

a permanent traveller site. At that time a site at Sheepcote Valley was identified as the best option, subject to further investigation of contamination issues. That further investigation of the site has discovered very serious levels of contamination, meaning it is not suitable for such a use.

5.10 The current exercise aims to identify a site (or sites):

§ To accommodate 16 permanent traveller pitches § That would be acceptable in planning terms and deliverable § As far as possible has stakeholder buy-in § That could retain DCLG funding for the delivery of the site

5.11 For the purposes of planning it has been important to consider all potential sites

within the wider Brighton and Hove area. Officers have agreed criteria for a site selection process. Selection of any final preferred site will need to take account of any measures to mitigate visual and environmental impacts. A large number of sites are under investigation and no preferred site has yet emerged.

5.12 It is acknowledged that, whilst developing a permanent Travellers site is a key

priority, it will form only one part of a revised Travellers Strategy. It is recognised that some travelling communities come to the city looking for work, and live on a permanent site elsewhere in the Country. In these cases, the aim is to adopt a firm but fair approach to unauthorised encampments whilst also using the Horsdean Transit site more effectively.

5.13 The Council will continue to work with other local authorities to seek a regional

solution to the provision of Traveller sites, and will seek to encourage and influence Government policy in relation to the provision of permanent sites. The council has recently responded to the Government’s consultation on proposed

24

replacement planning guidance for planning for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople.

6. CONSULTATION 6.1 Engagement with Gypsies, Roma and Travellers, partner agencies and support

groups (such as Friends, Families and Travellers), and the settled community is essential to ensure that the Travellers Strategy meets needs in an effective way.

6.2 As part of the development of a new Travellers Strategy, the Council will seek to

enhance existing consultation and dialogue mechanisms with stakeholders, the local settled community and locally based Gypsy, Roma and Travellers. It is hoped that the Environment & Community Safety Overview and Scrutiny Committee will be involved in the strategy development.

6.3 In addition the Council will work proactively with partners and stakeholders to

promote good race relations and community cohesion between Gypsies, Roma, Travellers and the settled community. This will involve the development of initiatives to raise awareness of issues relating to Travellers and address some of the ‘myths’ that still surround the travelling community.

7. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications: 7.1 The Traveller Liaison budget for 2011/12 is £0.310 million. Whilst budget

efficiencies have been planned for, the budget is likely to overspend this financial year (as it has done in previous financial years). Any financial implications associated with implementation and review of the Travellers Strategy will be included in the Council’s budget review and future reports back to Cabinet as per the action plan timetable

Finance Officer Consulted: Susie Allen Date: 09/09/11

Legal Implications 7.2 Legal Services have worked and will continue to work closely with the Travellers’

Liaison Team and other officers regarding unauthorised encampments and the development of the Traveller, Roma and Gypsy strategy. All the actions of the Council so far have been in accordance with Legal Requirements, including the Human Rights Act.

Lawyers Consulted: Abraham Ghebre-Ghiorghis Date: 09/09/11 Equalities Implications: 7.3 Gypsies, Roma and Travellers are an often marginalised group with a way of life

that the authority seeks to protect whilst at the same time considering the needs of local residents. Gypsies, Roma and Travellers as a group suffer a high level of inequality, particularly around life expectancy, health and education issues, and suffer from discrimination and racial hatred.

25

7.4 An Equality Impact Assessment was carried out as part of the development of the existing Traveller Strategy and a fresh assessment will be carried out as part of the upcoming review of the Traveller Strategy.

Sustainability Implications: 7.5 The repeated evictions of travelling groups from the city’s parks, historic and

otherwise important sites only to see them again camp on a similar site is causing distress to travelling groups, local people and the environment. In focussing protection measures on locations most unsuitable for encampments the report seeks to minimise the impact on residents and travellers and also prevent further damage to the city’s important open spaces.

Crime & Disorder Implications: 7.6 Joint work with the Police is strengthening our approach to dealing with anti-

social behaviour, crime and disorder associated with a small number of the travelling community.

Risk & Opportunity Management Implications: 7.7 None in relation to this report. Corporate / Citywide Implications: 7.8 Effective management of unauthorised encampments is essential to support local

residents, the Gypsy, Roma and Traveller community and to protect the city’s open spaces. In addition, an ineffective approach is likely to exacerbate the number of unauthorised encampments with additional associated community tensions and costs.

8. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 8.1 The review of the Travellers Strategy will examine new ways of managing the

seasonal summer increase in Travellers, including consideration of the appropriate use of limited toleration on lower impact sites.

9. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 9.1 The report seeks approval for the timetable for the review of the Travellers

Strategy.

26

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Appendices

1. Strategy review and development timeline.

Documents in Members’ Rooms None

Background Documents

1. Traveller Strategy, Brighton & Hove City Council, 2008

www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/travellers

27

Item 62A(i) Appendix 1

3-31 Oct 2011 Consultation

28 Nov 2011 – 23 Jan 2012 Consultation

Sept 2011

Oct 2011

Nov 2011

Dec 2011

Jan 2012

Feb 2012

Mar 2012

5 Sept 2011 E&CS Overview & Scrutiny

31 Oct 2011 E&CS Overview & Scrutiny

3 Oct 2011 Position Paper Published

28 Nov 2011 Draft Strategy Published

23 Jan 2012 E&CS Overview & Scrutiny

8 Mar 2012 Final Draft Published with Cabinet papers

15 Mar 2012 Cabinet for Approval

Strategy Development Timeline

28

CABINET Agenda Item 62A(ii) Brighton & Hove City Council


COUNCIL

4.30pm 21 JULY 2011

COUNCIL CHAMBER, BRIGHTON TOWN HALL

MINUTES

Present: Councillors , Wells (Deputy Chair), A Norman, Barnett, Bennett, Bowden, Brown, Buckley, Carden, Cobb, Davey, Deane, Duncan, Farrow, Fitch, Follett, Gilbey, Hamilton, Hawtree, Janio, Jarrett, Jones, Kennedy, A Kitcat, J Kitcat, Lepper, Littman, MacCafferty, Marsh, Meadows, Mears, Mitchell, K Norman, Oxley, Peltzer Dunn, Phillips, Pidgeon, Pissaridou, Powell, Randall, Robins, Rufus, Shanks, Simson, Smith, Summers, Sykes, C Theobald, G Theobald, Turton, Wakefield, Wealls and West

PART ONE

7. PETITIONS FOR COUNCIL DEBATE 7(b) Gypsies and Travellers 15(f) Responsibilities Towards Travelling Communities 7.16 The Mayor stated that under the Council’s petition scheme, if a petition contained 1,250

or more signatures, it could be debated by the Full Council and such a request had been made in respect of an e-petition concerning Gypsies and Travellers.

7.17 She also reminded the Council that she intended to take the Notice of Motion listed as

Item 15(f) Responsibilities Towards Travelling Communities on the agenda at this point, so as to enable one debate on the matter. She would however take the various recommendations and amendments separately during the voting on the petition report and the notice of motion.

7.18 The Mayor invited Councillor Simson to present her petition. 7.19 Councillor Simson thanked the Mayor and stated that a total of 2,309 people had signed

the combined paper and e-petition which read as follows:

“We the undersigned petition the council to take immediate and effective action when gypsies and travellers set up unauthorised encampments on parks and open spaces within the city’s boundary. Immediate action should mean requesting Sussex Police to use their powers under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 rather than using the long-winded process of repossession of the land through the courts. We also petition Council to recognise that providing a permanent site in the city will only accommodate a small number of travellers who wish to remain in the city and will not

29

COUNCIL 21 JULY 2011

deal with the problems of the many who have permanent sites elsewhere and come to the city looking for work.”

7.20 Councillor Simson stated that the petition had resulted from the need of residents to

express their views and feel that they were being listened to and to get some clarity on what action could be taken when areas of land were taken over by unauthorised encampments. It had become clear when such encampments occurred the police would not take any action immediately but would rather monitor the situation. She also noted that the travelling community tended not to use the transient site at Horsdean. She believed that the police should be encouraged to use the powers available to them at the earliest point in time and that access to important areas should be prevented.

7.21 The Mayor then invited Councillor Simson to move her amendment to the

recommendation contained in the report. 7.22 Councillor Simson moved the amendment on behalf of the Conservative Group and

stated that the current administration needed to clarify its position in regard to the treatment of gypsies and travellers and unauthorised encampments.

7.23 Councillor Wells seconded the amendment and noted that he had sought the assistance

of the Cabinet Member concerned to deal with an unauthorised encampment, but had been referred to the police instead. He believed the responsibility lay with the Cabinet Member and hoped that he would respond to the matter.

7.24 The Mayor then invited Councillor West to move his notice of motion. 7.25 Councillor West moved the notice of motion on behalf of the Green Group and stated

that he believed there were no more travellers in the city than there had been last year. He accepted that the council had a duty to its residents, but stated that there was also one to gypsies and travellers who were often a marginalised group. He was fully aware of the concerns being raised and had asked for an urgent review of the Travellers’ Strategy and to look at possible sites that could be used for short-term toleration.

7.26 Councillor Randall formerly seconded the motion. 7.27 Councillor G. Theobald moved an amendment on behalf of the Conservative Group and

stated that he believed the number of incursions had increased significantly. There had been five separate instances in Patcham and Withdean recently and he believed that if the council requested the police to take action, then the police could use their powers to move the travellers on and refer them to Horsdean.

7.28 Councillor K. Norman seconded the amendment and referred to the recent encampment

at 19 acres, which was an area of environmental interest and had previously been closed off but was opened to enable access for travellers. He also noted that the Leader of the Council had apologised to the Ward Councillors for the failure to inform of the decision to open up the 19 acres site, but he asked for confirmation as to who was consulted on the decision.

7.29 Councillor Mitchell moved an amendment on behalf of the Labour & Co-Operative

Group and stated that whilst she could agree with a lot of the actual motion, she felt that

30


there was a lack of clarity from the Administration which had not been helped by the statements from the MP for Pavilion. The Labour & Co-Operative Group had supported the intention to identify permanent plots for travellers with a local connection and recognised that it was not possible to prevent incursions but there should be a clear and uniform means of dealing with such incursions.

7.30 Councillor Hamilton seconded the amendment and stated that he felt the council needed

to have a co-ordinated approach to dealing with issues and was concerned about recent newspaper articles which he felt had not helped the situation. He hoped that an understanding could be reached with the police so that available powers could be used and any incursions dealt with quickly and calmly.

7.31 Councillor C. Theobald stated that she felt the Administration had not been fair to

residents in their approach to gypsies and travellers and that tolerated sites had been identified. She also queried whether the costs associated with maintaining those sites had been taken into account.

7.32 Councillor Simson stated that there was a need to balance both the needs of residents

and those of the travelling community. However, it had become apparent that the needs of residents were not being taken into account, hence the petition and she hoped that some action could be taken to redress that balance.

7.33 Councillor Mears suggested that residents were confused and did not understand the

position of the Administration and a clear message needed to be given in respect of how the council would respond to any unauthorised encampment.

7.34 Councillor Follett stated that he was concerned about the reaction of certain councillors

and welcomed the comments from Councillor Hamilton in regard to the issues that were being raised. He believed that consideration needed to be given to the needs of the travelling community and that action should be taken appropriately.

7.35 The Mayor congratulated Councillor Follett on his maiden speech. 7.36 Councillor Randall stated that an apology had been made to the Ward Councillors in

respect of the action taken to open up 19 acres, however there was a need to address a difficult set of circumstances. He also believed that previous attempts to resolve the problem of unauthorised encampments had not achieved anything and that there was a need for the council to find a solution. The site at Horsdean offered permanent transient sites but was not liked by the travelling community and therefore a better understanding of why that was the case was required. He also felt that there should be consultation with both residents and the travelling community to see if a more balanced approach could be found.

7.37 Councillor West stated that he could not accept the Conservative Group’s amendment

and noted that the MP for Pavilion had signed an early day motion which had cross-party support. He also recommended the recent Cabinet report to all Members and asked that they support its intentions.

31


7.38 The Mayor noted that an amendment had been moved along with the recommendation to refer the petition to the Cabinet Meeting and stated that she would put them to the vote.

7.39 The Mayor then put the Conservative Group’s amendment to the vote, which was lost. 7.40 The Mayor then put the recommendation as listed in the report to the vote which was

carried. 7.41 RESOLVED: That the petition be referred to the Cabinet Meeting for consideration. 15(f) Responsibilities Towards Travelling Communities 15.1 The Mayor then stated that she would deal with the Notice of Motion, Item 15(f) and

noted that two amendments had been moved. 15.2 The Mayor then put the Conservative Group amendment to the vote, which was carried. 15.3 The Mayor then put the Labour & Co-Operative Group amendment to the vote, which

was lost. 15.4 The Mayor then put the following motion as amended, to the vote:

“This council shares the concerns expressed by residents about the behaviour of some members of the Gypsy and Traveller groups visiting the city, and it condemns anti-social or criminal behaviour by anyone. Where such behaviour is evidenced and substantiated, the Police should take appropriate and proportionate action.

The council should continue to adopt a fair but firm approach to the issues raised by unauthorised Traveller encampments. Working in partnership with the Police, it should use:

• Government guidance introduced by the previous Government and new guidance in “Planning for Traveller Sites”, once adopted

• Brighton and Hove City Council’s Traveller Strategy, which the previous administration introduced in June 2008.

This council recognises Gypsy and Traveller communities’ heritage and the right to continue their nomadic lifestyle, as enshrined in law. It will continue to work with Friends and Families of Travellers and other organisations to address the problems faced by travelling communities and with residents’ groups, local action teams etc. to address the problems faced by the local residents.

It also acknowledges the excellent work of the council’s Traveller Liaison Team and urges all Council Members to behave in a mature, respectful and tolerant way when debating the presence of Gypsy and Traveller groups in the city, in accordance with relevant codes of conduct.

32


Therefore

1. This Council resolves to ask the Cabinet:

(a) To continue the search for another permanent Traveller site in the city taking into account the thorough work of previous Conservative and Labour Administrations;

(b) To continue to work with other local authorities to seek a regional solution to the

provision of Traveller sites; (c) To follow the firm but fair approach adopted by the previous Administration to

the issues raised by unauthorised Traveller encampments, working in partnership with the Police on special initiatives like Operation Monza, where necessary;

(d) To establish a cross-party review of the Traveller Strategy as soon as possible

to relieve the pressures created by unauthorized Traveller encampments; and

(2) The Council welcomes government proposals to ‘raise awareness amongst councillors of their leadership role in relation to traveller site provision; [1].”

[1] ‘Planning for Traveller sites’ Consultation, Department for Communities and Local Government, April 2011.

15.5 The motion was carried.

33

34

CABINET Agenda Item 62A(iii) Brighton & Hove City Council

NOTICE OF MOTION

RESPONSIBILITIES TOWARDS TRAVELLING COMMUNITIES

“This council shares the concerns expressed by residents about the behaviour of some members of the Gypsy and Traveller groups visiting the city, and it condemns anti-social or criminal behaviour by anyone. Where such behaviour is evidenced and substantiated, the Police should take appropriate and proportionate action. The council should continue to adopt a fair but firm approach to the issues raised by unauthorised Traveller encampments. Working in partnership with the Police, it should use:

• Government guidance introduced by the previous Government and new guidance in “Planning for Traveller Sites”, once adopted

• Brighton and Hove City Council’s Traveller Strategy, which the previous administration introduced in June 2008.

This council recognises Gypsy and Traveller communities’ heritage and the right to continue their nomadic lifestyle, as enshrined in law. It will continue to work with Friends and Families of Travellers and other organisations to address the problems faced by travelling communities and with residents’ groups, local action teams etc. to address the problems faced by the local residents. It also acknowledges the excellent work of the council’s Traveller Liaison Team and urges all Council Members to behave in a mature, respectful and tolerant way when debating the presence of Gypsy and Traveller groups in the city, in accordance with relevant codes of conduct. Therefore 1. This Council resolves to ask the Cabinet:

(a) To continue the search for another permanent Traveller site in the city taking into account the thorough work of previous Conservative and Labour Administrations;

(b) To continue to work with other local authorities to seek a regional solution to

the provision of Traveller sites;

(c) To follow the firm but fair approach adopted by the previous Administration to the issues raised by unauthorised Traveller encampments, working in partnership with the Police on special initiatives like Operation Monza, where necessary;

35

(d) To establish a cross-party review of the Traveller Strategy as soon as possible to relieve the pressures created by unauthorized Traveller encampments; and

(2) The Council welcomes government proposals to ‘raise awareness amongst

councillors of their leadership role in relation to traveller site provision; [1].” [1] ‘Planning for Traveller sites’ Consultation, Department for Communities and Local Government, April 2011.

36

CABINET Agenda Item 66


WRITTEN QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILLORS The following questions have been received from Councillors and will be taken as read along with the written answer to be circulated the meeting. The Councillor asking the question may then ask one relevant supplementary question which shall be put and answered without discussion. (a) Councillor Hamilton

“Local authorities have a duty of care to attain a satisfactory level of fire safety in communal buildings, such as blocks of flats. The code of practice was produced in 2005 supported by the DTI. Towards the end of 2010 a well known national paint provider was asked by the city council to provide painting specifications that would upgrade all walls and ceilings in communal areas and fire escapes to Class “O” fire rating which provides 30 minutes of fire resistance. To date no fire resistant paint has been purchased from this supplier even though communal areas have been painted. A local resident has informed me that the communal areas at Parker Court in the South Portslade ward have been painted with an acrylic non fire resistant paint. Please can you tell me if that is correct?”

37

38

CABINET Agenda Item 67A Brighton & Hove City Council

NOTICE OF MOTION

LEGAL AID

“This council notes with deep concern the Coalition Government’s plans to cut the national legal aid budget by £350 million depriving many Brighton & Hove residents from free legal advice. [1] It is concerned that claimants – including vulnerable residents needing help in cases of medical negligence, divorce, employment and welfare – will no longer be entitled to legal aid. These people will be denied justice, as their cases will go unheard without the support of a legal aid lawyer.

Furthermore, the council is concerned the cuts will devastate the inspiring work of the local Citizen’s Advice Bureau and Brighton Housing Trust, among others. If Legal Aid Funding is withdrawn, Brighton and Hove Citizens Advice Bureau estimates it will no longer be able to help 220 local residents needing specialist welfare benefits advice and 381 needing specialist debt advice each year.

The work of the Brighton Housing Trust helps clients in more than 1,400 housing cases each year. The proposed legal aid cuts will mean 900 of those cases will go unsolved. Long-term problem solving will also be lost. The Legal Action Group estimates legal aid in East Sussex will be cut by 64% with a total loss of funding to legal aid providers of £407,266.40. [2] This Council believes legal aid cuts in addition to the Coalition Government cuts to public services are a further blow to those communities in Brighton & Hove already enduring poverty and discrimination. Many older people, unemployed, families and the infirm will be left with little or no access to justice. The erosion of legal aid is likely to exclude even more people from enforcing their rights to fair treatment at work, decent housing and quality education and health. This Council further believes cutting legal aid is a false economy and will bring additional costs to Brighton & Hove City Council as more hardship problems are relinquished by central Government. Indeed, in the opinion of the Law Society “The suggested cuts will cost the government and the tax payer more than they will save and will have a severe impact on society.”[3] Furthermore, in a period of economic depression, these cuts are likely to reduce social cohesion, increase criminality and silence the vulnerable. This Council believes that fundamentally the legal aid cuts abandon the principle established by the Magna Carta of 1215 that everyone is equal in the eyes of the law.

39

This Council resolves to: 1. Express its support for the Sound off for Justice Campaign that has brought

together the Law Society and non-government organisations as varied as the Women’s Institute, Netmums and Shelter to campaign against the changes;

2. Ask the Cabinet to work with solicitors and barristers in the city with clients

receiving legal aid to lobby the Government to reverse the cuts; 3. Ask the Cabinet to work with Citizens Advice Bureau, Brighton Housing Trust and

other NGOs and to lobby Government to axe the cuts; 4. Ask the Cabinet to meet with the bodies affected by the cut in legal aid funding to

examine what proposals can be drawn out to help them navigate the changes; and

5. Request the Chief Executive to write to the city’s three MPs urging them to lobby

for the withdrawal of the government proposals.”

[1] http://www.justice-for-all.org.uk/Government-proposals

[2] http://www.lag.org.uk/

[3] http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/currentissues/sound-off-for-justice.page

40

CABINET Agenda Item 67B Brighton & Hove City Council

NOTICE OF MOTION

AN ARMED FORCES COMMUNITY COVENANT FOR BRIGHTON & HOVE

“This Council recognises the huge contribution made by the UK’s armed forces in protecting the basic and fundamental freedoms which we all take for granted. As a result of their duties they sacrifice civilian freedoms, face constant danger and sometimes suffer serious injury or even death. At the very least, they deserve our respect and support and should face no disadvantage compared to other citizens in the provision of services. This Council warmly welcomes recent initiatives in Brighton & Hove which have sought to recognise the unique contribution of the armed forces such as the ‘Heroes Welcome’ campaign, Armed Forces Day celebrations, the Freedom Parade and the awarding of Freedom of the City to Henry Allingham and Flight Lieutenant Marc Heal. However, this Council recognises that both nationally and locally, the Armed Forces community (including veterans, reservists and their families) face many unique social and economic problems and distinct challenges in accessing services provided by public authorities. Therefore, this Council welcomes the recent commitment by the Government to enshrine the national Armed Forces Covenant into law. This will bring about tangible benefits to the Armed Forces Community including increasing council tax relief to 50%, a pupil premium for service children, a new veterans’ information service, a Veterans’ Card and a Troops to Teachers scheme. This Council wishes to further show its moral and practical support to the local armed forces, veterans, reservists and their families by committing to sign a Community Covenant. The aims of the Community Covenant include:

• Encouraging local communities to support the Armed Forces in their areas and vice versa;

• Promoting understanding and awareness amongst the public of issues affecting the Armed Forces community;

• Recognising and remembering the sacrifices made by the Armed Forces community; and

• Encouraging activities which help to integrate the Armed Forces Community into local life.

Therefore, this Council requests that the Cabinet considers signing a Brighton & Hove Community Covenant and asks for a report to be brought to a future meeting

41

on how such a Covenant could be implemented, with a view to launching the Covenant on Remembrance Day 2011; and such report should be drawn up in close consultation with the Armed Forces Community and their representative organisations in Brighton and Hove.”

42


Subject: Targeted Budget Management (TBM) 2011/12 Month 4


Report of: Director of Finance

Lead Cabinet Member: Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services

Contact Officer: Name: Jeff Coates Tel: 29-2364

Email: [email protected]

Key Decision: Yes Forward Plan No: CAB21119

Ward(s) affected: All

FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 This report sets out the revenue and capital forecast outturn position for 2011/12

as at Month 4. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Cabinet notes the provisional outturn position for the General Fund, which is

an overspend of £1.308m.

2.2 That Cabinet notes the forecast outturn for the Section 75 Partnerships and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for 2011/12.

2.3 That Cabinet notes the provisional outturn position on the capital programme. 2.4 That Cabinet approves the following changes to the capital programme:

i) The new schemes and variations as set out in Appendices 1 & 2. 3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/CHRONOLOGY OF KEY

EVENTS: 3.1 Reporting has been summarised by strategic budget areas with Appendix 1

providing details of the commissioning and delivery units aligned with these areas. This includes information on critical capital schemes (paragraph 3.14) and capital summaries are included for each of the strategic budget areas within Appendix 1.

3.2 The table below shows the provisional outturn forecast for Council controlled

revenue budgets within the General Fund and the outturn on NHS managed S75 Partnership Services. Outturn forecasts provide a projection of the anticipated position as at the end of the current financial year (March 2012).

43

3.3 In depth work has been undertaken on the corporate critical budget forecasts and these are summarised in paragraph 3.5. Other budgets are reviewed on a rolling programme although it is expected that all major variances will have been identified. More detailed explanation of the variances can be found in Appendix 1.

Forecast 2011/12 Forecast Forecast Forecast

Variance Budget Outturn Variance Variance

Month 2 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4

£'000 Budget Area £'000 £'000 £'000 %

227 People 133,240 133,542 302 0.2%

610 Place 51,621 52,152 531 1.0%

152 Communities 12,973 13,124 151 1.2%

877 Resources & Finance 39,678 40,126 448 1.1%

1,866 Sub Total 237,512 238,944 1,432 0.6%

(925) Corporate Budgets (4,227) (4,351) (124) (2.9%)

941 Total Council Controlled Budgets

233,285 234,593 1,308 0.6%

182 NHS Trust managed S75 Services

14,179 14,341 162 1.1%

1,123 Total Overall Position 247,464 248,934 1,470 0.6%

3.4 The Total Council Controlled Budgets line in the above table represents the total

forecast outturn on the Council’s General Fund. The General Fund includes Commissioning Units and Service Delivery Units, which are organised under the strategic areas of People, Place and Communities. These, together with Resource & Finance Units, corporate budgets and Council-managed Section 75 services, make up the Total Council Controlled Budgets. The NHS Trust-managed Section 75 Services line represents those services for which local NHS Trusts act as the Host Provider under Section 75 Agreements. Services are managed by Sussex Partnership Trust and Sussex Community NHS Trust and include health and social care services for Adult Mental Health, Older People Mental Health, Substance Misuse, AIDS/HIV, Intermediate Care and Community Equipment. The financial risk for these services generally lies with the relevant provider Trust.

Corporate Critical Budgets 3.5 Targeted Budget Management (TBM) is based on the principle that effective

financial monitoring of all budgets is important. However, there are a small number of budgets with the potential to have a material impact on the Council’s overall financial position. These are significant budgets where demand or activity is difficult to predict with certainty and where relatively small changes in demand can have significant financial implications for the council’s budget strategy. These therefore undergo more frequent, timely and detailed analysis. Set out below is the forecast outturn position on the corporate critical budgets.

44


Variance Budget Outturn Variance Variance


£'000 Corporate Critical £'000 £'000 £'000 %

(116) Child Agency & In House

21,780 21,733 (47) (0.2%)

209 Sustainable Transport (13,569) (13,489) 80 0.6%

- Housing Benefits 177,624 177,624 - 0.0%

- Community Care 43,827 43,681 (146) (0.3%)

93 Total Council Controlled

229,662 229,549 (113) 0.0%

182 S75 NHS &

Community Care 14,179 14,341 162 1.1%

275 Total Corporate Critical

243,841 243,890 49 0.0%

Value for Money (VfM) Programmes

3.6 Value for money projects are managed as two programme phases as detailed in

previous TBM reports. The programmes contain large, complex projects which are effectively resourced and planned in order to achieve the expected financial and non-financial benefits. However, the projects carry significant risks and therefore each month the TBM report will attempt to quantify the achievement of savings in terms of those savings that have been achieved, those that are anticipated to be achieved (i.e. low risk) and those that remain uncertain (i.e. higher risk).

3.7 The main changes since Month 2 relate to the Management and Administration

project areas, which have a combined efficiency target of £1.875m, the Procurement project and Adult Social Care. Detailed information about these projects is provided in Appendix 1 under the relevant service area.

3.8 A summary of current progress toward VfM savings is shown below and a

detailed breakdown for each project is provided at Appendix 3.

45

Value for Money Programme (All Phases) - 2011/12 Monitoring

Achieved, £2.640m,

33.5%

Anticipated, £3.441m,

43.7%

Uncertain, £1.796m,

22.8%

Total VfM Target = £7.877m

Collection Fund

3.9 The collection fund is a separate account for transactions in relation to national non domestic rates, council tax and precept demands. Any deficit or surplus forecast on the collection fund is distributed between the council, Sussex Police and East Sussex Fire Authority in proportion to the value of the respective precept on the collection fund.

3.10 The council’s share of the projected collection fund deficit position at 31st March

2012 is still about £1.100m. Council tax collection remains above target so far this year so the deficit is entirely as a result of a lower than anticipated liability. This is mainly due to increases in the number of discounts awarded and exemptions for unfurnished properties being higher than anticipated. Inspectors in the Revenues Team are looking at the validity of key exemption categories. In addition to this the projected number of student exemptions is increased, however the information on numbers of students occupying properties for the remainder of the year will only become available after the new college / university year starts this autumn. Members will be kept informed of any revisions to the forecasts as and when new information becomes available

Housing Revenue Account

3.11 The Housing Revenue Account is a separate ring-fenced account which covers

income and expenditure related to the management and operation of the council’s housing stock. Expenditure is generally funded by Council Tenants’ rents. The forecast outturn on the HRA is summarised in the table below. More detail is provided in Appendix 1.

46

Forecast 2011/12 Forecast Forecast Variance

Outturn Budget Outturn Variance Month 4

Month 2 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 %

£'000 Housing Revenue Account £'000 £'000 £'000 (515) Expenditure 50,430 49,795 (635) (1.3%)

(21) Income (50,430) (50,451) (21) 0.0%

(536) Total - (656) (656)

Capital Budget 2011/12

3.12 The table below provides a summary of the capital programme by strategic theme. Within Appendix 1 for each budget area there is a breakdown of the capital programme by Unit.

2011/12 Forecast Forecast Forecast

Budget Outturn Variance Variance

Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4

Budget Area £'000 £'000 £'000 %

People 44,181 44,181 0 0.0%

Place 55,730 55,730 0 0.0%

Communities 5,752 5,752 0 0.0%

Resources & Finance 8,455 8,455 0 0.0%

Total Capital Budget 114,118 114,118 0 0.0%

3.13 Appendix 1 also provides details of proposed new capital schemes which are

included in the budget figures above. Cabinet approval for new capital schemes is required under the Council’s Financial Regulations. Appendix 2 shows an analysis of movements in the capital budget including new schemes, re-profiled schemes (carry forwards) to the 2012/13 programme and ‘slippage’.

3.14 Certain capital schemes have the potential to have significant revenue budget

implications if they are not delivered according to timetable. Progress on these more critical schemes is reported regularly through the TBM reports. These schemes are shown in the table below and as at Month 4 no variances have been identified. More detail on these schemes is provided in Appendix 1 under the relevant budget area.

47

Budget Area Scheme

Budget (£'000) Description

People New Primary School Places

11,272 Delivery critical to keep pace with anticipated increased demand for primary school places.

Place Vehicle Replacement

1,204 Forms part of the VFM programme. Delivery is critical to enable planned revenue savings from improved fleet management.

Resources Accommodation Strategy

2,847 Forms part of the Workstyles VFM programme. Delivery is critical to enable planned vacation of Priory House.

Resources Solar Panel Implementation

2,600 Solar panels need to be installed before 31st March 2012 to maximise Feed in Tariff payments and deliver VFM savings.

Total 17,923

Capital Receipts

3.17 Capital receipts are used to support the capital programme. For 2011/12 the programme is fully funded, however, any changes to the level of receipts during the year will impact on future years’ capital programmes and may impact on the level of future investment for corporate funds such as the Strategic Investment Fund, Asset Management Fund and ICT Fund. Capital receipts (excluding housing) are estimated to be £0.760m for 2011/12 and to date £0.058m has been received.

3.18 The Government receive 75% of the proceeds of ‘right to buy’ sales of council

houses; the remaining 25% is retained by the council and used to fund the capital programme. The estimated useable receipts for ‘right to buy’ sales is £0.638m for this financial year and to date £0.202m has been received.

Comments by the Director of Finance

3.19 There is a significant overspend forecast at Month 4 and clear action is needed to reduce this to ensure that it does not have create additional challenges for the 2012/13 budget setting process. There are a range of measures that can be taken to reduce this overspend and which are likely to have some beneficial impact including continued tight controls over recruitment and over any non-essential spend. However these will require careful monitoring to ensure delivery. There are also some real complexities in tracking some of the corporate and cross-cutting VFM programme savings because of their interrelationships with service financial plans. This continues to be an area of risk and has partly contributed to the increased overspend shown in this report. However that risk was understood at budget setting time and over £3.000m risk provisions included. Most of those have been allocated to offset the pressures included in this report, but there remains a further £0.250m recurrent funding and £0.400m non-recurrent funding which could be used to offset this overspend if required and if there is no further worsening of the position.

48

4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION 4.1 No specific consultation has been undertaken in relation to this report. 5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications: 5.1 The financial implications are covered in the main body of the report Legal Implications: 5.2 Decisions taken in relation to the budget must enable the council to observe its

legal duty to achieve best value by securing continuous improvement in the way in which its functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. The council must also comply with its general fiduciary duties to its Council Tax payers by acting with financial prudence, and bear in mind the reserve powers of the Secretary of State under the Local Government Act 1999 to limit Council Tax & precepts.

Lawyer Consulted: Oliver Dixon Date: 25/08/11

Equalities Implications: 5.3 There are no direct equalities implications arising from this report. Sustainability Implications: 5.4 The report includes progress in meeting energy savings targets set out in the

VFM Phase 3 programme. Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.5 There are no direct crime & disorder implications arising from this report

Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.6 The Council’s revenue budget and Medium Term Financial Strategy contain risk

provisions to accommodate emergency spending, even out cash flow movements and/or meet exceptional items. The council maintains a minimum working balance of £9.000m to mitigate these risks as recommended by the Audit Commission and Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy (CIPFA). The council also maintains other general and earmarked reserves and contingencies to cover specific project or contractual risks and commitments

Public Health Implications: 5.7 There are no direct public health implications arising from this report.

49

Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.8 The Council’s financial position impacts on levels of Council Tax and service

levels and therefore has citywide implications. 6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 The provisional outturn position on Council controlled budgets is an overspend of

£1.308m. Any overspend will need to be funded from general reserves which would then need to be replenished to ensure that the working balance did not remain below £9.000m.

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Budget monitoring is a key element of good financial management, which is

necessary in order for the council to maintain financial stability and operate effectively.

7.2 The capital budget changes are necessary to maintain effective financial

management.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Appendices: 1. Detailed Revenue & Capital Outturn Forecasts

2. Capital Programme Summary

3. VfM Programme Benefits Realisation

Documents in Members’ Rooms None Background Documents None

50

Item 68 Appendix 1

People - Revenue Budget Summary


Outturn Unit Budget Outturn Variance Variance


£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

(473) Commissioner - Children's Youth & Families

17,278 16,961 (317) (1.8%)

0 Commissioner - Schools, Skills & Learning

10,374 10,395 21 0.2%

680 Delivery Unit - Children's & Families

39,518 40,245 727 1.8%

207 Total Children's Services 67,170 67,601 431 0.6%

0 Commissioner - People 2,363 2,271 (92) (3.9%)

20 Delivery Unit - Adults Assessment

48,971 48,802 (169) (0.3%)

0 Delivery Unit - Adults Provider

14,736 14,868 132 0.9%

20 Total Adult Services 66,070 65,941 (129) (0.2%)

227 Total 133,240 133,542 302 0.2%

Explanation of Key Variances (Note: FTE/WTE = Full/Whole Time Equivalent)

Commissioner – Children, Youth & Families

There is an underspend of £0.473m in respect of residential agency placements resulting from lower than budgeted numbers of children placed and average unit costs.

The numbers of children placed in independent foster agency (IFA) placements continues to rise. During 2010/11 there were 164.52 FTE placements representing a 23% increase on the previous year. Currently there are 191.68 projected FTE placements. If nothing else changed this would imply an overspend of £1.045m. However it is anticipated that the outstanding VFM savings target of £0.929m will be achieved over the remainder of the year and this results in a forecast overspend of £0.116m on the IFA budget.

Children’s Services have put in place a Value for Money action plan to address the level of activity and spend in IFA’S. The plan focuses on strengthening preventive services and streamlining social care processes including:

• increasing the use of the Common Assessment Framework to provide universal and tier 2 services to children and families in need

• driving the implementation of the ‘Think Family’ approach for families with the most complex needs

51

Item 68 Appendix 1

• introducing a tiered approach to manage social care referrals from other agencies including the remodelling of social work duty systems and the reinstatement of area and specialist resource panels or similar mechanisms

• improving the commissioning and procurement of expert assessments in care proceedings, strengthening arrangements for early permanence planning and increasing the numbers of in house foster placements able to provide tier 1 care.

The 2011/12 children’s services VFM savings target is £2.019m. Current activity indicates that £1.090m is a projected saving based on current trends, leaving £0.929m to be achieved over the remainder of the financial year.

Commissioner – Schools, Skills & Learning

There is an overspend of £0.078m relating to the planned closure of the Learning Development Centre (LDC) at the end of January and the associated loss of booking income. This is related to planned changes across the service and links to the corporate accommodation strategy and will involve moving more office based staff into the LDC to generate service efficiencies and rationalise property use. This is offset by an underspend of £0.057m in home to school transport. The underspend reflects the continued reduction in the numbers of children being transported as well as the more favourable terms of the recently renegotiated contracts.

Delivery Unit – Children & Families

The overspending services in this delivery unit relate to two main areas: Agency placements for children with disabilities and Area Social Work Teams. Disability placements are projected to overspend by £0.455m; the number of children with disabilities placed has increased over the last 12 months and now there are 16 children in placement compared with a budgeted level of 11 places.

At the present time there is a projected overspend of £0.150m on agency spend on social workers, but this is subject to considerable variance. A successful advertising campaign in the spring/early summer saw the recruitment of a dozen new staff but there is continuing churn of social workers. A particular challenge to the service is other local authorities including London boroughs offering a significant ‘golden hello’, drawing-in staff from across the south east. Frontline teams are, of course, significantly staffed by young people who have greater mobility. We also have four staff on maternity leave within the East Area Team and the resignation of a Practice Manager: we do not have the option of leaving these front line posts uncovered for any length of time.

Commissioner - People

The forecast for Month 4 is an underspend of £0.092m as a result of staff savings identified.

Delivery Unit – Adults Assessment Assessment Services are reporting an underspend of £0.169m, due to a reduction in spend against the Community Care budget. This is largely due to a continuation of the trends experienced over the last couple of years where there is a significant underspend of £0.469m against Older People (79 WTE clients less than budgeted) offset by a pressure on Physical Disabilities of £0.364m (13 WTE clients more than

52

Item 68 Appendix 1

budgeted). The forecast assumes delivery of the outstanding £0.753m against the financial recovery plan. Across mainstream services there is an underspend of £0.023m from staff savings identified. Within this the service has managed to achieve the £0.150m workforce savings identified in the budget strategy.

Delivery Unit – Adults Provider Provider Services are reporting an overspend of £0.132m, due a variety of factors including a reduction in grants, inflationary pressures on income targets (approx. £0.300m) and staffing pressures linked to the workforce review. The pressures on grant reductions have been largely offset by a review of clients supported to cover level of need and ensuring that appropriate funding is in place. A management action plan is also in place to address the remaining pressure including achievement of management and admin efficiency targets, plans to increase income where possible, and on-going review of staffing levels where this can be done without impact on service delivery. People – Capital Budget Summary


Unit Budget Outturn Variance Variance

Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4

£'000 £'000 £'000 %

Delivery Unit - Children's & Families

508 508 0 0.0%

Commissioner – Schools, skills & Learning

42,854 42,854 0 0.0%

Total Children's Services 43,362 43,362 0 0.0%

Delivery Units – Adults Provider

20 20 0 0.0%

Delivery Unit - Adults Assessment

799 799 0 0.0%

Total Adult Services 819 819 0 0.0%

Total Capital - People 44,181 44,181 0 0.0%

Critical Budget – New Primary School places

The budget for this scheme is £11.272m and is contained within the total budget for Commissioner – Schools, Skills & Learning. The numbers of children needing primary school places has increased significantly. Ongoing works are progressing at various schools in order to deliver this anticipated demand for primary school places. There are currently no variations forecast. Within this year’s capital allocation are the following major works:

• Expansion of Goldstone, Queens Park, and Westdene Primary Schools.

• Work at the Connaught building to it up to an acceptable condition.

53

Item 68 Appendix 1

• West Blatchington Primary School has been taking additional pupils for the last few years. There is a need for accommodation on the junior part of the site as these additional children move into year 3

New Capital Schemes Included in the budget above for Delivery Unit – Children’s & Families are the following new capital schemes: Short Breaks for Disabled Children (£0.379m) Brighton & Hove City Council has been given £0.379m of capital grant funding relating to Short Breaks for Disabled Children. This will be used to fund capital equipment or adaptations in the voluntary sector or other parts of the Council. In previous years bids have been invited for this funding which has been used to pay for items such as play/park equipment, mini-buses, a holiday caravan, beach wheelchairs, and swimming pool adaptations. Carlton Hill School Section 106 (£0.306m) The development at American Express included a S106 agreement for Carlton Hill School of £0.306m. Of this, £0.160m will be used in 2011/12 to fund playground development with a further 0.146m being used in 2012/13 to fund a flint wall and shelter. New Capital Schemes (Under £0.050m) New capital schemes under £0.050m included in the People Capital Budget table are schools transport vehicles (£0.027m) and Fairlight Primary School IT Equipment (£0.020m).

54

Item 68 Appendix 1

Place - Revenue Budget Summary

Forecast

2011/12

Forecast Forecast Forecast


Month 2 Month 4

Month 4 Month 4 Month 4

£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

105 Commissioner - City Regulation & Infrastructure

3,524 3,631 107 3.0%

209 Delivery Unit - City Infrastructure

25,198 25,313 115 0.5%

35 Delivery unit - Planning & Public Protection

5,502 5,537 35 0.6%

0 Major Projects 317 296 (21) (6.6%)

349 Total City Regulation & Infrastructure

34,541 34,777 236 0.7%

139 Commissioner - Housing 16,779 16,916 137 0.8%

122 Delivery Unit - Housing & Social Inclusion

301 459 158 52.5%

261 Total Housing 17,080 17,375 295 1.7%

610 Total 51,621 52,152 531 1.0%

Explanation of Key Variances Commissioner - City Regulation & Infrastructure

Sustainable Transport is forecasting an overspend against budget of £0.107m which is an increase of £0.002m compared to month 2. This increase is caused by a shortfall in income from advertising on bus shelters. The remainder of the overspend is unchanged from month 2 and consists of a £0.075m projected shortfall in income from recharging officer time to capital projects and £0.030m in respect of the expected contribution to Shopmobility.

Delivery Unit - City Infrastructure

Parking and Traffic is forecasting an overspend against budget of £0.080m, an improvement of £0.129m since month 2. There has been a reduction in the level of on street pay and display income but a more than corresponding increase in permit income, causing an improvement of £0.030m to the forecast. Additional income of £0.014m is expected overall from the off street car parks There has been a small increase in the number of penalty notices issued, as a result of concentrating enforcement in areas where problems have been experienced, leading to an additional £0.050m. The remaining improvement of £0.035m relates to efficiencies in the parking enforcement contract.

Other Sustainable Transport is now forecasting an overspend of £0.029m in Highways, of which £0.010m relates to a shortfall in income and the remaining £0.019m relates to pressures in expenditure budgets.

City parks is predicting a small overspend of £0.006m relating to Health and Safety requirements at Stanmer Nursery.

55

Item 68 Appendix 1

Delivery unit - Planning & Public Protection

The projected overspend remains at £0.035m and relates to Public Protection budgets. The overspend of £0.035m is due to increased vet and kennelling costs and unachievable taxi licensing income.

Major Projects

There is a projected underspend of £0.021m relating to staffing costs.

Commissioner – Housing

The projected pressure of £0.137m includes an increase in running costs of £0.073m in respect of enlarged and refurbished office space at Palace Place/Old Steine. An increase in rent with effect from April 2011 has been agreed with Property services (and reflected in their income) and higher utility bills are expected.

Delivery Unit – Housing & Social Inclusion

The budget for Travellers is projected to overspend by £0.158m. This overspend is mainly due to costs for security (£0.120m) and for rubbish clearance (£0.042m). These costs are broadly similar to those incurred last year.

Place – Capital Budget Summary

The figures in the table above do not include budgets for the additional work included in the Investment in City Infrastructure – Car Park Improvements Phase 2 report elsewhere on the agenda for this meeting. This is because the main works are not expected to start until 2012/13.



Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 Month 4 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

Commissioner - City Regulation & Infrastructure

4,185 4,185 0 0.0%

Delivery Unit - City Infrastructure

7,225 7,225 0 0.0%

Major Projects 1,142 1,142 0 0.0%

Total City Regulation & Infrastructure

12,552 12,552 0 0.0%

Commissioner - Housing 6,371 6,371 0 0.0%

Delivery Unit - Housing & Social Inclusion (HRA Capital)

36,807 36,807 0 0.0%

Total Housing 43,178 43,178 0 0.0%

Total Capital - Place 55,730 55,730 0 0.0%

56

Item 68 Appendix 1

Critical Budget – Vehicle Replacement The budget for this scheme is £1.204m and is included within the total for the City Infrastructure delivery unit shown above. A review of the waste strategy is taking place and until this has been completed the purchase of 4 refuse collection vehicles is on hold. As a result £0.650m needs to be re-profiled into 2012/13. This has been reflected in the budget above. All other vehicles are being purchased this year in line with the business plan. New Capital Schemes Included in the budget above for Commissioner – City Regulation & Infrastructure are the following new capital schemes: Old Shoreham Road Cycle Facilities (£0.330m) The objectives of the Local Transport Scheme cycle facilities along Old Shoreham Road are to achieve long term and measurable increases in cycling to benefit the community and pupils travelling to schools in the area. This is to be achieved by creating a safe and legible cycle route which encourages people to cycle, thereby increasing the potential for physical activity, reducing obesity in children, reducing congestion and improving local air quality and reducing carbon emissions. In accordance with national policy objectives Brighton & Hove’s Local Transport Plan 3 (LTP3) has considered a significant number of local strategies and plans resulting in a number of key themes and principles, which include the need to:

• Manage – increasing transport choices for everybody and making the transport network more efficient through information and innovation and

technology;

• Improve –providing additional infrastructure to assist travel and improve environments e.g better air quality levels and residents’ health;

• Maintain – repairing roads, pavements and street lights. A consultation for cycle and pedestrian facilities along the full length of Old Shoreham Road was held in 2009. The results were presented to Environment Cabinet on 25th March 2010 with 66% of those responding being in favour of dedicated cycle facility provision along the full length of the Old Shoreham Road. Concerns regarding safety have been addressed through an enhanced design. Approval to consult will be sought at a Special Cabinet Member Meeting on 17th August 2011. The scheme will be funded from the Department for Transport Sustrans links to schools grant and must be fully allocated and accounted for during 2011/12 and as such any delays to the current schedule will be problematic for allocation of spend. Local Sustainable Transport Fund (LSTF) (£1.840m) The LSTF project is the result of a successful bid to central government and will provide £4.030m revenue and capital funding for transport initiatives over the next 4 years. The bid focuses on the Lewes Road Corridor and consists of tried and tested smarter choices measures in combination with infrastructure improvements. This combined

57

Item 68 Appendix 1

package approach is designed to deliver significant economic benefits and reduce carbon outputs in the area. The smarter choices measures include a sustained community led Personalised Travel Planning project with residents in the area as well as travel planning with the Universities, local schools and employers. The targeted infrastructure measures will include upgrades to public transport infrastructure, cycling improvements, traffic signal upgrades, pedestrian improvements, and improved links to the newly formed South Downs National Park. The figures below show the amount we have been successful in receiving for capital projects.

2011/12 £’000

2012/13 £’000

2013/14 £’000

Total £’000

250 830 760 1,840

Included in the budget above for Delivery Unit – City Infrastructure are the following new capital schemes: Controlled Parking Schemes (£0.060m) Following extensive public consultation, the majority of residents who voted wished to make changes or become an addition to existing schemes. This includes a change in Area C from Monday-Saturday restrictions to 7 days a week restrictions, and the addition of Tivoli Crescent to Area A. The benefits are that the parking in these areas will now be better controlled in accordance with the majority vote from the local community and in line with council's transport strategy for managing car use within the city. This is a self-financing project. The changes require capital outlay on signing, lining and pay & display machines but these should be recouped from the additional income generated by the changes/addition to existing schemes. This will be funded by unsupported borrowing with the financing costs being charged to the Unit’s revenue budget. Street Lighting Energy and Carbon Reduction Lantern Change Programme The council currently has in excess of 1200 fittings operating on its lighting network using an inefficient 250w bulb, each of which costs the council almost £130 per year in electricity costs. The Council has identified an opportunity to replace 1000 of these with a more efficient and modern light fitting using a lower 140w bulb to replace the 250w version, enabling a reduction of 40% energy usage and carbon output.

In addition to this there may be the potential to introduce part-night dimming to certain of the locations which would further increase the savings to 50%.

High energy efficiency and a reduction in our carbon footprint are high priorities for all local authorities, with new legislation and standards coming into place to enforce this. This is combined with the issue of rising and unknown future energy costs and concern over the security of existing energy sources – they are finite, and thus this is a very serious area of concern. Energy prices have risen by over 15% this year and it is expected that they will continue to increase over the coming years. The estimated cost is £0.400m to be funded from unsupported borrowing. While this will increase costs initially it is expected that it will be more than offset by the benefits of avoiding assumed higher energy price rises.

58

Item 68 Appendix 1

Variations

The following variations are requested to capital schemes within Delivery Unit – Housing & Social Inclusion.

Window Replacements (£0.100m)

It is requested that £0.100m is transferred from the External Decoration budget to the Window Replacement budget in order to enable window renewal to take place alongside external repairs and decorations in the Tillstone Street and Clarendon Road areas. This will result in better coordination of programmes, a reduction in responsive repairs and improved energy efficiency. There will also be less disruption to tenants. Roofing (£0.506m) It is requested that £506,100 is transferred from the External Decoration and Repairs budget to the roofing budget in order to enable phase 1 of a re-roofing programme to take place alongside external repairs and decorations in the Woodingdean area. This will result in better coordination of programmes, a reduction in responsive repairs and improved energy efficiency. There will also be less disruption to tenants. Door Replacement (£0.100m) It is requested that £0.100m is transferred from the Fire Risk management budget to the door replacement budget in order to enable fire doors to be replaced in the Craven Vale and other areas of the city. This capital investment will help enable the fire risk management strategy to be implemented in an effective way, and the risk reduced.

59

Item 68 Appendix 1

Communities - Revenue Budget Summary




£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

0 Commissioner - Communities & Equalities

3,430 3,430 0 0.0%

0 Community Safety 2,383 2,383 0 0.0%

0 Commissioner - Sports & Leisure

1,401 1,401 0 0.0%

0 Commissioner - Culture 2,014 2,014 0 0.0%

152 Delivery Unit - Tourism & Leisure

3,745 3,896 151 4.0%

152 Total 12,973 13,124 151 1.2%

Explanation of Key Variances Commissioner – Communities & Equalities The forecast for Month 4 is a break-even position. Community Safety The forecast for Month 4 is a break-even position. Commissioner – Sports & Leisure The forecast for Month 4 is a break-even position. Commissioner – Culture The forecast for Month 4 is a break-even position. Delivery Unit – Tourism & Leisure

The forecast overspend of £0.151m relates mainly to two areas where there are risks on income achievement. On Seafront and Sports facilities the projected overspend is £0.025m relating to a predicted shortfall on income from seafront leases. On Venues the projected overspend is £0.121m which includes £0.057m in respect of an ongoing income risk against the Hove Centre, as last year, and £0.054m against the Brighton Centre based on confirmed business. In all areas actual and forecast income is closely reviewed and action is being taken to maximise any business opportunities.

60

Item 68 Appendix 1

Communities - Capital Budget Summary




Commissioner - Sports & Leisure

744 744 0 0.0%

Delivery Unit - Tourism & Leisure

5,008 5,008 0 0.0%

Total Capital - Communities 5,752 5,752 0 0.0%

There are no variances to report at this stage.

61

Item 68 Appendix 1

Resources & Finance - Revenue Budget Summary




£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

0 Delivery Unit - City Services 13,712 13,641 (71) (0.5%)

877 Resources 18,522 19,063 541 2.9%

0 Finance 6,182 6,160 (22) (0.4%)

0 Strategic Leadership Board 1,262 1,262 0 0.0%

877 Total 39,678 40,126 448 1.1%

Explanation of Key Variances Delivery Unit – City Services

The forecast for Month 4 is an underspend of £0.071m.

Resources The net overspend across Resources is £0.541m, of which the main variances are on the following areas: - Human Resources (£0.300m overspend) Human Resources have previously managed year-on-year savings but this has been subsidised by savings made elsewhere and the use of one-off funding sources. In the current financial year there is a projected shortfall of £0.300m which is a reduction of £0.147m compared to month 2. This shortfall is made up of £0.162m unachievable income from recruitment advertising and use of the new HR system by external organisations, and additional costs associated with the running of the new HR/Payroll system. Vacancies are being held to try and manage the projected overspend but staff pressures are being caused as a result of supporting restructuring initiatives across the council. Further action plans to address the current shortfall are being developed Communications (£0.111m overspend) There is a risk of not achieving the full year effect of the £0.250m savings target in respect of the advertising and sponsorship tender. This is a result of delays in the procurement process for complex legal reasons. The procurement process for all except one lot is now underway and it is anticipated that some additional income will be generated before the end of the financial year. Due to uncertainty around this income target a risk provision of £0.250m has been allocated to this budget on a one off basis. The remaining variance of £0.111m is from a mixture of staffing pressures and anticipated shortfall against the advertising income budget for City News. The Communications Value for Money review continues to reduce spend across the organisation, however spend was originally running above the budget available hence creating a challenge in generating net budget reductions. Plans are in place to consolidate budgets for 2011/12 which is expected to generate savings through procurement and the management of demand, £0.050m has been assumed in this forecast and further reductions are being sought. Council-wide expenditure on

62

Item 68 Appendix 1

communications and related activities (e.g. print & design) reduced by approximately £0.650m in 2010/11 compared to the previous financial year, offsetting pressures in the central Communications budget. Property & Design (£0.122m overspend) The rental income forecast pressure has decreased to £0.072m from £0.083m since TBM2 which is encouraging in this difficult economic climate. Property & Design have continued to secure the most advantageous rent settlements both for the short term and long term gain. The other main area of overspending is within the Building Services & Facilities team and relates to a shortfall of income related to vacant spaces within the Ovest House building (£0.022m).The remainder of the pressure concerns electricity costs within Kings House (increases of 15% are expected) and additional security costs. Finance The forecast for Month 4 is an underspend of £0.022m. Strategic Leadership Board The forecast for Month 4 is a break-even position. Resources & Finance - Capital Budget Summary




Delivery Unit - City Services 154 154 0 0.0%

Resources 8,106 8,106 0 0.0%

Finance 195 195 0 0.0%

Total Capital – Resources & Finance

8,455 8,455 0 0.0%

Critical Budget – Accommodation Strategy Significant investment is being made into Bartholomew House and associated subsidiary buildings for the implementation of the first phase of the Workstyles project (called Phase One Smartspace) that will enable the re-location of services and staff from Priory House and the subsequent surrender of the Priory House lease. It will also radically improve the Council’s customer access points in the centre of the City and make considerable efficiency savings for the council. There are currently no variations forecast. Critical Budget – Solar Panel Implementation Brighton & Hove City Council is planning to install solar photovoltaic (solar PV) roof mounted systems suitable for Feed In Tariff (FIT) payments onto a range of its properties The works being carried out are being timed to try and take advantage of the Feed In Tariff payments at their current rate, which will be available until the 31st March

63

Item 68 Appendix 1

2012. Each set of panels will generate green electricity for each of the sites they are installed upon, the overall effect of which will be a reduction the carbon footprint for the Council. Additional benefits will include a reduction in Carbon Reduction Commitment payments due to the reduced carbon emissions that the solar panels will contribute to. There are currently no variations forecast. Variations There are two variations under £50,000 within Delivery Unit – City Services. These are in respect of budget increases required for the New Coroners Court (£0.025m) and the City Mortuary (£0.020m). These will be funded by unsupported borrowing which will be charged to the Unit’s revenue budget.

64

Item 68 Appendix 1

Corporate Budgets - Revenue Budget Summary




£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

100 Bulk Insurance Premia 3,009 3,109 100 3.3%

(400) Concessionary Fares 9,660 9,280 (380) (3.9%)

0 Capital Financing Costs 10,427 10,612 185 1.8%

0 Levies & Precepts 166 166 0 0.0%

600 Corporate VFM Projects (3,634) (2113) 1,521 (41.9%)

(1,250) Risk Provisions 4,742 3,192 (1,550) (32.7%)

25 Other Corporate Items (28,597) (28,597) 0 0.0%

(925) Total Revenue - Corporate Budgets

(4,227) (4,351) (124) 2.9%

Explanation of Key Variances Bulk Insurance Premia

There is a forecast overspend of £0.100m. Whilst the volume of claims has not increased, costs have. The most significant increase is in claimant solicitors’ costs and their success fees.

Concessionary Fares

The forecast underspend has decreased by £0.020m to £0.380m. This is as a result of an invoice for previous years’ costs. The remaining £0.400m is as a result of fixed deal agreements with Brighton & Hove Bus & Coach Company and Stagecoach South, agreed by Cabinet on 9th June, being lower than the budget provision.

Capital Financing Costs

The overspend in capital financing costs of £0.185m is due mainly to a lower than projected recharge to the Housing Revenue Account for interest on borrowings. HRA borrowing in 2010/11 was some £6.000m lower than projected and coupled with short-term interest rates remaining lower than projected at the time of the 2011/12 budget, has resulted in a reduction in the recharge.

Levies & Precepts The forecast for Month 2 is a break-even position. Corporate VFM Projects A number of VFM projects relate to council-wide projects which will deliver savings across many, if not all, service areas. The associated savings target is shown under Corporate Budgets and is awaiting allocation to individual service budgets as and when savings are identified. If all savings are identified and achieved, the Corporate VFM Projects savings target above will reduce to zero by the end of the financial year.

65

Item 68 Appendix 1

• As reported in Month 2, the ‘Process Efficiencies’ of £0.250m expected to generated through the application of Systems Thinking reviews are likely to have variable lead-in times and are therefore uncertain at present. The detailed methodology and priority areas for Systems Thinking reviews are currently being determined.

• The achievement of the Management & Administration savings has been underpinned by a Voluntary Severance Scheme (VSS) which is now drawing to a close. The outcome of the Scheme, in financial terms, indicates that approximately £0.771 million is uncertain at present. This is broadly in line with expectations as the VSS was not expected to achieve 100% of the savings required (£1.875m in 2011/12). As set out in the Revenue Budget report to Full Council in March 2011, some savings will need to come from ‘natural turnover’ over the remainder of the financial year and there will also be a need for further redesign in some service areas to accommodate the impact of staff released through the scheme. The main challenge now is to ensure that where people have been released but the post retained in the service structure, these are filled through redeployments across the council wherever possible.

• Carbon Reduction initiatives will be designed to reduce both energy use and costs. A scheme to pursue the installation of Solar PV panels was agreed at Cabinet in June 2011, however, savings will not be realised until 2012/13. The procurement of Automatic Meter Reader (AMR) devices is also in train and there is potential for 6 months of benefit from this initiative in 2011/12. The longer lead-in times for these initiatives means that the achievement of savings in 2011/12 (£0.250m) is relatively uncertain overall. Additional project management, technical and analytical resource has been prioritised to support this work due to the multiple projects, long lead in times and high levels of complexity involved.

• The Procurement project has identified an increased risk resulting partly from a reduction in overall procurement activity due to spending constraints, which has reduced potential savings opportunities compared with previous years. In addition, longer than expected lead-in times for some categories of procurement are being experienced. This is generally due to the complexity of aggregating procurement categories and packaging these as coherent or attractive tender invitations for the commercial marketplace. As at Month 4, there is uncertainty over £0.250 million of the savings target (£0.789m) and alternative procurement opportunities are currently being sought to improve the likelihood of achieving the full savings target in 2011/12.

Risk Provisions There are one-off risk provisions of £0.800m and it is forecast that these will be fully spent. It is anticipated that £0.192m of this will be needed for the preparatory works for the Prince Regent and Withdean Sports Complex schemes subject to further planning confidence and with the expectation of payback once the schemes are successfully implemented. The remainder will be required for one-off costs associated with Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) compliance following OFSTED inspection, costs associated with compliance with Microsoft licence requirements following an audit process, and additional costs associated with the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC) scheme implementation.

66

Item 68 Appendix 1

There is a permanent risk provision of £0.750m relating to grants ending and this will not be required in the current financial year. It is therefore being released to support the overall position. There is £1.250m of permanent risk provision, of which £0.500m is being released to support the overall position. Of the remainder, £0.500m is being used on a one-off basis to offset the shortfall in the Advertising and Sponsorship contract income target and the VfM Phase 3 Stretch target (0.250m). There remains a further £0.250m available to reduce the overspend further or offset further increases in the forecast if needed. In addition, there is £0.400m of one-off risk provision for children’s and adults services which is currently being retained corporately. An underspend of £0.300m is forecast on the financing costs for the new Historic Records Centre. The budget projections assumed the majority of the capital funding would be needed this financial year and as this expenditure is funded from borrowing the financing costs were set aside in contingency. East Sussex County Council (ESCC) have now provided a cashflow schedule and agreed with Brighton & Hove a payment schedule which gives a far lower capital contribution this year and therefore lower financing costs. The cashflow from ESCC is subject to change but experience shows that expenditure is generally lower than projected.

67

Item 68 Appendix 1

NHS Trust Managed S75 Budgets - Revenue Budget Summary



Month 2 Month 4

Month 4 Month 4 Month 4

£'000 £'000 £'000 £'000 %

182 NHS Trust managed S75 Servs

14,179 14,341 162 1.1%

182 Total S75 14,179 14,341 162 1.1%

Explanation of Key Variances (Note WTE = Whole Time Equivalent) NHS Trust Managed S75 Services There is a pressure of £0.376m on the Adult Mental Health Community Care budget, where WTE client numbers are approximately 20 more than budgeted. A financial recovery plan (FRP) has been developed to reduce the pressure, particularly against long-term placement spend, and a project is underway to review high-cost placements. The current forecast assumes delivery of FRP targets of £0.266m between now and the end of the financial year. Savings of £0.190m have already been identified against the mainstream budget from vacancy management and a review of social care input into Access Services. There is a 50/50 risk-share agreement with Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust, which is reflected in the overall pressure of £0.093m reported. Across Sussex Community NHS Trust there is a pressure of £0.069m as a result of staffing pressures identified within Intermediate Care service.

68

Item 68 Appendix 1

Housing Revenue Account - Revenue Budget Summary


Outturn Budget Outturn Variance Variance


£'000 Housing Revenue Account £'000 £'000 £'000 %

(227) Employees 9,157 8,930 (227) -2.5%

(220) Premises – Repair 10,905 10,685 (220) -2.0%

- Premises – Other 3,286 3,309 23 0.7%

(80) Transport & Supplies 2,128 2,048 (80) -3.8%

12 Support Services 2,144 2,126 (18) -0.8%

- Third Party Payments 54 54 - 0.0%

- Revenue contribution to capital

3,778 3,778 - 0.0%

- Capital Financing Costs 4,268 4,155 (113) -2.6%

- Subsidy Payable 14,710 14,710 - 0.0%

(515) Net Expenditure 50,430 49,795 (635) -1.3%

- Dwelling Rents (net) (44,213) (44,213) - 0.0%

50 Other rent (1,240) (1,240) - 0.0%

- Service Charges (3,454) (3,454) - 0.0%

- Supporting People (465) (465) - 0.0% (71) Other recharges & interest (1,058) (1,079) (21) -2.0%

(21) Net Income (50,430) (50,451) (21) 0.0%

(536) Total - (656) (656)

Explanation of Key Variances

The forecast outturn for 2011/12 is an underspend of £0.656m which is an increase of £0.120m since TBM Month 2. Further analysis of the forecast outturn variances are as follows:

• The employees forecast underspend of £0.227m relates to the budget for TUPE costs for Property & Investment staff not being required as the final costs were less than originally forecast and fully paid in last financial year.

• The Premises Repairs forecast outturn is an underspend of £0.220m. This includes:

• A projected saving on the gas servicing and maintenance contract of £0.161m from the rebasing of the open book contract value following the achievement of savings during the last financial year.

• A reduction in the overhead costs for the Repairs Partnership contract of £0.059m resulting from efficiencies in the contract.

69

Item 68 Appendix 1

• Transport & Supplies is forecast to underspend by £0.080m due to a reduction in the contribution to the provision for bad debt resulting from the improvement in the collection of rent which has led to a reduction in the rent arrears total.

• Capital Financing forecast costs have reduced by £0.113m due to reduced forecasts for repayment of debt compared to the original budget.

• There has been a budget adjustment between the Commercial Rent and Rechargeable works budgets of £0.050m to reflect the variances reported for last month. This leaves a balance of £0.021m overachievement of income for Rechargeable works, shown under other Recharges & Interest.

70

Item 68 Appendix 2

SUMMARY CAPITAL OUTTURN POSITION AS AT M

ONTH 4

2011/1

2

2011/1

2

2011/1

2

2011/1

2

2011/1

2

2011/1

2

2011/1

2

Appro

ved

Budget

New

S

chem

es

V

ariations

S

lippage

Revis

ed

Budget

Fore

cast

Outturn

O

vers

pends /

(Unders

pends)

Budget Area

£'0

00

£'0

00

£'0

00

£'0

00

£'0

00

£'0

00

£'0

00

People

4

3,5

95

586

0

0

44,1

81

44,1

81

0

Pla

ce

55,3

40

1,0

40

(650)

0

55,7

30

55,7

30

0

Com

munitie

s

5,7

52

0

0

0

5,7

52

5,7

52

0

Resourc

es &

Fin

ance

8,4

10

0

45

0

8,4

55

8,4

55

0

Tota

l C

ouncil

Budgets

1

13,0

97

1,6

26

(605)

0

114,1

18

114,1

18

0

71

72

Item 68 Appendix 3

Value for Money Programme: Benefits Realisation as at Month 4

Projects Target Achieved Anticipated Uncertain £m £m £m £m

VFM Phase 2 Projects

Adult Social Care 1.801 0.451 1.100 0.250

Children's Services 2.019 1.090 0.929 0.000

ICT 0.218 0.218 0.000 0.000

Procurement 0.789 0.000 0.539 0.250

Fleet Management 0.150 0.000 0.150 0.000

Sustainable Transport 0.115 0.000 0.115 0.000

Outdoor Events 0.060 0.010 0.025 0.025

Workstyles 0.100 0.100 0.000 0.000

Total VFM Phase 2 5.252 1.869 2.858 0.525

VFM Phase 3 Projects Target Achieved Anticipated Uncertain £m £m £m £m

Process Efficiencies 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.250

Management Structures 1.250 0.500 0.183 0.567

Admin & Business Support 0.625 0.271 0.150 0.204

Consolidation of Spend 0.250 0.000 0.250 0.000 Carbon Reduction Initiatives 0.250 0.000 0.000 0.250

Total VFM Phase 3 2.625 0.771 0.583 1.271

Total All VFM Projects 7.877 2.640 3.441 1.796

73

74



Subject: Home Energy Efficiency Investment Options – Installation of Solar Panels to council owned homes



Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Housing

Contact Officer: Name: Martin Reid Tel: 29-3060



Wards Affected: All

FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 One of the key strategic priorities outlined in the City-wide Housing Strategy

2009-14 is to improve housing quality, to make sure that residents are able to live in decent homes suitable to their needs. Our strategic goals include, reducing fuel poverty, minimising CO2 emissions and improving tenants’ homes ensuring they are of high quality and well maintained. This is consistent with our ambitions to mitigate and adapt to climate change.

1.2 The Housing Revenue Account Capital programme for 2011-14 includes home

energy efficiency investment as a housing commissioning investment priority for possible future investment. In order to maintain our current level of performance and meet our strategic priorities we also need to explore alternative funding streams to enable the continued delivery of home energy efficiency programmes in both the private sector and council stock. Previous reports and presentations to Housing Management Consultative Committee and Housing Cabinet Member Meeting have noted the importance of continuing to work with potential partners such as energy companies to explore means of maximising investment to meet our strategic housing goals, including potential opportunities offered by the Government backed Feed in Tariff scheme.

1.3 The Council has the opportunity to install solar PV panels onto its Council-owned

residential properties. This has arisen out of the Government’s Feed-in-Tariff incentive scheme and would:

§ Significantly raise the profile of renewable energy in the city; § Attract a multi-million pound investment and possibly create new business

and employment opportunities; § Create investment into city housing stock; § Reduce the carbon footprint; § Allow some Council tenants to lower their fuel bills; § Create an income stream into the council and subsequently further

investment opportunities.

75

The recommendations in this report need to be agreed now to maximise the benefits that can be achieved from the Feed in Tariff scheme prior to the governments planned reduction of the tariff in April 2012. As part of this commitment Housing Commissioning have been working with tenants, our procured Energy Managing Partner (Climate Energy) and other local authority partners to investigate and maximise home energy efficiency investment options for our tenants and residents from Feed-in Tariffs (FITs).

2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Cabinet approves a capital programme budget up to a maximum of £15.0

million for Solar Photovoltaic Panels on council housing stock to be financed through unsupported borrowing in the Housing Revenue Account, which will only be drawn against subject to the approval of the Strategic Director for Place and the Director of Finance, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Housing to proceed with the scheme.

2.2 That authority be delegated to the Strategic Director for Place, in consultation

with the Cabinet Member for Housing to approve the planning, supply, installation and maintenance of the panels via an approved framework agreement and a call off contract or contracts under an approved framework agreement.

2.3 That Cabinet notes the outcome of the initial options appraisal undertaken by Climate Energy, indicating that there is an outline business case to support delivery of a solar photovoltaic scheme across the council housing stock and to meet strategic housing and other council priorities, including private sector housing renewal, reducing fuel poverty and reducing carbon emissions.

2.4 That Cabinet notes the procurement exercise to establish the Solar Bourne

framework agreement undertaken by Eastbourne Borough Council with involvement from partners in the BEST consortium, and that the costs identified through the above procurement further support an outline business case as indicated by the initial options appraisal work.

3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/CHRONOLOGY OF KEY

EVENTS: Business Case for the installation of Solar Panels on council owned

homes. 3.1 One of the key strategic priorities outlined in the City-wide Housing Strategy

2009-14 is to improve housing quality, to make sure that residents are able to live in decent homes suitable to their needs. Our strategic housing goals include:

§ Goal 4: Making best use of the housing stock § Goal 6: Work with home owners & landlords to maintain and improve the

quality of their housing § Goal 7: Reduce fuel poverty & minimise CO2 § Goal 8: High quality and well maintained council housing, improving tenants

homes to meet the Decent Homes Standard .

76

3.2 The Council has a strong background in delivering home energy efficiency improvements across both the council housing stock and the private sector. Across private sector housing the BEST programme has funded the Brighton & Hove Energy Action Partnership (BHEAP) that has delivered home energy efficiency measures to some of the most vulnerable residents in Private Sector Housing, including: § 1461 loft insulations § 1126 cavity wall insulation § 1537 heating measures § 141 solar water heating systems

Historically across the council housing stock we have invested significantly in insulation & heating. The current SAP Energy Rating of 76.4 puts us in the top quartile of performance in this indicator. In addition: § We are investing £3.5 million in boiler & heating replacements and upgrades,

installing high efficiency condensing boilers § Last year we completed 2 insulated overcladding projects to Wiltshire House

& Somerset Point and a communal solar hot water system at Hazelholt sheltered scheme, partly funded by utility company grant monies

3.3 In April 2010 the Government introduced Feed-in Tariffs (FIT) to accelerate the

implementation of technologies that create on-site renewable electricity. These rates are considered generous and ultimately reward investment in renewable technologies.

3.4 The Government will guarantee the Feed-in-Tariffs (set out in current legislation)

for 25 years. The current, generous, tariff levels are only guaranteed at the present level for the 25 year period if panels are installed and operational by April 2012. Panels installed after that date will still benefit but at a reduced level.

3.5 It should be noted that the government is currently carrying out an early review of

the Feed in Tariff scheme due to the large scale solar installations that weren’t anticipated under the FITs scheme, there is concern this could mean that money meant for people who want to produce their own green electricity has the potential to be directed towards large scale commercial solar projects. The government’s comprehensive FITs review will assess all aspects of the scheme including tariff levels, administration and eligibility of technologies and will be completed by the end of the year, with tariffs remaining unchanged until April 2012 (unless the review reveals a need for greater urgency).

3.6 The proposal can help tackle fuel poverty in the following ways:

§ Reducing residents’ electricity bills as they can use electricity that is being generated by the panels, either free of charge or at a reduced rate

§ Through re-investment of FIT income in other energy efficiency measures § Creating an investment stream for further renewable energy technologies that

in turn may create further investment opportunities i.e. the governments Renewable Heat Incentive (RHI).

3.7 The proposal will help the City to reduce its carbon footprint, through the use of

renewable energy to meet some of the city’s electricity needs. Surplus electricity generated is fed back to the national grid thereby helping to reduce the need for electricity production from fossil fuels.

77

Initial options appraisal by Climate Energy

3.8 Our existing energy efficiency managing partner, Climate Energy, have carried out an extensive options appraisal to identify the potential benefits of a solar PV scheme across the council housing stock. The appraisal has been based on a survey of suitable roof space that has identified approximately 1,600 dwellings as being suitable based on a number of factors including orientation, roof pitch and the risk of ‘overshadowing’.

3.9 The options appraisal has identified that such a solar PV scheme has the

potential to provide lifetime carbon dioxide savings of over 48,000 tonnes. 3.10 There are a number of different ways that a solar PV FIT scheme can be

delivered: fully owned and funded by the council (either within current structures or via a special purpose vehicle); externally owned and funded (sometimes referred to as ‘rent a roof’); or a shared equity approach in partnership with an external investor.

3.11 The options appraisal and the information provided from the procurement

exercise have indicated that the greatest benefits to the city could be achieved through a fully owned and funded model. This model would provide the same benefits in terms of CO2 savings and potential reductions in energy costs to residents but also has the potential to provide the council with an additional income stream from the Feed in Tariff payments.

3.12 In addition to the potential income that can be generated, there are other

significant benefits to the Council of opting for the self-funding route: § There will be complete control over investments § There will be greater opportunity to create local employment opportunities

(including apprenticeships) § There will be an opportunity to recycle money back into the community § The fuel-poor can be assisted § The Council can play an important role in developing the local renewable

energy economy, and support Brighton & Hove businesses § The scheme sets up a platform for other low-carbon technologies and further

opportunities presented by both the Renewable Heat Incentive and the governments ‘Green Deal’

3.13 Market testing by Climate Energy, carried out as part of the options appraisal,

indicated that the capital costs of a fully funded and operated solar PV scheme of this size would be in the region of £15 million.

Solarbourne Framework Agreement

3.14 Subsequent to the initial options appraisal Brighton & Hove have participated in a

procurement exercise, led by Eastbourne Borough Council to establish the Solarbourne framework agreement for the procurement of supply, installation and maintenance of solar PV panels in order to establish actual costs, to inform economies of scale and further consideration of the business case and appropriate funding model.

3.15 The financial modelling carried out to date cannot in itself guarantee capital costs

and potential surplus but provides an indication of the likely range of capital costs

78

and surplus achievable. This information will be used in the planning and implementation of a detailed programme of work including in deciding the number and type of installations that can, and should, be delivered in this financial year and the next. Project management of the programme of works including updating the financial modelling based on actual installations will enable risks to be managed effectively. Sufficient costs have been included in the financial modelling to provide for the project management function.

3.16 Financial information provided through the Solarbourne tender exercise

confirmed that the capital costs of the scheme across all suitable roofs would be in the region of £14-16 million, dependent on the supplier used from the framework. The supplier may be selected through a mini-competition exercise and there is potential for capital costs and therefore potential surplus to improve through this process.

3.17 Brighton and Hove are not committed to accessing the Solarbourne Framework

and have been exploring options for accessing other similar frameworks to ensure that the potential scheme benefits are maximised. Legal and Procurement advice has been taken on existing framework agreements available. Officers continue to evaluate these options to ensure that the benefits are maximised for the council and local residents and will then proceed either through a mini competition with Solarbourne or other approved framework, such as that below.

3.18 The non-housing solar PV implementation programme is progressing, having

received Cabinet approval in June. The list of approximately 40 sites identified for the installations based on specific technical criteria has been reviewed and refined due to Planning and Listed Building application requirements. Existing national and regional procurement frameworks for solar PV installations have been evaluated and the national Pro5 Microgeneration Technologies framework contract has been chosen as the most appropriate procurement route. This framework is readily accessible with 13 providers for the South East region. In order to find a value for money contractor to meet specific needs further specifications for a mini competition under the Framework are being established. Local labour, apprenticeships, suppliers, timing and capacity issues will be addressed through the mini competition process. The works will be undertaken in two lots and with the aim of being in a position to appoint the suppliers in November 2011. With approximately one month mobilisation installations are expected to start on site early next year and be complete by the end of March 2012 to take advantage of the current Feed in Tariff rates. We continue to work closely with colleagues in Property and Design to ensure learning and experience is shared for the benefit of both housing and non-housing opportunities.

4. CONSULTATION 4.1 Consultation has taken place with council tenants through Cabinet Members

Energy Efficiency Working Group. Presentations were given and options discussed at meetings on the 1st November 2010, 10th January, 21 February 2011 & 4th April 2011. Feedback from the group has been generally positive.

4.2 Presentations and discussions have also taken place at Area Panel tenant

participation meetings on the following dates;

79

§ North & East Area Panel – 17th November 2010 § East Area Panel – 22nd November 2010 § West Area Panel – 23rd November 2010 § Central Area Panel – 25th November 2010

Feedback has been positive, with residents keen to understand which buildings may be suitable.

4.3 Presentations have also been delivered to members, tenant reps and others

through previous HMCC meetings, specifically 8th November,13th December 2010 and 13th June 2011.

5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications: 5.1 Financial modelling has taken place using the information provided from the

Solarbourne procurement exercise. The potential net present value (NPV) surplus, based on the assumption that the majority of units will be installed after 1 April 2012 and therefore utilising the post April 2012 Feed in Tariff (FITs) rates, is in the region of £9 million for 1,600 properties. (Note that the NPV surplus is after repayment of borrowing).

5.2 The potential surplus will be dependent on a number of variables including the

original capital outlay, when installations are completed, the performance of the panels and the actual ‘yield’ created. Figures in the financial modelling have been calculated allowing for reasonable and foreseeable contingencies in project delivery and ongoing management.

5.3 Any changes to the FIT rate will be modelled as part of a mini competition/tender

process to ensure that the scheme provides a positive NPV return for the scheme to proceed.

5.4 The Capital funding of the Solar Panel scheme will be met through unsupported

borrowing through the Housing Revenue Account, which will be repaid from the annual surpluses that the scheme provides. Self financing of the Housing Revenue Account will be implemented from 1 April 2012 and the borrowing of £15 million will be within the borrowing ceiling limit that will be introduced as part of self financing.

5.5 The Solar Panel scheme budget will be included in the HRA Capital Programme

budget for the appropriate year and the unsupported borrowing will be built into next years HRA Budget Strategy.

Finance Officer Consulted: Susie Allen Date: 25/08/11

Legal Implications: 5.6 The Councils procurement through any framework agreement must comply with

the Public Contracts Regulations 2006. The Council is entitled to access any suitable framework agreement(s) which have been set up with contractors to provide for the planning, supply, installation and maintenance of Solar PV panels on council housing stock, (including but not limited to the Solarbourne framework

80

once it has been concluded and the Council has signed the access agreement with EBC). Without the delegation of authority recommended in paragraph 2.2, contracts called off from any framework could require separate approval under Contract Standing Orders, depending on the value of the call off contract.

5.7 The statutory framework for the Feed-in Tariff scheme is provided by sections

41-43 of the Energy Act 2008 and associated regulations. 5.8 As the owner and landlord of properties let on secure tenancies, the Council is

empowered to install Solar Photovoltaic Panels. The installation of the panels must be undertaken with due regard to tenants' rights under the Human Rights Act to respect for private and family life and protection of property.

Lawyer Consulted: Isabella Hallsworth Date: 25/08/11

Liz Woodley Date: 31/08/11 Equalities Implications: 5.9 A full Equalities Impact Assessment will be carried out at pre project delivery

stage. At present we do not foresee significant equalities implications. Outcomes of the EIA and subsequent actions will be monitored and managed through the project management stage.

Sustainability Implications: 5.10 The proposals outlined above would bring significant sustainability benefits in

terms of climate change and energy use and promoting sustainable communities.

Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.11 There are no significant crime and disorder implications foreseen. Risk & Opportunity Management Implications: 5.12 Risks and opportunity played a significant part of the Solarbourne procurement

process and the design of the specification for both equipment and installation programme. The ongoing management of risk and opportunity implications will be fully assessed and where necessary mitigated through the project delivery stage.

Corporate / Citywide Implications:

5.13 The proposals support the council priorities:

§ Tackling inequalities § Making Brighton & Hove the most sustainable city in the UK And the corporate priorities; § Protect the environment while growing the economy § Better use of public money § Reduce inequality by increasing opportunity

81

6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 The Council has worked with partners in the current BEST consortium to

establish the Solarbourne framework agreement for the provision of the planning, supply installation and maintenance of solar PV panels in order to establish actual costs and to take advantage of any potential for creating economies of scale. The outcome of this procurement process, led by Eastbourne Borough Council, allows further consideration of the business case and appropriate funding model. The actual costs identified in the framework agreement support the business case developed as part of the initial options appraisal by Climate Energy. Both the framework agreement and the options appraisal indicate that the greatest benefits to the city could be achieved through a fully owned and funded model.

6.2 Solar PV installation companies, together with the backing of private investment

companies, are willing to pay the capital costs to install solar PV panels onto the roofs of homes if, in return, they receive the Feed In Tariff (FIT) incentive over a 25-year period. It may be possible for the Council to generate additional receipts, by some form of “profit share” or roof rental agreement. This would be in addition to an element of free or cheap electricity and the CO2 savings such a scheme would generate. There are potential additional benefits in this option including; no or less capital borrowing required and reduced or shared risk related to delivering the installation and ongoing maintenance and monitoring of solar PV installations. However this model would be unlikely to deliver the same benefits outlined in the report, and the income would be significantly less than that achievable through a fully funded and operated model. The Solarbourne framework agreement includes an option for the ‘rent a roof’ scheme. However only one supplier is on the framework and the information available to us at this stage is not sufficient to calculate what the expected return would be.

6.3 Indications from the initial options appraisal, by Climate Energy, suggest that on

balance a fully owned and operated scheme has the potential to provide significantly greater benefits to the city as a whole and that risks associated with this model can be adequately mitigated through in-house and procured expertise. These initial indications have been backed up through the Solarbourne framework agreement procurement exercise. A fully funded and owned model of delivering a solar PV scheme has the potential to create significant income, generated by the Feed in Tariff payment, to the council over a 25 year period. A fully owned and funded model gives the council greater influence over delivering the benefits outlined in this report.

6.4 The focus of work to date has been on the procurement of the Solarbourne

framework agreement to inform a business case for proceeding with the installation of solar PV on council housing. We are not committed to accessing this framework and have explored options for accessing other frameworks to provide further opportunities and as a contingency if issues arise that prevent the council from maximising potential benefits through the Solarbourne framework agreement. Legal and procurement advice has been taken on other existing framework agreements for supply and install of solar PV which are accessible by the council and meet our needs. Officers continue to assess these options to ensure benefits are maximised for the council and local residents.

82

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Approval is required now to realise the benefits of the Feed in Tariff scheme and

to take advantage of any opportunity this offers the Council to gain investment and energy savings before the Feed in Tariff is reviewed in April 2012.

7.2 Approval is required now to realise the benefits of CO2 reductions and the

provision of free or cheap electricity to tenants who may be living in, or at risk of, fuel poverty.

7.3 To realise and maximise the additional benefits outlined in this report.


Appendices: None Documents in Members’ Rooms None Background Documents None

83

84


Subject: Equality Impact Assessment


Report of: Strategic Director, Communities

Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Communities, Equalities & Public Protection

Contact Officer: Name: Mary Evans Tel: 29-1577


Key Decision: No


FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 The Council’s “Working towards an Equal City”: Equality & Inclusion Policy and

the Single Equality Scheme set out equality priorities and actions from January 2010 until December 2011. A new policy and action plan is under development for approval by Council in January 2012.

1.2 The Equality Act 2010 sets out new legislative requirements in this area including

new requirements on the public sector. 1.3 This report outlines the council’s approach to equality impact assessment as a

key process in tackling discrimination and inequality. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Cabinet agrees the proposed approach to equality impact assessment and

ensure that they are taken into account in all decision making across the Council, including issues related to “cumulative impact” on specific communities


EVENTS: 3. 1 Implementation of the Equality Act 2010

3.1.1 The Equality Act replaces the previous anti-discrimination legislation with a single

Act that simplifies the law, removing inconsistencies and making it easier to understand. It also strengthens the law to help tackle discrimination and inequality, and expands the Duties placed on public bodies.

3.1.2 The Act came into force on October 1 2010. The new public sector Equality Duty

came into force on April 6 2011. The Equality Duty aims to embed equality considerations into the day to day work of all public bodies, and those carrying out public functions, so that they tackle discrimination and inequality. The Duty requires public bodies to engage with the diverse communities affected by their

85

activities and decisions to ensure that policies and services are appropriate and accessible to all and meet different people’s needs.

3.1.3 The Duty consists of a general Duty and specific Duties – the specific Duties

are designed to enable public bodies to meet the general Duty. The new Duty replaces the existing public sector equality Duties and covers the following protected characteristics:

− Age

− Disability

− Gender reassignment

− Pregnancy and maternity

− Race (ethnic or national origin, colour, nationality)

− Religion or belief (including lack of belief)

− Sex

− Sexual orientation 3.1.4 The Duty also applies to ‘marriage and civil partnership’ but only in respect of the

requirement to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination. 3.1.5 It is designed to reduce bureaucracy whilst helping public bodies deliver equality

outcomes. It will require public bodies to publish more information than before, and to demonstrate how they are delivering improvement so that the public can hold them to account.

3.1.6 The general Duty has 3 aims. Public sector bodies need to be able to evidence

that they have given due regard to the impact and potential impact on all people with ‘protected characteristics’ in shaping policy, in delivering services, and in relation to their own employees, specifically in relation to the duties to:

− Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited under the Equality Act 2010

− Advance equality of opportunity between people from different groups

− Foster good relations between people from different groups 3.1.7 The specific Duties provide a framework to enable public bodies to meet the

general Duty. The Duties require public bodies to set specific, measurable, equality outcomes, embedded into core practice and process, and to publish information on their progress to enable public scrutiny and accountability.

3.1.8 There is no longer a specific duty to undertake a defined Equality Impact

Assessment process, however it is an approach that will enable the council to meet the aims under the General Duty as above (3.6) and to robustly evidence compliance. EIAs should therefore be completed on all new policies, strategies and services; and existing services every 3 years, or at re-design, whenever is most relevant

3.2 Historical Use of Equality Impact Assessment 3.2.1 Equality Impact Assessments are designed to use data and consultation to

influence how we deliver services to meet the needs of the city’s diverse

86

communities. Prior to the Equality Act 2010 they were timetabled across all services and required for all service reviews, new policy development and particularly for key decision making.

3.2.2 Screening Equality Impact Assessments were prepared for the Budget in 2010.

These were intended to highlight issues where diverse groups might be disproportionately affected by changes to funding or services and were used internally in the council and by other external stakeholders in the process.

3.2.3 Summaries of completed Equality Impact Assessments can be found on the

council’s main website. These summaries give an overview of the full assessments by detailing key outcomes and actions on how outcomes will be implemented to improve the service or policy.

3.3 Background and City Context

3.3.1 Although not specifically required by the new legislation, Equality Impact

Assessments do provide a clear process to demonstrate that we have consciously thought about the three aims of the Equality Duty as part of the process of decision-making, in relation to how we act as an employer; how we develop, evaluate and review policy; how we design, deliver and evaluate services, and how we commission and procure from others. They also help us ensure that we meet the new legal requirements for the analysis of data, the publishing of this data, and the development of equality objectives. In addition, alongside the City Community Engagement Framework and the Sustainability Strategy it provides a framework for implementation of the Corporate Plan objectives to:

− Tackling Inequality

− Building a more Sustainable City

− Involving People

3.3.2 In the current context of reduced resources for council activity there is a clear potential risk that services to vulnerable people and groups will be adversely affected by budget reductions. This may include those who are covered by the Equality Act 2010 and any decisions will therefore potential contravene this legislation.

3.3.3 In May 2011 the high court ruled that Birmingham city council had acted

unlawfully over a decision to cut its provision of care for disabled people. The judgment said that there had been a failure to take proper account of the duty to promote equality under laws on disability and discrimination. When setting its budget and altering its eligibility policy, Birmingham had not given proper consideration to the impact on disabled people and had failed to adequately consult on its proposals. Birmingham council had failed to ask the right questions and councillors were not given the right information to answer those questions. Essential information on the plans was either unclear or only provided at a very late stage. Equality Impact Assessment provides a mechanism for providing this information in a timely and consistent manner.

3.3.4 There is a wealth of experience and knowledge held by individuals and the city’s

Community & Voluntary Sector who provide a wide range of services to

87

vulnerable people and represent the views of communities of interest. They are interested in the use of Equality Impact Assessment and can add information and challenge to the council’s own assessments.

3.4 Proposed New Approach to Equality Impact Assessment (EIA)

3.4.1 In the light of the Equality Act 2010 and changes within the council we have reviewed and streamlined the EIA Toolkit (see Appendix A). All the steps remain the same and the full, detailed guidance is still available for people to use, but given the increasing level of familiarity with and confidence in the EIA process across the council we have been able to focus in on the key issues and principles behind impact assessment. We have emphasised the service focus, the need to evidence consideration of the general duties, and the requirements for a good assessment. The new Toolkit has been reviewed by the Community and Voluntary Sector Forum locally as well, as a key stakeholder in the process.

3.4.2 The templates for formal council reports have also been amended to explicitly

reference the need for an EIA, asking officers to explain either how the issues identified in the EIA have been incorporated into a report, or if one has not been completed to explain why it is not needed.

3.4.3 Equality implications for staff are rarely to be incorporated within Equality Impact

Assessments due to the need to ensure confidentiality for the individuals concerned. The council’s Change Management processes have been developed by HR to incorporate equality issues into staff consultation and wider staffing implications should be fed back via HR to inform the People Strategy.

3.4.4 Corporate Management Team will hold responsibility for taking an overview on

Equality Impact Assessments and assessing the cumulative impact of decisions on equality groups. Officers are currently exploring how to ensure that this work is resourced adequately.

3.4.5 As a key next step there will be more extensive Equality Impact Assessment of the

council’s budget decision making for the 2012/13 financial year. 4. CONSULTATION

4.1 As highlighted above the new EIA Toolkit has been commented upon by the local Community and Voluntary Sector Forum, who have also suggested some improvements to the full guidance that supports it. Internally, the Toolkits have been developed in partnership with the corporate Equality Steering Group members, who are all equality leads in their respective units across the council

5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications:

5.1 The resources to fund ongoing work as described in this report are met from current council budgets and partnership funding.

5.2 Equality Impact Assessments will be used to inform budget development for

2012/13 and 2013/14.

Finance Officer Consulted: Anne Silley Date: 05/08/11

88

Legal Implications: 5.2 The statutory framework for the council’s Single Equality Scheme is the Equality

Act 2010, in particular sections 149 to 157 which set out the ‘Public Sector Equality Duty’ consisting of a general duty and supporting, specific, duties. The general duty came into force on 6 April 2011 and the specific duties will oblige the council to publish no later than 31 January 2012 information (as specified in regulations) to demonstrate its compliance with the general duty.

Lawyer Consulted: Oliver Dixon Date: 15/08/11 Equalities Implications: 5.3 The equalities implications are directly addressed by the work contained within

the report. Sustainability Implications: 5.4 None directly in relation to this report. Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.5 The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership and the Partnership Community

Safety Team are key contributors to equalities & inclusion work in the city.

Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.6 The implications for risk are directly addressed by the actions contained within

the report. Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.7 The actions contained within the report have been developed with input from all

council Units. 6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 The alternative to continuing the use of Equality Impact Assessment would be

the development of new systems for the publication of data linked to equality objectives. There would not therefore be a process for systematically and publicly addressing equality issues in decision making

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 To ensure that the council effectively implements the duties set out in the

Equality Act 2010 whilst addressing its own equality and inclusion objectives

89


Appendices: Appendix A: Equality Impact Assessment toolkit (revised July 2011) Documents in Members’ Rooms None Background Documents None

90

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

Equality Impact Assessment – brief guidance and template

1

Public sector bodies need to be able to evidence2 that they have given due regard to the impact and potential impact on all people with

‘protected characteristics’3 in shaping policy, in delivering services, and in relation to their own employees.

The following principles, drawn from case law, explain what is essential in order for the Equality Duty to be fulfilled. Public bodies

should ensure:

• Knowledge – those who exercise the public body’s functions need to be aware of the requirements of the Equality Duty.

Compliance with the Equality Duty involves a conscious approach and state of mind.

• Timeliness – the Equality Duty must be complied with before and at the time that a particular policy is under consideration or

decision is taken – that is, in the development of policy options, and in making a final decision. A public body cannot satisfy the

Equality Duty by justifying a decision after it has been taken.

• Real consideration – consideration of the three aims of the Equality Duty must form an integral part of the decision-making

process. The Equality Duty is not a matter of box-ticking; it must be exercised in substance, with rigour and with an open mind in

such a way that it influences the final decision.

• Sufficient information – the decision maker must consider what information he or she has and what further information may be

needed in order to give proper consideration to the Equality Duty.

• No delegation – public bodies are responsible for ensuring that any third parties which exercise functions on their behalf are

capable of complying with the Equality Duty, are required to comply with it, and that they do so in practice. It is a duty that cannot

be delegated.

• Review – public bodies must have regard to the aims of the Equality Duty not only when a policy is developed and decided

upon, but also when it is implemented and reviewed. The Equality Duty is a continuing duty.

1 Information taken from Equality Act 2010: Public Sector Equality Duty What Do I Need To Know? A Quick Start Guide For Public Sector

Organisations – Government Equalities Office May 2011

2 To councillors, senior managers, service-users, the public and community and voluntary sector groups

3 ‘Protected characteristics‘ are: age, disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation. (Also

marriage and civil partnership, but only in relation to eliminating discrimination.)

91

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

1.

Record of data/engagement; impacts identified; and potential actions to meet the Duties.

Data1 that you have

Community

engagement exercises

or mechanisms2

Impacts identified

(actual and potential)3

Potential actions to

advance equality of

opportunity, eliminate

discrimination, and

foster good relations

(You will prioritise these

below)

Community Cohesion

(this is what must happen

in all communities to

enable different groups of

people to get on well

together. A key contributor

is integration which

enables new residents and

existing residents to adjust

to one another)

Age (people of all ages)

Disability (a person is

disabled if they have a

physical or mental

impairment which has a

substantial and long-term

adverse effect on their

ability to carry out normal

1 ‘Data’ may be monitoring, customer feedback, equalities monitoring, survey responses…

2 These may be ongoing links that you have with community and voluntary groups, service-user groups, staff forums; or one-off engagement sessions

you have run.

3 If data or engagement are missing and you can not define impacts then your action will be to take steps to collect the missing information.

92

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

day-to-day activities)

Gender reassignment

(a transgender person is

someone who proposes

to, starts or has

completed a process to

change his or her gender.

A person does not need

to be under medical

supervision to be

protected)

Pregnancy and

maternity (protection is

during pregnancy and

any statutory maternity

leave to which the

woman is entitled)

Race (this includes

ethnic or national origins,

colour or nationality,

including refugees and

migrants; and Gypsies

and Travellers)

Religion or belief

(religion includes any

religion with a clear

structure and belief

system. Belief means any

religious or philosophical

belief. The Act also

93

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

covers lack of religion or

belief.)

Sex (both men and

women are covered

under the Act)

Sexual orientation (the

Act protects bisexual,

gay, heterosexual and

lesbian people)

Marriage and civil

partnership (only in

relation to due regard to

the need to eliminate

discrimination)

Other relevant groups,

eg:

Carers, people

experiencing domestic

violence, substance

misusers, homeless

people, looked after

children etc

94

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

2.

Prioritised Actions:

Action

Timeframe

Lead officer

Evidence of progress

Success measure

Signing of EIA:-

Lead Equality Impact Assessment Officer:

Date:

Head of Service Delivery Unit

Date:

Lead Commissioner (if required):

Date:

Communities and Equality Team

Date:

NB: Actions must now be transferred to service or business plans

95

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

You must also complete and submit a summary of the EIA in the Publication Template (see below)

96

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

3.

Attach data and/or engagement lists as appendices.

Title (of data or engagement)

Date

Main findings

Gaps in data

Contact

97

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

More information on the Equality Act 2010 and the General Duties:

Public bodies are required in law to have due regard to the need to:

• eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited by the Act;

• advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it; and

• foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.

The Equality Act 2010 replaces the previous anti-discrimination laws with a single Act. It simplifies the law, removing inconsistencies

and making it easier for people to understand and comply with it. It also strengthens the law in important ways, to help tackle

discrimination and inequality. The majority of the Act came into force on 1 October 2010.

The public sector Equality Duty came into force on 5 April 2011. The Duty ensures that all public bodies play their part in making

society fairer by tackling discrimination and providing equality of opportunity for all. It ensures that public bodies consider the needs of all

individuals in their day to day work – in shaping policy, in delivering services, and in relation to their own employees.

The new Equality Duty supports good decision-making – it encourages public bodies to understand how different people will be affected

by their activities so that policies and services are appropriate and accessible to all and meet different people’s needs. By understanding

the effect of their activities on different people, and how inclusive public services can support and open up people’s opportunities, public

bodies are better placed to deliver policies and services that are efficient and effective. The Equality Duty therefore helps public bodies to

deliver the Government’s overall objectives for public services.

The new Equality Duty replaces the three previous public sector equality duties – for race, disability and gender. The new Equality Duty

covers the following protected characteristics:

• age

• disability

• gender reassignment

• pregnancy and maternity

• race – this includes ethnic or national origins, colour or nationality

• religion or belief – this includes lack of belief

• sex

• sexual orientation

It also applies to marriage and civil partnership, but only in respect of the requirement to have due regard to the need to eliminate

discrimination.

The Equality Duty has three aims. It requires public bodies to have due regard to the need to:

98

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

• eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment, victimisation and any other conduct prohibited by the Act;

• advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it; and

• foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and people who do not share it.

Having due regard means consciously thinking about the three aims of the Equality Duty as part of the process of decision-making.

This means that consideration of equality issues must influence the decisions reached by public bodies – such as in how they act as

employers; how they develop, evaluate and review policy; how they design, deliver and evaluate services, and how they commission

and procure from others.

Having due regard to the need to advance equality of opportunity involves considering the need to:

• remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics;

• meet the needs of people with protected characteristics; and

• encourage people with protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is low.

Fostering good relations involves tackling prejudice and promoting understanding between people who share a protected

characteristic and others.

Complying with the Equality Duty may involve treating some people better than others, as far as this is allowed by discrimination law. For

example, it may involve making use of an exception or the positive action provisions in order to provide a service in a way which is

appropriate for people who share a protected characteristic – such as providing computer training to older people to help them access

information and services.

Taking account of disabled people’s disabilities

The Equality Duty also explicitly recognises that disabled people’s needs may be different from those of non-disabled people. Public

bodies should therefore take account of disabled people’s impairments when making decisions about policies or services. This might

mean making reasonable adjustments or treating disabled people better than non-disabled people in order to meet their needs.

Demonstrating compliance with the Equality Duty

There is no explicit requirement to refer to the Equality Duty in recording the process of consideration but it is good practice to do so.

Keeping a record of how decisions were reached will help public bodies demonstrate that they considered the aims of the Equality Duty.

It is important for people throughout public bodies to be aware of the Equality Duty. These include:

• Board members – in how they set strategic direction, review performance and ensure good governance of the organisation.

• Senior managers – in how they oversee the design, delivery, quality and effectiveness of the organisation’s functions.

• Equality and diversity staff – in how they raise awareness and build capacity about the Equality Duty within the organisation and

how they support staff to deliver on their responsibilities.

99

Ite

m 71 Appendix A

• Human resources staff – in how they build equality considerations in employment policies and procedures.

• Policy makers – in how they build equality considerations in all stages of the policy making process including review and

evaluation.

• Communications staff – in how they ensure equality information is available and accessible.

• Analysts – in how they support the organisation to understand the effect of its policies and practices on equality.

• Front line staff – in how they use equality considerations in the delivery of services to the public.

• Procurement and commissioning staff – in how they build equality considerations in the organisation’s relationships with suppliers.

Keeping a simple record of how decisions were reached will help public bodies show how they considered the Equality Duty. Producing

an Equality Impact Assessment after a decision has been reached will not achieve compliance with the Equality Duty.

Where it is clear from initial consideration that a policy will not have any effect on equality for any of the protected characteristics, no

further analysis or action is necessary.

Public bodies should take a proportionate approach when complying with the Equality Duty – in practice, this means giving greater

consideration to the Equality Duty where a function or policy has the potential to have a substantial effect on discrimination or equality of

opportunity for the public or the public body’s employees, and less consideration where the potential effect on equality is slight.

The Duty requires public bodies to think about people’s different needs and how these can be met.

100

Item 71 Appendix A

Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) Summary of stages

• EIAs should be completed on: all new policies, strategies and services; and

existing services every 3 years, or at re-design – whenever is most relevant.

• EIAs are about service improvement.

• EIAs use data and consultation to define positive and negative impacts on

different communities, including staff.

• Actions defined in the EIAs feed into team/directorate plans.

1. Who will contribute to the EIA? Range of people – offer different perspectives and challenge.

Core team plus people to consult with.

2. Define aims/objectives of the policy/service Most appropriate range of the EIA for the specific service.

3. Scope and focus of EIA Identify key groups and an initial hypothesis of issues.

Staffing issues fit here – can use HR for support and/or information. Consider all aspects of the service.

Proportionate approach – depends on the significance of the policy / strategy / service.

Legal duty applies to contractors as well: contents of the contracts, how they do the work, how we monitor them –

Corporate Procurement Team can help

4. Assess existing data or do research Use the information that already exists.

Identify gaps. Fill gaps with more research or identify actions for future research.

5. Assess or undertake consultation

Protected character-istics – legal duty

Social inclusion groups

101

Item 71 Appendix A

Identify and use what exists – aim to co-ordinate with other surveys, consultation, research, evaluation.

Use the Community Engagement Framework approach and standards. Identify gaps (in data and understanding) and actions.

6. Assess impact Consider and evaluate the findings.

Minimise or remove negative impacts and increase opportunities for positive impacts (eg: community cohesion).

NB: in some areas equalities legislation is over-ridden by other national legislation – this should be stated.

7. Reduce adverse and promote positive impacts May identify impacts of greater or lesser significance or impacts which cannot be

immediately acted upon – process of noting and prioritising. Unlawful adverse impact must be addressed. The emphasis here is on adverse impact,

not simply differential impact.

8. Action plan and sign off EIA signed off by Head of Unit –

reflects the corporate responsibility for EIAs. Actions must be built into team or Unit action plan.

9. Publish results The publication template is compulsory: this is published to ensure consistency.

The EIA is officially completed when the template is published. NB: the full EIA is also a public document under Freedom of Information.

10. Monitor and review The EIA is not the end of the process: it is an evaluation leading to coherent actions for progress, which should then be implemented.

Progress against the EIA timetable is monitored. Make sure that it is up-to-date

(contact Communities and Equality Team – x 1343 or 1280 or 2301)

102

Item 71 Appendix A

Appendix 2 Equalities Impact Assessment Publication Template

Name of review:

Period of review:

Date review signed off by Head of Unit / Lead Commissioner:

Scope of the review:

Review team:

Relevant data and research:

Consultation: indicate who was consulted and how they were consulted

Assessment of impact, outcomes and key follow-up actions:

Name and contact details of lead officer responsible for follow-up action:

For further information on the assessment contact:

103

104



Subject: Revised Local Development Scheme for the Local Development Framework 2011-2014



Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Planning, Employment, Economy & Regeneration

Contact Officer: Name: Lisa Marshall Tel: 29-2612



Wards Affected: All

FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT:

1.1 To seek approval of the updated Local Development Scheme (LDS). This is the

three year work programme for the Local Development Framework (LDF) covering the period from 2011 to 2014.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Cabinet approves the revised Local Development Scheme for

submission to the Secretary of State subject to any minor grammatical alterations that may be made by the Strategic Director, Place.

2.2 That Cabinet agrees that the revised Local Development Scheme should be

brought into effect following approval by the Secretary of State. 3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/CHRONOLOGY OF KEY

EVENTS:

3.1 All local planning authorities are required to prepare a Local Development Scheme (LDS) under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004). LDS’s are a public statement of a local planning authority’s programme for the production of local development documents that over time will replace Local Plans and form part of the Local Development Framework. The scheme outlines in advance when Public Examinations and major public consultations are due to take place. The revised LDS will be submitted to the Secretary of State for approval after which it can be brought into effect.

3.2 The LDS includes a three year timetable showing the main stages for

community and stakeholder involvement in producing Development Plan Documents (DPDs). DPDs set out policies on the development and use of land in a local authority area.

105

3.3 The council’s performance is assessed annually against the LDS timetable

via the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) which is currently published annually in December each year.

3.4 The council is also a waste and minerals planning authority and works

jointly with East Sussex County Council and the newly created South Downs National Park Authority to prepare a Waste and Minerals Development Framework. The South Downs National Park Authority came into full operation in April 2011 and part of the joint waste and minerals plan area falls within its remit. The Local Development Scheme includes the timetables for the completion of documents prepared as part of this joint waste and minerals framework.

3.5 The most recent version of Brighton & Hove’s Local Development Scheme

was approved by Cabinet in December 2008. Since this scheme was approved by the council, there have been a number of changes to the planning system announced by the Government including the publication of the Localism Bill. These changes to the planning system have been taken into account in the production of this version of the LDS. and have affected the timetables for preparing the city’s local development documents. The changes include:

§ The Government’s intended revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategy

(The South East Plan) – this will remove the set regional housing and waste targets.

§ Review of the National Waste Strategy – places waste prevention as the starting point and landfill as a last resort.

§ The Localism Bill (due to be enacted in November 2011) – places a ‘duty to co-operate’ on councils to ensure joint working takes place between neighbouring authorities and introduces Neighbourhood Planning. This bill also removes the requirement that Local Development Schemes and their updates be approved by the Secretary of State.

3.6 These changes have resulted in the need to undertake additional research,

particularly with regard to local housing targets and the Core Strategy. The Core Strategy had already been submitted to the Secretary of State before the Government announced its intention to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies, however, the Examination was suspended after the Inspector raised soundness concerns about the housing delivery strategy identifying insufficient housing sites to meet the South East Plan target.

3.7 The Council agreed at its July 2011 Council meeting to withdraw the Core

Strategy from the Examination process and to draw up a new timetable for a new “City Wide Plan”, based on more up to date local research and the intended Government changes to the planning system. Changing the name of the Core Strategy to the City Wide Plan is proposed as part of these changes to clarify that this is the overarching plan for the city underneath which Neighbourhood Plans can come forward for particular areas..

106

3.8 The council also intends to produce a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) in order to raise funds for the delivery of new city infrastructure as defined in the City Wide Plan (Core Strategy) such as new health and recreation facilities. For that reason, the production of the CIL’s Charging Schedule and the new City Wide Plan need to be closely aligned.

3.9 To summarise, the main changes to the previously approved (December

2008) version of the Local Development Scheme are:

§ Amendments to the timetable for adoption of the Core Strategy (DPD – now to be known as the City Wide Plan) due to the withdrawal from the previous Core Strategy Examination process.

§ Amendments to the timetable to produce a Waste and Minerals Core

Strategy – this timetable was delayed to allow for further consultation.

§ Amendments to the timetable for the production of a Development Policies and Site Allocation SPD – Now known as the City Wide Plan Part 2.

§ Addition of a Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan DPD to be

prepared with our partner authorities Adur District Council and West Sussex County Council.

§ The addition of a timetable for the revision of the Statement of

Community Involvement (SCI) to bring it in line with changed local plan regulations and the council’s approach to consultation.

§ The addition of a timetable for the production of the Community

Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule.

§ SPDs - proposed adoption dates are included for public information

4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION

4.1 The LDS is not subject to public consultation. 4.2 The Planning Inspectorate will be consulted in order to assist with the

national scheduling of public examinations for DPDs. 5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS

Financial Implications: 5.1 Preparation costs for local development documents have been identified

and budget provision has been made within the Delivery Unit of Planning and Public Protection. The financial implications of each local development document will be assessed and commented upon within future reports.

Direct costs arising from the production of the Shoreham Harbour JAAP including staffing costs are being met by Growth Point funding from DCLG.

Finance Officer Consulted: Karen Brookshaw Date: 22/08/11

107

Legal Implications: 5.2 The Local Development Scheme (LDS), and any revisions to it, must

comply with statutory requirements, notably s15 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) Regulations 2004 as amended by The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008. The LDS, the subject of this Report, has been drafted in accordance with the relevant legislation.

5.3 It is considered there are no human rights implications.

Lawyer Consulted: Hilary Woodward Date: 31/8/2011

Equalities Implications:

5.4 The LDF will make the planning system more accessible and transparent to

the community. The Council has already adopted a Statement of Community Involvement, which encourages effective social inclusion for all groups to influence the policy-making agenda. DPD’s are subject to an Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA). This document will be reviewed and updated as part of this LDS programme.

Sustainability Implications: 5.5 Sustainability considerations are central to the new planning system. Each

local development document requires an integrated sustainability appraisal. Crime and Disorder Implications: 5.6 Relevant Development Plan Documents will address priorities relating to the

agreed Community Safety, Crime Reduction and Drugs Strategy 2011-2014 and future Community Safety Strategies.

Risk and Opportunity Management Implications:

5.7 The programme management of the LDF includes risk management

procedures. A dedicated risk log is maintained, regularly monitored and updated. The proposed LDS and timetable has been risk assessed key concerns centre around risk of delay, financial and staff resource issues.

Public Health Implications: 5.8 Development Plan Documents are being developed alongside the Healthy

Cities initiative and all Development Plan Documents are subject to a Health Impact Assessment undertaken as part of the Sustainability Appraisal.

108

Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.9 The City Wide Plan will help to deliver the Sustainable Community Strategy

and a number of key council and city wide strategies such as the Corporate Plan.

6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 The main alternative options considered and evaluated in preparing the

LDS relate to the type of local development documents to be prepared over the next three years, how they will be resourced, prioritised and when the key stages will be undertaken. The proposed timetable is considered the best option with the resources available.

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 To ensure that there is an up to date timetable for preparing development

plan documents in accordance with government guidance. In addition, to ensure that minor changes can be made, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Planning, Employment, Economy & Regeneration, without the need for the document to return to Cabinet.

7.2 Should the LDS be agreed by the Secretary of State there would be no

requirement for the document to return to Cabinet for adoption.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Appendices: 1. Revised Local Development Scheme 2011-2014

Documents in Members’ Rooms None Background Documents 1. Local Development Scheme, December 2008 2. Planning Policy Statement 12: Local Spatial Planning

109

110

Item 72 Appendix 1

Brighton & Hove

Local Development

Scheme

2011-2014

DRAFT

September 2011

Draft Version : 8th September 2011

111

Brighton & Hove Local Development Framework

Planning and Public Protection

Table of Contents

Sections Page

1 Introduction 1

2

3

The Local Development Scheme 2011-2014

The Local Development Framework

3

3

• Spatial Planning in Brighton & Hove

• Proposed Documents 5

• Other Documents in the Local Development Framework

6

4 Timetable of proposed Development Plan Documents

7

• Schedule 7

• Gantt Chart 9

5 Saved Policies 10

6 Monitoring and Review 11

7 Supporting Documents and Evidence

12

8 Project Management and Resources 15

9 Risks and Contingencies

15

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Profile of Development Plan Documents

Appendix B – List of documents adopted as part of the LDF

Appendix C – Transition from Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) to

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs)

Appendix D - Glossary of Terms

112


1. Introduction

1.1 This is the 2011 version of the Local Development Scheme (LDS) produced by Brighton & Hove City Council. This document revises the

previous version of the LDS that was approved by the city council in December 2008.

1.2 The scheme sets out the three year work programme for the Brighton & Hove Local Development Framework (LDF). An LDF is a portfolio of

planning policy documents. These were first introduced in 2004 as part of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act. The aim of LDFs are to enable more community involvement in planning and to ensure that the long term social,

environmental, economic and resource impacts of development are more fully considered as part of planning for sustainable development. They

require more collaborative working with the wide range of stakeholders that help to shape local areas.

1.3 This amended LDS provides the most up to date timetables for the production of the Development Plan Documents being produced by Brighton

& Hove as part of its LDF. It will explain the role of these documents and reasons for changes to previously published timetables.

1.4 Since the production of the last LDS in 2008, the Government has announced changes to the planning system, including the publication of the Localism Bill

in November 2010. These changes have been incorporated into the scope and timetables of the documents in this LDS, including the intended revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategy, the review of the National Waste

Strategy, the introduction of Neighbourhood Planning and the ‘duty to co-operate’ with neighbouring authorities. All plans will also be developed in

close alignment with the emerging new National Planning Policy Framework. 1.5 LDFs consist of three main types of Local Development Document. These

are: • Development Plan Documents (DPDs)

• Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) • Other Local Development Documents – including the Statement of

Community Involvement and the Annual Monitoring Report.

1.6 As and when new Local Development Documents become adopted by the

council, they will gradually replace the policies in the adopted Brighton & Hove Local Plan (2005). The status of policies and plans in the transitional

period from local plan to local development documents are also discussed in section 5. Appendix D also summarises the status of Supplementary Planning Guidance notes that are to be saved as part of the transition to the

new system.

1.7 This LDS also includes the development plan documents that are being produced as part of the Waste and Minerals Development Framework (WMDF) and prepared jointly with East Sussex County Council and the new

South Downs National Park Authority which came into full operation in April 2011. Documents produced as part of the WMDF will eventually replace both

the East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Waste Local Plan (2006) and Minerals Plan (1999). In addition, the council is working with Adur District Council and

113


West Sussex County Council to jointly produce a Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan.

114


2. The Local Development Scheme 2011-2014

2.1 Key Changes to the LDS produced in December 2008

2.1.1. Completion of Documents The London Road Central and the Architectural Features Supplementary Planning

Documents (SPD) were adopted in December 2009. The Nature Conservation in Development SPD was adopted in March 2010.

2.1.2 Additional Documents

The timetable for the production of a Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan has been added to the LDS as well as a Review of the Statement of Community

Involvement. An outline timetable for the production of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging schedule has also been added for information.

2.1.3 Changes to timetables previously published in December 2008

• Core Strategy replaced by a “City Plan Part 1” DPD – A new work programme for the completion of this document has been created following the withdrawal from the Examination process of the April 2010 Submission version

of the Core Strategy in July 2011. This document will now be known as the City Plan Part 1.

• Development Policies and Site Allocations replaced by a “City Plan Part

2” DPD –The timetable has been adjusted to allow for resources to be focussed

on the completion of Part 1 of the City Plan.

• Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan (JAAP) – This timetable was adjusted to allow for the completion of a Viability and Capacity Study to be undertaken with the two other partner local authorities (Adur District Council

and West Sussex County Council).

• Waste and Minerals Core Strategy renamed as the Waste and Minerals Plan.

• Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) – The Brighton Marina, Infrastructure Delivery and Universities SPDs will now not be produced. The Urban Design Framework, Parking and Householder Extensions SPDs have

updated timetables. The council wishes to concentrate resources on the production of the City Plan and to limit the production of supplementary

planning documents to support policy streamlining and conserve resources. • Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) – A timetable for developing a CIL

Charging Schedule has also been added to the LDS for information. The CIL is a new levy that local authorities can choose to charge on new development to

assist with the funding of infrastructure improvements and new community facilities. The timetable for this must be aligned with the development of the City Plan as it is connected to the delivery of its objectives.

115


3. The Brighton & Hove Local Development Framework

3.1 Spatial Planning in Brighton & Hove

3.1.1 Spatial planning broadens traditional ‘land use planning’ by seeking to integrate it more closely to other policies and programmes which influence the

nature of places and how they function, for example, by achieving clearer linkages between local planning and other key local strategies such as the Sustainable

Community Strategy and health and community safety strategies. 3.1.2 The city council has taken measures to ensure that there are effective links

between the LDF and the Brighton & Hove Sustainable Community Strategy. These include:

• Ensuring that there is full alignment between the policies of the City Plan and the Sustainable Community Strategy

• Mapping and analysing how the City Plan delivers on Sustainable Community Strategy priorities and regular reporting on this to the LSP

• Consulting and engaging with the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) and the Public Service Board’s LDF Partnership Sub-Group on emerging documents

• Sharing monitoring information

3.1.3 The LDF is an important mechanism in helping to deliver the spatial elements of a number of Brighton & Hove’s citywide strategies. These include the economic, local transport, housing, community safety, tourism, sports and cultural strategies

and the climate change action plan. Linkages are made with these strategies via the council’s LDF Internal Officers Advisory Group (this is made up of senior officers

across the city council) that advises on options for DPDs.

116


3.2 Proposed Documents

The Brighton & Hove LDF will consist of the following development plan documents. Which will form the statutory development plan for the city.

Table 1

Development Plan Document Description

City Plan Part 1

(formerly Core Strategy)

To provide an overall strategic vision for the

city to 2030. It sets out priorities to meet

the challenges of the future and identifies

the broad locations, scale and type of

development and supporting infrastructure

that is required. It makes both strategic

allocations and employment site allocations.

Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan

DPD

To set out a vision, objectives, strategies,

policies and detailed site allocations for

Shoreham Harbour.

City Plan Part 2

(formerly Development Policies & Site

Allocations DPD)

This document will include existing and

proposed site allocations not shown in the

City Plan Part 1 as well as a set of generic

development management policies.

City Plan Proposals Map DPD This will be adopted at the time the City Plan

Part 1 is adopted and will be updated as

each new DPD is adopted.

Waste and Minerals Plan DPD (formerly

known as the Waste and Minerals Core

Strategy)

Sets out the vision, objectives and strategy

for sustainable waste development and

minerals production in the area and will

provide the framework for development

control.

Minerals Sites DPD This will set out the existing sites and

commitments and any new site allocations

for minerals development.

Minerals Sites Proposals Map DPD Shows on a geographical basis the

application of the policies in the Minerals

Sites DPD.

Waste Sites DPD This will set out the existing sites and

commitments and any new site allocations

for waste development not covered in the

Waste & Minerals Plan.

Waste Sites Proposals Map DPD This will show on a geographical basis the

application of the policies in the Waste Sites

DPD.

117


3.3 Other Documents in the Local Development Framework

3.3.1 Statement of Community Involvement (SCI)

This document was adopted in September 2006 and guides how local communities and stakeholders will be involved in the preparation of the LDF. This will be revised and updated in 2012 to bring it into line with changed local plan regulations and the

council’s revised approach to consultation.

3.3.2 Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) This is published by the city council in December every year. It will assess

performance over the previous financial year (1 April through to 31 March) and will review performance in relation to implementing the Local Development Scheme and

whether policies in the LDF are meeting their aims. It will also monitor the effectiveness of the Statement of Community Involvement and will include information on the number of new dwellings provided every year (and projected

into the future). In addition it will include development control performance against key indicators (for example, decisions taken within 8 weeks).

3.3.3 Sustainability Appraisal Framework

The purpose of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) framework is to promote sustainable development through the integration of social, environmental, and

economic considerations into the policies and guidance in Development Plan Documents (DPDs) and certain Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD’s). Where a Sustainability Appraisal is required, this will be produced and consulted on in

parallel to the development document in order to inform the final submission version.

Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) is a legally enforced assessment procedure required by European SEA Directive 2001/42/EC. The SEA Directive aims

at introducing systematic assessment of the environmental effects of strategic land use related plans and programmes. This will be carried out as part of a full

Sustainability Appraisal.

4. Timetable of proposed Local Development Documents and Supplementary Planning Documents

4.1 The Schedule of proposed Local Development Documents (Table 2 overleaf) sets out the documents to be prepared giving a brief description, the

status of the document and sets out the key stages for consultation. For a more detailed breakdown of the key stages of document production, please see Appendix B.

4.2 Table 3 summarises the key milestones for the Supplementary Planning

Documents (SPDs) that are to be prepared over the next three years, giving their proposed adoption dates.

118

Item 72 Appendix 1

Table 2: Schedule of Proposed Local Development Plan Documents DPD Document

Description Chain of Conformity Consulting Statutory Bodies on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal

Publication of the DPD

Submission to the Secretary of State

Proposed date for Adoption

City Plan Part 1 (was known as the Core Strategy)

Provides an overall strategic vision for the city to 2030. It will set out priorities and meet the challenges of the future and identify the broad locations, scale and type of development and supporting infrastructure that will take place in the city. It will make both strategic allocations and employment site allocations.

Planning Policy Statements, emerging National Planning Policy Framework,, Sustainable Community Strategy and other relevant city strategies.

Completed November 2012 March 2013 November 2013

LDF Proposals Map

Identifies the national, regional and local designations. To be updates when DPDs are adopted/updated.

National and development plan designations.

As part of City Plan preparation



November 2013

Waste and Minerals Plan (was known

as the Waste and Minerals Core Strategy)

Sets out the vision, objectives and strategy for sustainable waste development and minerals production in the area and will provide the framework for development control.

Planning Policy Statements, emerging National Planning Policy Framework, and both Sustainable Community

Strategies.

Completed in March-April 2007

February 2012 June 2012 January 2013

Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan

To set out a vision, objectives, strategies, policies and detailed site allocations for Shoreham Harbour.

Planning Policy Statements, emerging National Planning Policy Framework, national policy and guidance, Adur Core Strategy/BHCC City Plans, Sustainable Community Strategies.

November 2011 December 2013 March 2014 October 2014

Minerals Sites

Sets out the existing sites and commitments and any new site allocations for minerals development not covered in the Waste and Minerals Plan.

Planning Policy Statements, emerging National Planning Policy Framework and the Waste and Minerals Plan.

Completed in March-April 2007

TBC TBC TBC

Minerals Sites Proposals Map

Shows on a geographical basis the application of the policies in the Minerals Sites DPD

In conformity with the Waste and Minerals Plan.

As part of Minerals Sites DPD preparation

TBC TBC TBC

City Plan Part 2 (Site Allocations & Development Management)

This document will include existing and proposed site allocations not shown in the City Plan Part 1 as well as a set of generic development management policies.

Planning Policy Statements, emerging National Planning Policy Framework, Sustainable Community Strategy, City Plan Part 1 and other relevant city strategies.

July 2013 December 2014 March 2015 December 2015

119


Table 3 Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs)

Document Title Description Public Consultation Date SPD due to

be adopted

Householder

Extensions

To provide guidance on minor household extensions. November-

December 2011

March 2012

Urban Design

Framework

To provide detailed and city-wide policy guidance to support

the Urban Design policy in the City Plan. It will take forward

the background evidence of the Urban Characterisation Study

into strategic policy and set out priorities for future

intervention.

October –November

2012

March 2013

Parking To provide revised guidance on parking standards and

accessibility needed to comply with national and regional

guidance and to support the city’s sustainable transport

policies, the Local Transport Plan and the development

management process.

To Be Confirmed To Be Confirmed

Table 4 Other Documents

Document Title Description Public Consultation Date to be

adopted

Community

Infrastructure

Levy (CIL) –

Charging Schedule

To agree a charging rate for the CIL in Brighton & Hove to

deliver additional funding for the council to carry out a wide

range of infrastructure projects that support growth and benefit the local community

January 2013 November 2013

120


Overall Programme 2011-2014 ID Task Name Start Finish

1 WASTE & MINERALS PLAN Fri 29/02 /08 Tue 29/01 /1 3

2 Public Partic ipation in P reparation Fri 29/02 /08 Fri 30/12 /1 1

3 Publication of Document Wed 0 1/02/12 Fri 30/03 /1 2

4 Submission to Secretary of State Fri 01/06 /12 Fri 29/06 /1 2

5 Pre-Examination Meeting Mon 0 3/09/12 Fri 28/09 /1 2

6 Examination Mon 0 1/10/12 Tue 30/10 /1 2

7 Adoption Tue 01/01 /1 3 Tue 29/01 /1 3

8

9 CITY PLAN PART 1 Mon 0 3/10/11 Fri 29/11 /1 3

10 Public Partic ipation in P reparation Mon 0 3/10/11 Mon 30/04/12

11 Publication of Document Thu 01/11 /1 2 Fri 30/11 /1 2

12 Submission to Secretary of State Mon 0 4/03/13 Fri 29/03 /1 3

13 Pre-Examination Meeting Wed 0 1/05/13 Fri 31/05 /1 3

14 Examination Mon 0 1/07/13 Wed 3 1/07/13

15 Adoption Fri 01/11 /13 Fri 29/11 /1 3

16

17 SHOREHAM HARBOUR JAAP Mon 0 2/07/12 Wed 2 9/10/14

18 Public Partic ipation in P reparation Mon 0 2/07/12 Thu 28/02 /1 3

19 Publication of Document Mon 0 2/12/13 Tue 31/12 /1 3

20 Submission to Secretary of State Mon 0 3/03/14 Fri 28/03 /1 4

21 Pre-Examination Meeting Thu 01/05 /1 4 Fri 30/05 /1 4

22 Examination Tue 01/07 /1 4 Thu 31/07 /1 4

23 Adoption Wed 0 1/10/14 Wed 2 9/10/14

24

25 CITY PLAN PART 2 Mon 2 5/03/13 Mon 28/12/15

26 Public Partic ipation in P reparation Mon 2 5/03/13 Fri 30/05 /1 4

27 Publication of Document Mon 0 3/11/14 Fri 28/11 /1 4

28 Submission to Secretary of State Mon 0 2/03/15 Tue 31/03 /1 5

29 Pre-Examination Meeting Mon 0 1/06/15 Tue 30/06 /1 5

30 Examination Wed 0 1/07/15 Wed 2 9/07/15

31 Adoption Tue 01/12 /1 5 Mon 28/12/15

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

121

Item 72 Appendix 1

5. Saved Policies

5.1 The Brighton & Hove Local Plan The Brighton & Hove Local Plan was adopted in July 2005. Under the new planning

system, local plans will remain the statutory development plan and be automatically saved for three years from adoption. The Local Plan will be eventually

replaced by the City Plans Part 1 and 2. As this time period, goes beyond the original three year period, a proposal was placed in the council’s submitted Annual Monitoring Report 2006-7 to ‘save’ the policies until the replacement policies are

adopted. A letter from the Secretary of State confirming this request was received in June 2008.

5.2 East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Waste Local Plan

The East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Waste Local Plan was adopted in February 2006 and its policies were automatically ‘saved’ for three years to February 2009. A

submission was made to the Secretary of State to save Waste Local Plan policies until they are replaced by new waste and minerals development plan documents.

The LDS includes a timetable for preparing a new Waste and Minerals Plan and a Minerals Sites DPD. The council is satisfied that the current waste site allocations in the Waste Local Plan will meet waste needs until the Waste Sites DPD is adopted.

5.3 East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Minerals Local Plan The East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Minerals Local Plan was automatically saved

for three years to July 2007. Brighton & Hove City Council is preparing a Waste and Minerals Development Framework with East Sussex County Council and South

Downs National Park Authority. There is only one minerals site within Brighton & Hove at Shoreham Port. Appropriate policies in the Minerals Local Plan have been saved until the Waste and Minerals Plan DPD is adopted. These are set out on East

Sussex County Council’s web site at www.eastsussex.gov.uk.

5.4 Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) It is proposed that all of the SPG notes linked to the adopted Brighton & Hove Local

Plan are saved until:

• superseded by new Supplementary Planning Documents; • or until the policies to which they are attached to are replaced by policies in

Development Plan Documents. The saved SPGs are listed in appendix D and can

be found on the city council’s website at: www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/planning/local plan/supplementary planning

guidance. The council is currently considering options to upgrade some Supplementary

Planning Guidance notes to Supplementary Planning Documents subject to policy considerations.

122


6. Monitoring and Review

6.1 The performance of the council against the LDS timetable will monitored in the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR). This will be published in December every year. It will be made publicly available at the City Council’s City Direct offices and on the

council’s website (www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/ldf).

6.2 The AMR monitors and reviews a number of areas and provides information on the following:

• performance against the timetable as set out in the LDS; • the effectiveness of saved policies;

• the effectiveness of any new policies (in future it will determine the timetable for review of local development documents;)

• an up to date list of superseded and ‘saved’ policies ; • the effectiveness of the Statement of Community Involvement; • the amount of new housing currently being delivered and likely to be delivered

in the future.

6.3 The information in the AMR will be used to identify work priorities. The LDS will be reviewed as the need for further documents emerges and to ensure that a three

year programme is maintained.

123


7. Supporting Documents and Evidence Base

Table 4 below sets out background evidence and research work undertaken that will inform the new local development documents.

Table 4

Study Title Description Status

Tall Buildings Study Provided a design and plan-based approach to

determine areas of Brighton & Hove that may be

suitable for taller development.

Completed in

October 2003.

Socio-Economic

Baseline Report

(based on City Stat’s)

City profile of demographic; socio-economic

statistics; ward profiles; definition of neighbourhood

areas.

Completed in June

2005.

Housing Needs Study Updated the Brighton & Hove Housing Needs Study

(2002) and assessment of need for Gypsy and

Travellers’ Sites.

Completed in Sep

2005.

Retail Study & Retail

Health Checks

Provided an up-to-date picture of current and future

capacity for retailing in the city.

Original study

completed in June

2006. Updated in

August 2011.

Employment Land

Study

Assessed the demand for and supply of employment

land over the next ten years.

Completed in

September 2006.

Updated in 2009.

Infrastructure

Capacity Study

Assessed the physical, social and transport

infrastructure capacity across the city.

Completed in

November 2006.

Houses in Multiple

Occupation (HMO)

Study

Studied the role that HMO’s serve particularly in

terms of providing low cost accommodation.

Completed in June

2006.

The East Sussex and

Brighton & Hove

Gypsy and Traveller

Study

Assessed the accommodation needs of gypsies and

travellers.

Completed in 2006.

LR2 (London and

Lewes Road Study)

This study identifies options and opportunities for

regeneration of the London Rd/Lewes Rd area of the

city.

Completed in July

2007.

Urban

Characterisation

Study

Citywide and neighbourhood characterisation study. Completed in March

2007.

Hotel Futures Study Provided up to date information on hotel and guest

accommodation, performance and development

potential in the city.

Completed in March

2007. Updated

2010.

Public Place Public

Life Study

Provided a Public realm toolkit for Brighton & Hove -

made recommendations for improving the city’s

network of streets and spaces.

Completed in April

2007.

Affordable Housing

Viability Study

To test alternative percentages of affordable

housing.

Study completed in

December 2007. To

be updated in 2011.

Reducing Inequalities

Review

To evaluate the approaches taken in Brighton &

Hove to address social exclusion and deprivation in

neighbourhoods and among groups facing

disadvantage and offer recommendations for future

approaches to tackling inequality.

Completed January

2008.

124


Study Title Description Status

Strategic Flood Risk

Assessment

Determined the basis for preparing appropriate

policies for flood risk management and the approach

to flood risk in the development control process

Commissioned

jointly with ESCC -

completed at the

end of March 2008.

To be updated in

October 2011 as

part of work on

Shoreham Harbour.

Sequential and

Exception Test

This paper sets out the sequential tests relating to

flood risk at the broad locations (or ‘Development

Areas’) identified in the City Plan.

Completed in March

2008.

Creative Industries

Workspace Study

Provided an evidence base on the supply and

demand of creative industry workspace.

Study completed by

end of March 2008.

Strategic Housing

Market Assessment

Estimated housing need and demand in terms of

affordable and market housing, determine the

distribution of need, demographic trends and

accommodation requirements of specific groups.

Completed in May

2008.

Strategic Housing

Land Availability

Assessment

To identify potential land for the development of

sites for housing to cover at least the first ten year

life of the plan and to assess their housing potential

and when they are likely to be developed.

Report completed in

May 2009. Updated

in March 2011.

Appropriate

Assessment

Part of the Habitat Regulation Assessment and the

City Plan Sustainability Appraisal

Completed in May

2008. Updated in

December 2009.

Transport Assessment To provide a transport assessment of the City Plan’s

spatial strategy.

Revised assessment

completed in May

2009. To be

updated in 2011 as

part of the revisions

to the City Plan.

Open Space, Sport

and Recreation Study

Quantitative, qualitative and accessibility analysis of

existing open spaces/recreational facilities.

Development of local Open Space Standards.

Final report

completed in May

2009. Updated in

March 2011.

Green Infrastructure

Network

Options for developing a green network through

combining ecological, sustainable transport and

social/cultural benefits.

Final report

completed in May

2009.

Local Housing

Requirement

This study has produced estimates for a housing

requirement for the city based on up to date

demographic projections and economic forecasts. It

also provides an estimate of the range and type of

the various dwellings that will are required.

Completed in July

2011.

125


In addition, research has been commissioned in November 2008 for the Shoreham Harbour Joint Area Action Plan which also informs the evidence base for the City

Plan. The key studies are summarised below, others may follow:

Shoreham Harbour JAAP Background Studies Date of Completion

Strategic Transport Study March 2009

Economic Development Strategy March 2009

Retail Study March 2009

Hotels and Tourism Study March 2009

Reclamation and Port Masterplanning March 2009

Capacity and Viability Study March 2011

There are also a number of studies that have been prepared as part of the Waste

and Minerals Framework. These are listed at consult.eastsussex.gov.uk.

126


8. Project Management and Resources

8.1 The LDF is delivered by staff across Brighton & Hove’s City Planning division. The main responsibility for delivering the Local Development Framework lies with the Local Development Framework Team which is managed by the Local

Development Framework Team Manager. It is staffed by a Principal Policy Advisor and three Senior Planning Officers.

8.2 The LDF Manager manages the LDF and produces and monitors the yearly LDF Programme Plan and LDF Risk Log. Progress is driven forward via the LDF project

Team which meets weekly and updates are reported regularly to the Head of Planning and Public Protection, the Member-led cross Party LDF Steering Group and

the cross-departmental LDF Internal Officers Advisory Group consisting of senior council officers. The LDF Manager is also responsible for working up detailed work

programmes across the LDF, ranging from background research, SPD preparation and consultation schedules.

8.4 The Strategic Planning and Monitoring Team provides support in terms of staffing, leading on the Waste and Minerals Development Framework and the

Shoreham Harbour project through joint project management arrangements. This team also undertakes sustainability appraisal work and produces the Annual Monitoring Report. Project support is also provided by planners in the Planning

Projects Team and officers in the Conservation and Design Team.

8.5 Individual Development Plan Documents are prepared via identified officers in a project team lead by a manager and co-ordinated by a dedicated lead officer. Supplementary Planning Documents may be prepared outside Planning or within

other departments within the city council. If this is the case project management for these remain the responsibility of an identified officer in Planning.

8.7 Close working with Local Strategic Partnership and the Public Service Board ensure good links are made with delivery of the Sustainable Community Strategy.

9. Risks and Contingencies

9.1 Dedicated LDF Risk and Issue Logs are maintained by the LDF Manager and are regularly reviewed at LDF Project Team meetings. These logs include any resource

based issues which may arise as a result of the regular programme review process. The log identifies action required to mitigate the risks if they occur and also

identifies contingency measures that may be required to ensure key deadlines can be met. In addition, there is also a dedicated Waste and Minerals Development Framework risk log maintained jointly with East Sussex County Council and the

South Downs National Park Authority and reviewed regularly by the joint Waste and Minerals Project Board.

127


APPENDICES

APPENDIX A- Profile of Development Plan Documents (DPDs)

1. CITY PLAN – PART 1 (DPD) (replacing Core Strategy)

OVERVIEW Role and

Subject

To provide an overall strategic vision for the city to 2030. It will set out

priorities and meet the challenges of the future and identify the broad locations,

scale and type of development and supporting infrastructure that will take place

in the city.

Coverage Citywide

Status Development Plan Document

Conformity National planning policy

TIMETABLE

Stage Date

Withdrawal of Submission Core Strategy July 2011

Reg 25: Options Consultation October-November 2011

Reg 25: Draft City Plan Consultation March - April 2012

Publication of the Document November 2012

Date for submission to Secretary of State March 2013

Pre-examination meeting with Inspector May 2013

Examination in Public (estimated) July 2013

Estimated date for adoption by the council November 2013

ARRANGEMENTS FOR PRODUCTION

Role Officers

Organisational Lead Chief Executive

Political Management Cabinet and full Council

Internal Resources Local Development Framework Team Manager, Principal Policy Advisor,

LDF Project Team and the Sustainability Appraisal Officer, the LDF Cross-

Party Steering Group and the LDF Internal Officers Advisory Group.

External Resources Consultants commissioned for research/evidence base work.

Stakeholder Resources Local Strategic Partnership, Economic Partnership, Community and

Voluntary Sector Forum, statutory consultees and the local housing

partnerships.

Community and

Stakeholder

Involvement

The approach to stakeholder and community involvement is set out in

the Statement of Community Involvement.

128


2. CITY PLAN PART 2 (DPD) (replacing Site Allocations & Development Policies)

OVERVIEW Role and

Subject

This document will include existing and proposed site allocations not shown in

the City Plan Part 1 as well as a set of generic development management

policies.

Coverage Citywide


Conformity National policy and guidance and the City Plan Part 1

TIMETABLE

Stage Date

Consultation with Statutory Bodies on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal

April- May 2013

Reg 25: Draft City Plan Part 2 Consultation January – February 2014

Publication of the Document November 2014


Pre-examination meeting with Inspector June 2015


Estimated date for adoption by the council December 2015


Role Officers

Organisational Lead Head of Planning & Public Protection, Brighton & Hove City Council

Political Management Cabinet and full Council

Internal Resources Local Development Framework Team Manager, Principal Policy

Advisor, Sites Priorities Group, and Sustainability Appraisal Officer.

Work will be endorsed by the LDF Cross-party Steering Group. Close

working with other teams including Housing Strategy Team, Economic

Development and Children, Families and Schools Department. Initial

work will be with the LDF Internal Officers Advisory Group.

Stakeholder Resources These include the Housing and Economic Partnerships, Local Strategic

Partnership, and the Primary Care Trust. There will be the need to

engage at regional and sub-regional level as well as local stakeholder

groups around a number of issues including design, community safety

and sustainability.

Community and

Stakeholder Involvement

The approach to stakeholder and community involvement is set out in

the Statement of Community Involvement.

129


3. WASTE AND MINERALS PLAN (DPD) (replacing Waste & Minerals Core Strategy)

OVERVIEW Role and

Subject

The Waste and Minerals Plan is a joint document that will set out the vision and

spatial strategy for sustainable waste reduction, recycling and disposal for

Brighton & Hove and East Sussex. It will set out the strategy for identifying sites

for waste and waste facilities. This document will include a suite of development

control policies.

Coverage Citywide and countywide


Conformity National policy and guidance and the Community Strategies.

TIMETABLE

Stage Date


March – April 2007

Public Participation in Plan Preparation February 2008 – December 2011

Publication of the Document February – March 2012

Date for submission to Secretary of State June 2012

Pre-examination meeting with Inspector September 2012

Examination in Public (estimated) October 2012

Estimated date for adoption by the council January 2013


Role Officers

Organisational

Lead

Head of Planning & Public Protection (Brighton & Hove City Council) and

Assistant Director of Policy (East Sussex County Council).

Political

Management

Cabinet and full Council (Brighton & Hove) and Cabinet and full Council (East

Sussex County Council). South Downs National Park Authority Board

Internal

Resources

Strategic Planning and Monitoring Manager, Lead Waste Officer, Senior

Planning Officer, Sustainability Team.

External

Resources

Joint working with officers at East Sussex and the Head of Planning South

Downs National Park Authority. Consultants commissioned for

research/evidence base work.

Community and

Stakeholder

Involvement

The approach to stakeholder and community involvement is set out in both

Statements of Community Involvement.

130


4. SHOREHAM HARBOUR JOINT AREA ACTION PLAN DPD

OVERVIEW Role and

Subject

To set out a vision, objectives, strategies, policies and detailed site allocations

for Shoreham Harbour.

Coverage Shoreham harbour and South Portslade area


Conformity General conformity with national policy and the emerging Brighton & Hove City

Plan and the Adur Core Strategy.

TIMETABLE Stage Date

Commencement of Document Summer 2011


November 2011

Reg 25: First round consultation July-August 2012

Reg 25: Second round consultation January-February 2013

Publication of the Document December 2013


Pre-examination meeting with Inspector May 2014


Estimated date for adoption by the council October 2014

ARRANGEMENTS FOR PRODUCTION Role Officers

Organisational

Leads

Head of Planning & Public Protection, (Brighton & Hove City Council), Strategic

Director (Adur District Council) and the Coastal West Sussex Regeneration

Manager (West Sussex County Council).

Political

Management

Joint Member Steering Group, Cabinet and full Council (Brighton & Hove),

Cabinet and full Council (Adur) and Cabinet and full Council (West Sussex).

Internal

Resources

Strategic Planning and Monitoring Manager, Senior Planning Officer (BHCC)

Principal Planning Officer & Development Manager (joint funded)

External

Resources

Homes and Communities Agency.

Stakeholder

Resources

Community Partnerships. Economic Partnerships.

Community and

Stakeholder

Involvement

The approach to stakeholder and community involvement is set out in the

Statements of Community Involvement for each individual local authority.

131


5. STATEMENT OF COMMUNITY INVOLVMENT (UPDATED VERSION)

OVERVIEW Role and

Subject

To set out the approach that will be taken to engage the public and stakeholders

in the development of planning policy and the planning application process.

Coverage City Wide

Status Local Development Document

Conformity General conformity with national policy

TIMETABLE Stage Date

Commencement of Review June/July 2012

Draft Revised SCI Consultation December 2012

Estimated date for adoption by the council July 2013

ARRANGEMENTS FOR PRODUCTION Role Officers

Organisational

Leads

Chief Executive

Political

Management

Cabinet and full Council

Internal

Resources

Local Development Framework Team Manager, Principal Policy Advisor, LDF

Project Team and the Sustainability Appraisal Officer, Development Control

officers, the LDF Cross-Party Steering Group and the LDF Internal Officers

Advisory Group.

External

Resources

None required

Stakeholder

Resources

Local Strategic Partnership

Community and

Stakeholder

Involvement

The approach to stakeholder and community involvement is set out in the

original Statement of Community Involvement. This will be used as a guide.

132


APPENDIX B– Adopted documents within the Brighton & Hove LDF

Document Name Document Type Date Adopted

Brighton Centre Design Framework SPD Jan 2005

Brighton & Hove Local Plan DPD Jul 2005

East Sussex and Brighton & Hove Waste Local Plan DPD Feb 2006

Statement of Community Involvement LDD Sep 2006

Shopfront Design SPD Sep 2005

Circus Street Development Brief SPD Mar 2006

Edward St Development Brief SPD Mar 2006

Trees and Development Sites SPD Mar 2006

Construction and Demolition Waste SPD Dec 2006

Advertisements SPD Jun 2007

Sustainable Building Design SPD Sep 2008

London Road Central Masterplan SPD December 2009

Nature Conservation in Development SPD March 2010

APPENDIX C

133


Transition from Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) to Supplementary

Planning Documents (SPDs)

All of the city council’s currently adopted SPGs are up to date and will remain a material consideration linked to the Local Plan saved policies. Upgrading a number

of these to SPD status is currently being considered. The saved SPGs are set out below.

Supplementary Planning Guidance Note

and date

Saved Policy in the Brighton & Hove Local

Plan

SPG1: Roof Alterations and Extensions –

adopted February 1999 QD14 Extensions and Alterations

SPG2: External Paint Finishes and Colours –

October 1998

HE1 Listed Buildings

HE6 Development within or affecting the

setting of conservation areas

SPG3: Brighton Station Brief – October 1998 EM13 Brighton Station – mixed uses

SPG4: Parking Standards – September 2000

(this SPG is currently under review and will be

replaced by an SPD in July 2008)

TR1-TR4, TR14, TR17-TR20 public transport

accessibility and parking and TR19 Parking

Standards

SPG5 Black Rock Planning Brief – 2001 SR19 Black Rock Site

SPG7 Satellite Dishes – September 2003 QD22 Satellite dish aerials

SPG10 King Alfred/RNR Site Planning Brief –

adopted 2002 SR24 King Alfred/RNR Site

SPG11 Listed building interiors – September

2003 HE1 Listed Buildings

SPG13 Listed Buildings – general advice –

adopted September 2003 HE1 Listed Buildings

SPG14 Preston Barracks – September 2003 EM17 Preston Barracks

SPG15 Tall Buildings – January 2004 QD1-QD4 Design policies

SPG16 Energy Efficiency and Renewable

Energy SPG – May 2004

SU2 Efficiency of development in the use of

energy, water and materials

SPG17 Hollingdean Depot and Abattoir Site

Planning Brief – January 2004

Waste Local Plan Policy – WLP8b Site specific

designation of a proposed recycling, transfer

and materials recovery facility

Local Plan Policy – EM1 Identified employment

sites.

SPG19 Fire Precaution Works to Historic

Buildings – May 2004 HE1 Listed Buildings

SPG20 Brighton Marina Planning Brief –

January 2003

Linked to a number of policies in the local plan

including QD design policies, transport,

housing and retail policies.

SPG21 Sustainability Checklist – May 2004 SU2 Efficiency of development

134


APPENDIX D GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND KEY DOCUMENTS Acronym Buster

AMR - Annual Monitoring Report

DPD - Development Plan Document

LDF - Local Development Framework

LDD - Local Development Document

LDS - Local Development Scheme

SCI - Statement of Community Involvement

SPD - Supplementary Planning Document

Glossary of Terms

Term Definition

Annual Monitoring

Report (AMR)

An assessment of the progress against the LDS Includes a commentary on the performance of policies. Sent to the Secretary of State each December.

Area Action Plans

(AAPs)

These will provide a planning framework to cover key areas of change or conservation.

Background

Documents

Technical documents that will inform the production of LDDs, for example an Urban Capacity Study.

Chain of conformity Outlining how the policies in the DPDs conform to the national, regional and local policy

City Plan (was known

as the Core Strategy)

Sets out the vision and spatial strategy for the area and will address important spatial matters including housing, the economy, retail, community safety, tourism, transport issues, areas of regeneration and social infrastructure. A key diagram will illustrate the spatial vision for the city.

Development Plan Term which groups together Regional Spatial Strategies and DPD’s.

Development Plan

Documents (DPDs)

These are subject to statutory requirements, including submission to the Secretary of State, formal testing through an independent examination and a binding Inspector’s report.

Development Policies A suite of criteria-based policies which are required to ensure that all development within the area meets the vision and strategy set out in the City Plan.

Independent

Examination

All DPD’s are subject to independent examination by a planning inspector. The inspector will carry out an “assessment of soundness” of the document.

Local Development

Documents (LDDs)

The collective term for DPDs, SPDs and the SCI.

Local Development

Framework (LDF)

This is the group of documents that form the spatial development framework for the area. Includes DPDs, SPDs, the SCI, the LDS and the AMR.

Local Development

Scheme (LDS)

Sets out a three year rolling project plan for the preparation and delivery of the various LDDs. The purpose of the LDS is to inform the public of the documents that will make up the LDF and the timescales they can expect preparation and review of these documents.

Planning Policy

Statements (PPS)

Produced by central government and express national planning policy.

Proposals Map Will show existing and revised designations of areas of land such as conservation areas and green belt, and the locations of any proposed or actual Area Action Plans. It would also define the sites for particular future land uses or developments, and the areas to which specific policies apply.

Regional Spatial

Strategy (RSS)

To be prepared in the South East by the South East England Regional Assembly (SEERA). The regional spatial strategy or the ‘South East Plan’ will be a statutory document and part of the local Development Plan and it will set out the policies in relation to the development and use of land in the region and will be approved by the Secretary of State.

Site Allocations This will identify all citywide site allocations for uses including housing, affordable housing, employment land, retail, leisure, social, health and education.

Saved Plan Certain existing plans will be “saved”, that is they will remain a material consideration as part of the development plan for three years and be contained within the local development framework.

Spatial Planning Planning that is not just about land use but concerned with delivering sustainable development and that takes into account for example, education, housing, economic development, cultural and social issues.

Statement of

Community

Involvement (SCI)

Sets out how the community is to be engaged in the LDF process and sets standards for involving the community in the preparation, alteration and continuing review of all local development documents.

Supplementary

Planning Documents

(SPDs)

These will need to be consistent with parent DPDs and will elaborate upon the policies and specific site allocations. They will be capable of being a material consideration in the determination of planning applications although afforded less weight.

Sustainability

Appraisal

Strategic environmental assessment (SEA) is a generic term used internationally to describe environmental assessment as applied to policies, plans and programmes. The European ‘SEA

Directive’ requires a formal ‘environmental assessment’ of certain plans and programmes, including those in the field of planning and land use.

135

136


Subject: Terms of Reference for the Cross-Party Working Group on the Core Strategy: extract from the proceedings of the Council Meeting held on 21 July 2011


Report of: Strategic Director, Resources

Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Planning, Employment, Economy & Regeneration

Contact Officer: Name: Mark Wall Tel: 29-1006


Key Decision: No



4.30pm 21st JULY 2011 COUNCIL CHAMBER, HOVE TOWN HALL

DRAFT MINUTES

Present: Councillors: Meadows (Chair); Wells (Deputy Chair), Barnett, Bennett, Bowden, Brown, Buckley, Carden, Cobb, Davey, Deane, Duncan, Farrow, Fitch, Follett, Gilbey, Hamilton, Hawtree, Janio, Jarrett, Jones, Kennedy, A Kitcat, J Kitcat, Lepper, Littman, MacCafferty, Marsh, Mears, Mitchell, A. Norman, K. Norman, Oxley, Peltzer Dunn, Phillips, Pidgeon, Pissaridou, Powell, Randall, Robins, Rufus, Shanks, Simson, Smith, Summers, Sykes, C Theobald, G Theobald, Turton, Wakefield, Wealls and West.

PART ONE

14. WITHDRAWAL OF THE CORE STRATEGY TO UPDATE AND AMEND 14.1 Councillor Kennedy introduced the report and expressed her thanks to the officers

involved in preparing the report and the Core Strategy to date. She noted that there had been significant changes in the circumstances since the Core strategy was first prepared and the Planning Inspector had recommended that it be withdrawn from the examination process to allow it to be amended and updated in light of the changes. She also noted that various proposals in the Localism Bill directly impacted on the planning process and would need to be taken into account in an update Core Strategy document. It was intended to bring a report back to the Cabinet in October and then onto the Council meeting and she hoped that the proposed cross-party working group

137

L


would be able to develop ideas and feed into the report. In this respect, she could not accept the proposed joint amendment from the Conservative and Labour & Co-Operative Groups.

14.2 Councillor G. Theobald moved the joint amendment on behalf of the Conservative and

Labour & Co-Operative Groups and stated that he felt it was inappropriate to have voting rights on a cross-party working group.

14.3 Councillor Mitchell formally seconded the amendment and stated that whilst it made

sense to review the Core Strategy; it was not necessary to have voting on the cross-party working group. She welcomed the resurrection of the working group and felt that it would be able to put forward views which could be taken into account as the revised strategy was developed. She also noted that the Planning Inspector had raised concern over the council’s over-reliance on windfall sites for development opportunities and hoped that the working group would take this into account.

14.4 Councillor C. Theobald suggested that the main reason for the withdrawal of the Core

Strategy was the Localism Bill. She welcomed the proposed legislation in respect of the planning process and the ability for local people to determine how their local areas were affected from a planning perspective. She hoped that further details would be brought forward for Members in regard to how the system would operate and asked for a time table of events to be made available to all Members as soon as possible.

14.5 Councillor Randall stated that he welcomed the opportunity to take another look at the

matter, especially as the new Administration held different objectives in regard to sustainability and neighbourhood decisions than the previous one.

14.6 Councillor Kennedy noted the comments and stated that she hoped the cross-party

working group would prove to be worthwhile and questioned how the resources that would be required to meet the proposals in the Localism Bill would be found; given the Government’s current stance and level of targets its was setting.

14.7 The Mayor noted that a joint amendment had been moved and put it to the vote which

was carried. 14.8 The Mayor then put the recommendations from the Cabinet meeting as amended to

the vote which were carried. 14.9 RESOLVED:

(1) That the Secretary of State’s direction to withdraw the submitted Brighton and Hove Core Strategy from the examination process be sought for the reasons set out in Part 3 of the report; and

(2) That the Cabinet be recommended to delete paragraph 4 of the Terms of

reference of the Cross Party Working Group set out in Appendix 2 to the report.

138

Item 73 Appendix 1

Terms of Reference July 2011

Cross Party Working Group for Plan Preparation 1. Purpose 1.1 The purpose of the cross party working group is to help the City

Council develop and implement its development plans as a mainstream part of its activities, including partnership work with other agencies and bodies.

Terms of Reference

• To oversee the progress of the Core Strategy (proposed to become the new City Wide Plan) and any subsequent developments plan documents undertaken by the Council and advise or make recommendations to the Cabinet member meetings or cabinet.

• To review the content of development plan documents and, having regard to evidence; National planning guidance; best practice; corporate priorities; and resources to advise the Cabinet member (s) as appropriate.

• The joint working group shall have the ability to invite / receive presentations from interested parties where they (jointly) see fit. (Interested parties may include amongst others; community and voluntary Sector partnerships or organisations, constituent partnerships of the Community partnership, Landowners, Developers or their agents).

2. Objectives and scope 2.1 To lead on the development, implementation, monitoring and review of

the Council's Development Plans; in partnership with local partnerships and communities.

2.2 To promote innovative thinking, best practice and joint working in

approaches to delivering sustainable development within the boundary of the City.

2.3 To develop the capacity of the wider community to make informed,

sustainable decisions and build on the work of the Brighton and Hove Strategic Partnership to promote greater understanding of the priorities for the city and the contribution that sustainable development can make to improving people's quality of life.

2.4 To work with the voluntary and community sector, business and others

to promote sustainable development, integrate economic, social and environmental issues and advise on implementation within the context of the community strategy and the Council's overall vision and priorities.

139

Item 73 Appendix 1

2.5 To work with the Brighton and Hove Strategic Partnership to ensure that development plan documents are compatible with and help to facilitate delivery of the community strategy.

3 Membership

The group shall be chaired by the Cabinet Member for Planning, Employment, Economy & Regeneration plus one member from each political group (for the current term 1 Green group member; one Conservative group member one Labour group member).

4. Voting 4.1 It is expected that the Working Group would normally reach agreement

on proposals by consensus. If, however, there is no consensus, or if any Member requests it, the matter will be put to a vote. In the event of there being an equality of votes, the Chair will have a second or casting vote.

5. Reporting and Accountability 5.1 The joint working group will advise, the Council's Cabinet Member for

Planning, Employment, Economy & Regeneration. The Working Group will report to and ask for comments from the Environment & Community Safety Overview & Scrutiny Committee

6. Review 6.1 These Terms of Reference will be reviewed after the first 6 months 6.2 The work of the cross party working group will be reviewed bi-annually.

140


Subject: National Illegal Money Lending Team - Delegation of Powers to Birmingham City Council


Report of: Strategic Director, Communities

Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Communities, Equalities & Public Protection

Contact Officer: Name: John Peerless Tel: 29-2486


Key Decision: No


FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 This report sets out the proposal to delegate functions to Birmingham City

Council to take enforcement action against illegal money lenders in Brighton and Hove. This follows a national team being established in Birmingham, resourced with skilled professionals to specialise in effectively preventing and prosecuting in this field.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Birmingham City Council be given delegated power to discharge the

enforcement of Part III of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 in Brighton & Hove (pursuant to Section 101 of the Local Government Act 1972, Regulation 7 of the Local Authority (Arrangements for Discharge of Functions) (England) Regulations 2000 and Section 13 and 19 of the Local Government Act 2000).

2.2 That the “Protocol for Illegal Money Lending Section Investigations” attached at

Annex One be approved and that the Head of Planning and Public Protection be authorised to enter into the agreement and to approve any minor technical or typographical alterations if required.


EVENTS: 3.1 The primary legislation governing the consumer credit industry is the Consumer

Credit Act 1974. The Trading Standards Service enforces this in each Local Authority area. The Act is based on a licensing system and all consumer credit and consumer hire businesses operating in the UK (with certain exemptions) must possess an appropriate licence issued by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT).

141

3.2 To operate a consumer credit business without being licensed is a criminal offence and carries a maximum penalty of £5,000 and/or up to two years imprisonment. Licences can be revoked where it can be established that the licensee has acted inappropriately.

3.3 Illegal money lending covers a range of activities, from persons that are actually

licensed but are acting unlawfully, to the extreme of a person offering cash loans without being licensed at all (Loan Sharks). Loan Shark activity is characterised by deliberate criminal fraud and theft, with extortionate rates of interest on loans that mean borrowers face demands for payment of thousands of pounds more than they borrowed and can often never pay off the loans. Borrowers who fail to pay or refuse to pay are subject to intimidation, theft, forced prostitution and other, extreme physical violence.

3.4 In 2005 an Illegal Money Lending Team was established within Birmingham

Trading Standards as a pilot project in England, one of only two in Great Britain; the other pilot area being Glasgow – covering Scotland. The success of the pilot led to a roll out of other teams across the country. Although the Trading Standards South East (TSSE) group agreed to align itself with the Birmingham based team rather than introduce their own team.

3.5 The team has worked with the East Sussex Credit Union publicising their ‘hotline’

and the support that can be offered to ‘victims’, but as yet no further investigations have been carried out.

3.6 On the 29th December 2010 Business Minister Edward Davey announced that

£5.2 million in funds was to be made available to continue the national Illegal money lending project for 2011/12 and beyond. He announced a restructure moving the project to a three national team model. Birmingham City Council will continue to host the England team providing a resource to investigate illegal money lending across the country.

3.7 Key statistics for the project up to January 2011 are:

§ Identified over 1,700 illegal lenders § Arrested over 500 illegal money lenders (loan sharks) § Over £37 million of illegal debts written off (money victims would have paid

back to illegal lenders if the Department had not acted) § Secured over 182 prosecutions, resulting in prison sentencing totalling over

107 years and one indefinite sentence § Helped over 16,000 victims of loan sharks including the most hard to reach

individuals § Referred over 600 victims to alternate (legal) sources of financial support

3.8 The Head of Trading Standards (HOTS) is a founder member of the East Sussex

Credit Union. The Credit Union began as a community based organisation in Whitehawk and was established to provide the residents with access to a cheaper and safer source of credit. As a member of the Loan Committee he received first hand information indicating that loan sharks operated in many parts of the city.

3.9 Loan sharks generally come from the community in which they carry out their

142

crime. They use others to hide their activity but also to protect them-selves from detection. It is not surprising therefore that there is limited ‘hard evidence’ of such activity in Brighton & Hove.

3.10 Information from the ILMT indicates that these criminals are also linked to other

crimes including drugs, counterfeiting and money laundering. Experience shows that once someone comes forward action needs to be taken promptly, to secure the evidence but more importantly protect the victim.

3.11 The Trading Standards Service does not have the relevant expertise of the

resources to deal with such activities and wish to take advantage of the resources being offered. This will align us with neighbouring local authorities and the country as a whole.

3.12 The ILMT were given delegated powers in August 2008 under urgency

provisions’ in order to allow them to investigate alleged loan sharking activity as a result of a call to their ‘hotline’. This delegation was extended until March 2009 but due to an administration error on the part of the ILMT no request to extend the delegation further was received.

3.13 It is crucial that this situation is now resolved as the ILMT intend to increase their

activities across the country and receiving delegated powers from Brighton & Hove will mean that they can respond promptly and appropriately to any information received from this area.

4. CONSULTATION 4.1 The list of organisations consulted is included in Annex 2. There is general support for

the recommendations of this report, although none of the respondents have any specific information regarding ‘loan shark’ activity in the area.

4.2 Money Advice & Community Support (MACS) initially expressed concern about

duplication of activity, however after further discussion now realise that those concerns were unfounded.

5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications: 5.1 All the major costs associated with the recommendations will be funded by the

Treasury. Incidental costs in providing a work base for officers operating in Brighton & Hove will be met from within the existing Trading Standards Service revenue budget.

Finance Officer Consulted: Karen Brookshaw Date: 29/07/11 Legal Implications: 5.2 By virtue of Section 161 of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, it is the duty of each Local

Authority to enforce the provisions of the Act within their local authority boundary. This is an executive function and therefore, in order to proceed with the proposals in this report, it is necessary for Cabinet to formally delegate this function to Birmingham City Council under Section 13 and 19 of the Local Government Act 2000 and the Local

143

Authorities (Arrangements for the Discharge of Functions) (England) Regulations 2000. Birmingham City Council is also required to formally accept the delegation.

5.3 Any prosecutions will be undertaken by Birmingham City Council with no liability for

costs to Brighton & Hove City Council. The delegation of functions is proposed to last until 31st March 2015. The protocol enables the Council to withdraw from the delegation arrangements providing that it is reasonable to do so.

Lawyer Consulted: Elizabeth Culbert Date: 28/07/11 Equalities Implications: 5.4 It is often the poorer and more vulnerable members of society who become victims of

illegal moneylenders and find it difficult to access appropriate support and help. 5.5 Any actions arising from this particular work will be fed into the financial inclusion work

currently underway with the Credit Union and advice providers across the City. This work will be subject to a detailed EIA process to ensure that those who suffer most from the disproportionate and cumulative impacts of financial exclusion benefit significantly.

Sustainability Implications: 5.6 There are no sustainability implications. Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.7 Illegal moneylenders invariably target low-income households and the most vulnerable

members of society. This can mean that their activities have disproportionate implications for the more deprived areas and action taken against them therefore supports the policy priorities associated with crime and disorder and protecting the more vulnerable members of the community.

5.8 Illegal money lending has a serious detrimental effect on both individuals and the

community. Tackling the root causes and providing legitimate alternative sources of credit will contribute to reducing stress and pressures on many individuals and communities.

5.9 Marginalising rogue traders creates an environment which supports and encourages

legitimate credit providers and reduces the fear of crime. Risk & Opportunity Management Implications: 5.10 The risk to adopting this partnership approach by providing delegated powers is

assessed as low. The approach removes any risk to future funding of this work as the officers will be employed by another local authority.

Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.11 Proper delegation of these powers will help to protect the public from loan sharks and

other illegal money lending activity.

144

6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 There are no other viable options as the funding is provided on the basis of expanding

the Birmingham team. 7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 This proposal, if agreed, will add to the County Council’s resources and will enable our Trading Standards Service to have access to a team of highly trained experts from the IMLT.

7.2 The recommendations will support performance of the Authority’s duty in relation to enforcement of the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974.


Appendices: 1. Protocol between Brighton & Hove City Council and Birmingham City Council 2. List of Consultees and their responses Documents in Members’ Rooms

None Background Documents

None

145

146

Item 74 Appendix 1

DEPARTMENT FOR BUSINESS INNOVATION AND SKILLS (BIS) ILLEGAL MONEY LENDING PROJECT

PROTOCOL FOR ILLEGAL MONEY LENDING SECTION INVESTIGATIONS

Interpretation

For the purposes of this Protocol – “BCC” means Birmingham City Council “BHCC” means Brighton & Hove City Council “IMLS” means the Illegal Money Lending Section

“Delegated Power” means the discharge of the function of the Enforcement of Part III of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 granted to BCC by BHCC in pursuance of section 101 and 222 of the Local Government Act 1972, Regulation 7 of the Local Authorities (Arrangements for Discharge of Functions) (England) Regulations 2000, sections 13 to 19 of the Local Government Act 2000 and any other legislation enabling the discharge “Commencement Date” means the date the Delegated Power is granted “Term” means from the date of signing of this protocol to 31st March 2015 “Birmingham Trading Standards” means Regulatory Services of BCC “BHCC Contact Officer (BHCCCO)” means the relevant person appointed by the Head of Planning & Public Protection of BHCC to liaise with the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section on matters relating to and in connection with the Illegal Money Lending Project “Appropriate Contact Officer” means The Director of Regulatory Services, Head of Trading Standards or the Head of Illegal Money Lending of Birmingham Regulatory Services or any person nominated by the Council or authorised by them

147

Item 74 Appendix 1

1. Application 1.1 This Protocol applies to the Department of Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS)/HM

Treasury funded ‘Illegal Money Lending Project’ and covers the following issues:-

• The conduct of investigations and associated working practices for the IMLS officers when conducting investigations or operating in Brighton & Hove.

• The mechanisms whereby Brighton & Hove City Council is updated on the progress of the project and any significant issue relating thereto.

• The exchange of intelligence and information between the IMLS and BHCC

• The institution of legal proceedings. 2. Protocol 2.1 The purpose of this protocol is to facilitate the delegation of powers to BCC and

officers employed within BCC’s IMLS to enforce the provisions of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 within the area of Brighton & Hove City Council. The protocol encourages the exchange of information and a working partnership approach between BCC and BHCC in relation to the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

2.2 This Protocol will come into force on the Commencement Date and terminates at

the end of the Term. 2.3 Notwithstanding the terms and conditions of this Protocol, this Protocol does not

prejudice the right of BHCC to withdraw the Delegated Power at any time during the Term. However BHCC undertakes not to withdraw the Delegated Power unless it considers there is good reason to do so. The Delegated Power is not to be unreasonably withdrawn by BHCC.

3. The IMLS 3.1 It is recognised that officers in the IMLS will need authority to initiate and/or

undertake investigations and/or the prosecution of potential offences falling within the scope of the ‘Illegal Money Lending Project’ where such potential offences fall entirely outside of the BCC boundaries. This protocol and also the Delegated Power is deemed to provide such authority to BCC and its officers regarding all matters.

3.2 The IMLS will comprise of a team manager and up to 45 staff directly employed by

BCC. The Head of Illegal Money Lending Section will be responsible for the day-to-day operation and supervision of the IMLS.

3.3 The Head of Illegal Money Lending Section will report directly to the Director of

Regulatory Services or nominated officer as appropriate.

148

Item 74 Appendix 1

3.4 The Head of the Illegal Money Lending Section BCC will, when required, provide

quarterly progress reports, from the Commencement Date, to the Head of Trading Standards of BHCC giving details of investigations, (unless there is a significant risk that any such disclosure may jeopardise an investigation, such a decision is within the discretion of the Director of Regulatory Services or Head of Trading Standards BCC) prosecutions being pursued or concluded and developments concerning or affecting the Illegal Money Lending Project in Brighton & Hove.

3.5 It is recognised that after Delegated Power is granted to BCC, all decisions

concerning the pursuance of relevant investigations, decisions to prosecute and the laying of charges and/or information on such relevant matters within Brighton & Hove City Council, shall be taken by BCC and in accordance with the relevant Code for Crown Prosecutors and BCC’s Enforcement Policy.

4. Working Arrangements in the Brighton & Hove City Council Area 4.1 BCC will designate and appoint a Brighton & Hove City Council Contact Officer

(BHCCCO). 4.2 The Head of Illegal Money Lending Section will at any time the Head of Illegal

Money Lending Section considers necessary and prudent, or at the request of the WBCCO, brief the BHCCO on any intelligence gathered, any progress made on investigations and/or prosecutions pending or otherwise, relating to or affecting Brighton & Hove City and/or its residents.

4.3 Further to Clause 4.2 above, all reasonable steps will be taken by the Head of

Illegal Money Lending Section to keep the BHCCO updated on the progress of investigations and enquiries being carried out in Brighton & Hove City and any changes made or introduced by BIS concerning the ‘Illegal Money Lending Project’. It is incumbent on the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section to maintain regular dialogue/communication with the BHCCCO.

4.4 The IMLS will have regular contact with the Police and other Government

agencies. The Head of Illegal Money Lending Section will consult the BHCCCO to identify any local arrangements, investigations and protocols before any investigation is commenced in pursuance of the ‘Illegal Money Lending Project’. Wherever possible, the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section will actively involve the BHCCCO and seek to develop close links between those agencies and BCC.

4.5 The Head of Illegal Money Lending Section will as soon as reasonably

practicably inform the BHCCCO of the outcome of any concluded prosecution proceedings conducted within Brighton & Hove City.

4.6 BCC, where possible, will consult with BHCC in good time before issuing any

press release concerning any prosecution pursued by BCC pursuant to this Protocol.

149

Item 74 Appendix 1

4.7 Any contact with local government bodies, other police forces, credit unions or

similar organisations that may be locally funded or may involve local sensitivities will be agreed with the BHCCCO in advance. Upon being notified of an intention to contact such a body, Brighton & Hove City Trading Standards may arrange for one of their own officers to accompany the relevant officer of the IMLS on any visit.

4.8 Where the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section and the Head of Trading

Standards of Brighton & Hove City Council agree that an officer or officers of Brighton & Hove City Council Trading Standards & Regulatory Services will be actively involved in an investigation, that officer will remain an employee of BHCC but for the purpose of that investigation, will come under the control of the IMLS team manager. Such agreement will be subject to the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section being satisfied that the officer’s or officers’ participation will not compromise any investigation or endanger any member of the IMLT, supporting staff or witnesses, that the officer has the appropriate training and experience to undertake the task; and upon any other terms that the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section and the Head of Trading Standards of Brighton & Hove City Council consider necessary and/or appropriate.

4.9 Unless there is prior agreement with the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section

for assistance in an investigation, which is accompanied by an official purchase order from BCC, no reimbursement will be made for time spent on activities supporting the ‘Illegal Money Lending Project’ or expenditure incurred by any BHCC officer.

4.10 The exercise by BCC of these arrangements shall be at no cost to BHCC 4.11 BCC shall have an Appropriate Contact Officer. 4.12 In the absence of the IMLS Head of Service, the role, duties, and responsibilities

of the Head of Illegal Money Lending Section shall be discharged and carried out by the other Appropriate Contact Officers as nominated.

5. Referral of Information/Intelligence to the Project Team 5.1 It is recognised that the IMLS will rely on receiving information about Illegal

Money Lender activities. 5.2 BHCC will endeavour to provide as much relevant information and intelligence as

reasonably and practicably possible to the IMLS concerning any investigation being carried out within Brighton & Hove City having regard to any statutory limitations/restrictions.

5.3 Information and intelligence will be provided by the BHCCCO to the Head of

Illegal Money Lending Section or a person designated by him/her. 5.4 BCC IMLS will not, as a matter of routine, investigate individual complaints

received concerning alleged Illegal Money Lender activities. However, such complaints may be used by the IMLS as a source of intelligence.

150

Item 74 Appendix 1

5.5 BCC, IMLS and BHCC agree to process personal data only in accordance with the requirements of the Data Protection Act 1998 and to disclose information only in accordance with the requirements of the Enterprise Act 2002.

6. Conduct and Control of Investigations 6.1 The conduct and control of all investigations undertaken and prosecutions by the

IMLS in Brighton & Hove City will be the responsibility of BCC. Investigations will be undertaken in line with the BCC’s published Enforcement Policy and subject to the policies and procedures approved and adopted by Birmingham Trading Standards.

6.2 BCC will be responsible for all aspects of the investigations and responsibilities

under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the Data Protection Act 1998, the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Enterprise Act 2002.

6.3 BCC will be solely responsible for the Health and Safety of IMLS officers and any

other officer or person within the direct management of the IMLS providing support and assistance in any investigation undertaken by the IMLT.

6.4 Where breaches of Part III of the Consumer Credit Act 1974 are identified, action

will be taken in accordance with the enforcement policy and procedures adopted by Birmingham Trading Standards.

6.5 When the Head of Service, IMLS BCC, recommends a prosecution under Part III

of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, if required, BHCC will be provided with a copy of the relevant prosecution file, which will consist of a detailed case summary, schedule of issues, aggravating and mitigating factors, reasons justifying prosecution and any other material fact that WBC ought reasonably to be aware of. BHCC will be invited to communicate any comments it considers appropriate and necessary concerning the intended prosecution to the Director of Regulatory Services, the informant for BCC. Such comments will be given due attention and consideration by the informant for BCC.

7. Responsibilities and Actions of the Authorities 7.1 BCC shall be liable for the actions and competence of the persons employed

within the IMLS and shall ensure that the IMLS shall comply with all legislative requirements and take all reasonable steps to ensure any actions taken are lawful and within the spirit of the protocol.

7.2 BHCC shall be liable for the actions and competence of persons within its employ

and shall take all reasonable steps to ensure the competence of those persons in carrying out their functions and that they comply with legislative requirements and the spirit of this protocol.

7.3 Information / intelligence provided between BCC and BHCC shall be used for the

purpose intended and shall not be divulged to third parties unless to do so would be lawful and in pursuant of an investigation / enquiry subject to this protocol.

151

Item 74 Appendix 1

7.4 BCC and BHCC endorse a joined up working approach to the enforcement of the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The partners will attempt to promote consistency in enforcement. However, this protocol does not attempt to restrict the powers of authorised officers of the IMLS or BCC from discharging their duties, as appropriate.

Commencement date: Signed Martin Randall Head of Planning & Public Protection Brighton & Hove City Council Signed

Jacqui Kennedy Director of Regulatory Services Birmingham City Council.

152

Item 74 Appendix 2

Organisations consulted Money Advice & Community Support Sussex Police Citizens Advice Bureau East Sussex Credit Union

153

154


Subject: Open Government Licence



Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services

Contact Officer: Name: Paul Colbran Tel: 29-0283


Key Decision: No


FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 Cabinet is recommended to apply the Open Government Licence to all data and

content, subject to limited exceptions as set out in the report. This would enable any member of the public to copy, publish and distribute the non-exempt information without infringing the council’s copyright.

1.2 The recommendation supports the Government’s commitment to increase public

sector transparency and to create a right to data. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Cabinet authorises data and content including that on the council’s public

website to be made available for re-use under the terms of the Open Government Licence

2.2 That Cabinet authorises the Strategic Director, Resources, to assess against the

criteria specified in paragraph 3.10 (i) and (ii) any exceptional circumstances which may support an exemption to publish data and content under the Open Government Licence and apply the exemption.

3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION: 3.1 The Council already publishes a variety of information on the Council website.

The Transparency agenda requires the council not only to publish information, but to publish it in a way that makes it re-usable by the public. Whilst the Council will continue to provide performance and financial information in context to help residents understand how the Council performs, data will also be made available so that interested and data-literate parties are able to re-use the data as they see fit.

3.2 The Council will enable greater transparency, engagement and efficiency by

allowing public and peer comparison and re-use of the data in applications and analysis. The publication of public data will improve levels of trust, expand opportunities for analysis of need with voluntary and community sectors, help to

155

open new markets for local business, achieve a reduction in avoidable contact and support the delivery of improved public services.

3.3 In May 2010, the Government published The Coalition: our programme for

government, setting out their commitment to increase government transparency and create a right to data. On 4 August 2011 the Cabinet Office published a consultation, Making Open Data Real: a Public Consultation, which sets out its proposed approach for implementing its transparency and open data agenda. This is about creating two forces: a pull – an enhanced right to data; and a push – a presumption of publication.

3.4 Already in place is the Government’s Licensing Framework and Open

Government Licence (OGL), which aim to open access to publicly held information, promoting transparency and enabling wider economic and social gain.

3.5 The OGL provides the mechanism for public sector content to be made

accessible with minimal restrictions on the user – thus providing the mechanism by which public sector information can be reused, adapted or blended together etc.

3.5 Copying, publishing or distributing written, graphic or photographic material

without the copyright holder’s consent usually constitutes an infringement of copyright, which could give rise to legal proceedings. The effect of the OGL is – in relation to the material to which it applies – to render the copying, publishing and distribution lawful by granting the necessary consent.

3.6 The licence applies to information and data in which the Government or a public

body holds the copyright, and which the rights holder has expressly made available under the terms of the OGL. This can be achieved by a clear statement in the information being licensed, or in a position which relates to the information, or by means of a hyperlink.

3.7 The OGL is reproduced in full at Appendix 1 3.8 Certain forms of information and data are excluded from the licence. These are

listed under the heading ‘Exemptions’ in the licence document, and include personal data and third party rights which the information provider is not authorised to license. An example of the latter would be Ordnance Survey material which the council is permitted to reproduce on its website under licence from OS, but which we are not permitted to license on to others.

3.9 The established statutory role of Caldicott Guardian assures all arrangements,

protocols and procedures to prevent disclosure of confidential social care information are maintained in line with established information sharing and data confidentiality policies

3.10 It is proposed that implementation would cover most data and content, including

databases and source code, on the council’s website and on websites where it holds sole publishing rights. It should be noted there exists a number of related websites to which the council provides information or links which are managed either in partnership with the council or privately on behalf of the council on which

156

we cannot legally enforce the OGL. The material which it is proposed should be made available for re-use under the terms of the OGL comprises all and any data and content except for:

(i) material which is considered exempt from the OGL as noted in the licence;

and (ii) material in respect of which the council wishes to retain income generated

from the granting of one or more copyright licences; or to preserve for potential future income from such licences; or

(iii) material selected to be published which conflicts with organisational practices and/or policies

4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION 4.1 Engagement with community and special interest groups has identified that open

data as an approach supports the Council’s aim of increased community engagement and improved relationships. Events such as CityCamp, dialogue with community and voluntary groups and consultation with the local developer community support initiatives which seek to maximise benefit from the reuse of council data assets.

5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications: 5.1 There are no costs associated with implementing OGL. Finance Officer Consulted: Mike Bentley Date: 31/08/11 Legal Implications: 5.2 The decision as to whether and in what manner the council applies the OGL is an

executive decision for Cabinet or the relevant Cabinet member. As indicated in paragraph 3.5, a licence to re-use the council’s data and content or information is needed to prevent infringement of the council’s copyright.

5.3 There is no legal obligation on the council to apply the OGL to its copyright

material, but doing so is consistent with government policy. Lawyer Consulted: Oliver Dixon Date: 15/08/11 Equalities Implications: 5.4 There are no implications specifically related to the implementation of OGL Sustainability Implications: 5.5 There are no adverse implications for sustainability as a result of implementing

OGL. The repurposing of data and content provides many benefits, from fostering stakeholder participation in solving complex problems, to enabling third parties to innovate completely new services, for example, as mobile applications that help visitors to find the fastest way to get around the city

157

Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.6 There are no implications as a result of implementing OGL

Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.7 There exists a risk that some licensed material on the council website contains

third party materials which may not be clearly defined as such but which, under the terms of the licence is exempt. Consideration with regards current and future web content will be required to ensure no infringements of 3rd party copyright are encountered.

5.8 There is the potential for an increased number of requests to publish additional

material for release under the terms of OGL impacting on existing capacity. These will be considered on a case-by-case and planned accordingly by the CIO

Public Health Implications: 5.8 There are no implications for Public Health as a result of implementing OGL. Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.9 The OGL is aimed at creating a culture of openness and transparency in public

services. Government has also identified social and economic gain as a consequence of open data, which supports the council priority of involving residents and communities in everything we do.

6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 An assessment was made against the most recognised licences for data,

databases and datasets including Creative Commons Licences, CC Zero tool and Open Data Commons licences.

6.2 OGL was considered the most appropriate licence for providing access to data in

both machine and human readable forms. The licence does not permit the copying of logos, registered trademarks and other IP such as patents and includes specific non-endorsement clauses.

6.3 OGL is compatible with the Creative Commons Attribution Licence for content,

and also the Open Data Commons Attribution Licence for data, datasets and databases thus providing the means for data, databases and content to be licensed under one licence which is beneficial for content comprising of multiple elements.

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 Publishing data under OGL supports the councils aim to achieve open and

transparent data which can be repurposed and is reusable.

158


Appendices: 1. Open Government Licence – full terms and conditions Documents in Members’ Rooms None Background Documents 1. The Coalition: our programme for government:

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/sites/default/files/resources/coalition_programme_for_government.pdf

2. Making Open Data Real: a Public Consultation:

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/making-open-data-real-public-consultation

159

Item 75 Appendix 1

You are encouraged to use and re-use the Information that is available under this licence, the Open

Government Licence, freely and flexibly, with only a few conditions.

Using information under this licence

Use of copyright and database right material expressly made available under this licence (the

‘Information’) indicates your acceptance of the terms and conditions below.

The Licensor grants you a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive licence to use the

Information subject to the conditions below.

This licence does not affect your freedom under fair dealing or fair use or any other copyright or

database right exceptions and limitations.

You are free to:

• copy, publish, distribute and transmit the Information;

• adapt the Information;

• exploit the Information commercially for example, by combining it with other Information,

or by including it in your own product or application.

You must, where you do any of the above:

• acknowledge the source of the Information by including any attribution statement specified

by the Information Provider(s) and, where possible, provide a link to this licence;

If the Information Provider does not provide a specific attribution statement, or if you are

using Information from several Information Providers and multiple attributions are not

practical in your product or application, you may consider using the following:

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v1.0.

160

Item 75 Appendix 1

• ensure that you do not use the Information in a way that suggests any official status or that

the Information Provider endorses you or your use of the Information;

• ensure that you do not mislead others or misrepresent the Information or its source;

• ensure that your use of the Information does not breach the Data Protection Act 1998 or

the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) Regulations 2003.

These are important conditions of this licence and if you fail to comply with them the rights granted to

you under this licence, or any similar licence granted by the Licensor, will end automatically.

Exemptions

This licence does not cover the use of:

• personal data in the Information;

• Information that has neither been published nor disclosed under information access legislation

(including the Freedom of Information Acts for the UK and Scotland) by or with the consent of

the Information Provider;

• departmental or public sector organisation logos, crests and the Royal Arms except where they

form an integral part of a document or dataset;

• military insignia;

• third party rights the Information Provider is not authorised to license;

• Information subject to other intellectual property rights, including patents, trademarks, and

design rights; and

• identity documents such as the British Passport.

No warranty

The Information is licensed ‘as is’ and the Information Provider excludes all representations,

warranties, obligations and liabilities in relation to the Information to the maximum extent permitted

by law.

The Information Provider is not liable for any errors or omissions in the Information and shall not be

liable for any loss, injury or damage of any kind caused by its use. The Information Provider does not

guarantee the continued supply of the Information.

161

Item 75 Appendix 1

Governing Law

This licence is governed by the laws of the jurisdiction in which the Information Provider has its

principal place of business, unless otherwise specified by the Information Provider.

Definitions

In this licence, the terms below have the following meanings:

‘Information’

means information protected by copyright or by database right (for example, literary and artistic

works, content, data and source code) offered for use under the terms of this licence.

‘Information Provider’

means the person or organisation providing the Information under this licence.

‘Licensor’

means any Information Provider which has the authority to offer Information under the terms of this

licence or the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, who has the authority to offer Information

subject to Crown copyright and Crown database rights and Information subject to copyright and

database right that has been assigned to or acquired by the Crown, under the terms of this licence.

‘Use’

as a verb, means doing any act which is restricted by copyright or database right, whether in the

original medium or in any other medium, and includes without limitation distributing, copying,

adapting, modifying as may be technically necessary to use it in a different mode or format.

‘You’

means the natural or legal person, or body of persons corporate or incorporate, acquiring rights under

this licence.

About the Open Government Licence

The Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (HMSO) has developed this licence as a tool to enable

Information Providers in the public sector to license the use and re-use of their Information under a

common open licence. The Controller invites public sector bodies owning their own copyright and

database rights to permit the use of their Information under this licence.

The Controller of HMSO has authority to license Information subject to copyright and database right

owned by the Crown. The extent of the Controller’s offer to license this Information under the terms of

this licence is set out in the UK Government Licensing Framework.

This is version 1.0 of the Open Government Licence. The Controller of HMSO may, from time to time,

issue new versions of the Open Government Licence. However, you may continue to use Information

licensed under this version should you wish to do so.

162

Item 75 Appendix 1

These terms have been aligned to be interoperable with any Creative Commons Attribution Licence,

which covers copyright, and Open Data Commons Attribution License, which covers database rights

and applicable copyrights.

Further context, best practice and guidance can be found in the UK Government Licensing Framework

section on The National Archives website.

163

164


Subject: Surveillance Policy


Report of: Director of Finance

Lead Cabinet Member: Leader of the Council

Contact Officer: Name: Jo Player Tel: 29-2488


Key Decision: No


FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 The purpose of the report is to inform the Cabinet of the activities that have been

undertaken utilising the powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) since the last report to Cabinet in June 2011 and to confirm that these activities were authorised in line with the necessity and proportionality rules.

1.2 The report also provides an update on the progress of the legislation needed to

introduce the proposed changes to the use of surveillance activity by local authorities.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Cabinet approves the continued use of covert surveillance and the

accessing of communications data as an enforcement tool to prevent and detect all crime and disorder investigated by its officers, providing the necessity and proportionality rules are stringently applied.

2.2 That Cabinet notes the surveillance activity undertaken by the authority since the

last report to Cabinet in June 2011compared to the same quarter in 2010 as set out in Appendix 1.


EVENTS: 3.1 The Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporates the European Convention on

Human Rights, requires the council to respect the right of citizens to a private and family life. This is a qualified right and, in certain circumstances, the council may interfere with an individual’s right, providing that interference is in accordance with the law.

165

3.2 The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) is the statutory mechanism for authorising covert surveillance, and accessing communications data. It seeks to ensure that any interference with an individual’s right is both necessary and proportionate.

3.3 The relevant codes of practice require that elected members should consider

internal reports on the use of the 2000 Act on a quarterly basis to ensure that it is being used consistently with the council’s policy and that the policy remains fit for purpose. Attached at Appendix 1 is a breakdown of the last quarter’s surveillance activity. This shows an increase in activity compared to the same period last year particularly in respect of flytipping. As a result the Senior Responsible Officer (Director of Finance) asked for a specific protocol to be produced for this area of activity. The equalities impact of this protocol will be assessed and the proposals will be considered by Cabinet when it conducts its annual review of Council’s policy in November.

3.4 The changes to the council’s covert surveillance policy and procedures, which

were agreed at Cabinet in June 2011, have been implemented. 3.5 Following the Government’s review of surveillance powers and their use by local

authorities which were reported to Parliament in January this year, the recommendations are still being debated as part of the Freedoms Bill. The Bill is still progressing through Parliament and Royal Assent is likely later this year or early next year.

4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION 4.1 There has been no consultation in the compilation of this report 5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS:

Financial Implications: 5.1 There are no direct financial implications associated with the recommendations

of this report. Finance Officer Consulted: Karen Brookshaw Date: 22/08/11 Legal Implications: 5.2 The legislative framework governing the use of covert surveillance and accessing

communications data is referred to in paragraphs 3.1 and 3.2 above. The council’s policy and procedures, including the latest amendments, are intended to ensure that any council operation involving covert surveillance is exercised lawfully and consistently.

Lawyer Consulted: Oliver Dixon Date: 30/08/11 Equalities Implications: 5.3 The proper and consistent application of the RIPA powers should ensure that a

person’s basic human rights are not interfered with without justification. Each

166

application will be assessed by the gatekeeper for necessity and proportionality prior to the authorisation by a restricted number of ‘Authorising Officers’. This process should identify any inconsistencies or disproportionate targeting of minority groups and enable action to be taken to remedy any perceived inequality. Need to include something additional here in relation to flytipping.

Sustainability Implications: 5.4 There has been an increase in directed surveillance requested as a result of

illegal flytipping. Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.5 If used appropriately, the activities described in the report should enhance our

capacity to tackle crime and disorder. Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.6 Any failure to comply with the provisions of the legislation could render any

evidence obtained as inadmissible, resulting in a failed prosecution, and have a detrimental impact on the council’s reputation.

Public Health Implications: 5.7 There are potential public health risks if illegal flytipping is not properly enforced, Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.8 Proper application of the powers will help to achieve fair enforcement of the law

and help to protect the environment and public from rogue trading and illegal activity.

6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 A review of ‘surveillance activities’ could be the subject of the normal scrutiny

process. 7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 It is essential that officers are able to use the RIPA powers where necessary

within the new threshold, but only after excluding all other methods of enforcement. An authorisation will only be given by a Director or above, and scrutinised by a ‘gatekeeper’, therefore, it is unlikely that these powers will be abused.

7.2 The implementation of the Annual review and quarterly oversight has made the

whole process transparent and demonstrates to the public that the correct procedures are followed.

167


Appendices: 1. Summary of surveillance activity undertaken by the authority since the last report

to Cabinet in June 2011 and a comparison with activity undertaken in the same quarter in 2010.


168

Item 76 Appendix 1

QUARTERLY REPORT TO MEMBERS ON USE OF SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REGULATION OF INVESTIGATORY POWERS ACT 2000 Year: 2011-12 Quarter 2(Jun- August)

No in Quarter 2

No in Year to Date 2011(Cumulative)*

No in Quarter 2 2010

No in Year to Date 2010 (Cumulative)**

Number of Directed Surveillance Authorisations Granted

4 8 2 3

Number of Directed Surveillance Authorisations Rejected

1 1 0 0

Number of Directed Surveillance Authorisations Cancelled

7 8 3 5

Number of Covert Human Intelligence Sources Authorised

0 0 0 0

Number of Juveniles or Vulnerable Persons authorised as Covert Human Intelligence Sources

0 0 0 0

Number of Applications for Covert Human Intelligence Sources Rejected

0 0 0 0

Number of Covert Human Intelligence Source authorisations Cancelled

0 0 0 0

169

Item 76 Appendix 1

Number of Applications for Acquisition of Communications Data Approved

0 1 0 2

Number of Applications for Acquisition of Communications Data Rejected

0 2 0 0

Number of errors with regards to communications data (as defined in Statutory Code of Practice) recorded

0 1 0 0

Number of errors with regards to communications data (as defined in Statutory Code of Practice) reported to the Interception of Communications Commissioner

0 1 0 0

Have all authorisations been granted by officer of level prescribed by law? Yes Comments on Quarterly Activity: (to include any recommended changes to policy, and, explanations for any activity outside scope of policy).

• * Period Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 (March – end August)

• ** Period Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 (March – end August) Monitoring Officer Signature

Senior Responsible Officer Signature:

Date: 12 September 2011

170

CABINET AGENDA ITEM 77B

OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY COMMISSION

Agenda Item 34 Brighton & Hove City Council

Subject: Consultation on proposed merger of West and East Sussex Fire and Rescue Services

Date of Meeting: 13th September 2011

Report of: Strategic Director Communities

Contact Officer: Name: David Murray Tel: 29-



FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 West Sussex Fire and Rescue and East Sussex Fire and Rescue Services are

seeking views on proposals to work more closely and potentially merge. 1.2 The consultation period closes on October 6th 2011 and member views are sought on

the proposals by this date. 2. RECOMMENDATIONS: 2.1 That Members consider the issues associated with the proposed changes to ways of

working across West and East Sussex Fire and Rescue Services. 2.2 That Members refer any comments that may be agreed on the proposed merger of

Fire and Rescue Services to the Cabinet meeting scheduled for 22 September 2011. 3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/CHRONOLOGY OF KEY EVENTS: 3.1 Brighton & Hove’s Fire and Rescue Service has been provided as part of an

integrated service with the rest of East Sussex – East Sussex Fire & Rescue Service (ESFRS) since April 1997.

3.2 Over the last few months ESFRS and the West Sussex Fire and Rescue Service

(WSFRS) have been exploring a number of options for closer working and have reached a stage where they are consulting on three specific options.

171

3.3 The consultation process for determining views on these options closes on October 6 2011. If a recommendation for merger were forthcoming this would then be taken forward to the Department for Communities and Local Government by December 2011. The earliest date for implementation, if agreed, would be 01 April 2013.

3.4 The three main options now being consulted upon more widely are:

Option 1: Base position: Continued joint working in specific areas between the two services - Status Quo

Option 2a: Enhanced Collaboration between the two Services but under existing governance arrangements for West Sussex County Council (WSCC) and East Sussex Fire Authority (ESFA)

Option 3: Merger (Combination) into a new Fire Authority covering (West Sussex, East Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove with a new merged Service underpinning it).

3.5 Members are being provided with a number of documents with regard to the

consultation namely:

• West Sussex & East Sussex Fire & Rescue Services – Business Case for increased collaboration and possible merger

• Public Consultation Document

• Frequently asked questions

• East Sussex Structure Chart 3.6 There appear to be four main areas for Members within Brighton & Hove City Council

to focus upon.

• The business case

• Governance issues

• Operational issues

• The consultation process The Business Case 3.7 It is important to note that Fire & Rescue Services, in common with most public

services, face very significant financial pressures now and into the future. The estimated savings required from the services are approximately 25%, and the current shortfalls operating separately reach approximately £3.8m per annum.

3.8 On this basis, a merger of the two services makes the most business sense as it

offers the opportunity to merge governance, management and operations and achieve economies of scale that come from, for example, integrating disparate IT systems into a more efficient whole and taking a wider view of asset management. In taking such steps, there is the potential to protect front line services to communities. Continuing to work as now whilst driving out efficiencies, and collaborating more closely, offer some opportunities for savings and rationalisation, but insufficient when assessed against the size and scale of reductions required.

172

3.9 One other point to note is that assets and any debts would be transferred to the new

Authority. 3.10 Governance Issues 3.11 The proposals for merging the two services set out options for new governance

arrangements. In effect, all options are based on two fundamental principles:

• Number of electors in each areas

• A belief that any Member, irrespective of party or “locality”, will work to deliver an effective service across the whole of Sussex.

3.12 The ratio suggested according to electors would work as follows, although actual

calculations wouldn’t be undertaken until around mid 2012: West Sussex 3 / 6 East Sussex 2 / 6 BHCC 1 / 6

Therefore in terms of impact on BHCC representation:

BHCC East Sussex West Sussex

12 Members 2 4 6

18 Members 3 6 9

24 Members 4 8 12

3.13 Twelve is considered the very lowest figure possible for a combined Fire and Rescue

Service with a population of approximately 1.5million. More than 24 becomes a very large Board. The maximum number of Members is 25.

3.14 Members may wish to carefully consider governance arrangements within the context

of striving for effective front line services, delivering sufficient savings and desirable levels of local democratic control for Brighton and Hove. East Sussex Fire Authority currently has 18 Members, of which 6 are from Brighton and Hove and the remaining 12 from East Sussex County Council.

3.15 Operational Issues 3.16 If a merger proceeds, irrespective of whatever governance arrangements are put in

place, there is a need to ensure that the specific operational requirements that a city like Brighton & Hove needs continue to be delivered effectively by any new body. The demands of Brighton & Hove are unlike most of those across the rest of East Sussex and most different to those of west Sussex, with only a handful of other places similar in terms of density, high rises and operational challenges. Clearly, colleagues in the ESFRS have many years experience of dealing with these issues, and supporting

173

them in ensuring these “differences” are registered within a wider Authority will be crucial.

3.17 In terms of officer working in this important area, at the moment BHCC provides the

Monitoring Officer role, with East Sussex County Council providing the Treasurer and 151 roles. Clearly, there is an opportunity to re-assess these roles if a merger proceeds. As with member representation, ensuring an equitable spread of accountabilities across officers is something to note and be aware of.

4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION 4.1 The consultation process has been managed by the Fire and Rescue Services and

has included consultation with Members, officers and specific communities throughout Sussex.

4.2 A 12 formal week public consultation with staff, partners, stakeholder and members of

the public commenced on the 14 July, running through to the 6 October. 4.3 A number of public meetings have been scheduled during the consultation:

August

• 13 – Stand at Pride

• 20/21 – Stand on Hove Lawns

• 27 – Newhaven Station Open Day

• 27 – Pevensey Station Open Day

• 28 – Burwash Station Open Day

• 29 – Heathfield Station Open Day September

• 01 – Eastbourne Public Meeting

• 06 – Brighton Public Meeting

• 10 – Crowborough Station Open Day

• 12 – Stakeholder Forum for partners, businesses & voluntary sector in Uckfield

• 12 – Community Engagement Focus Group -in Uckfield - The attendees are selected by an Independent research company and facilitated by that company.

• 13 – Stakeholder Forum for partners, businesses and voluntary sector in Hove

• 13 – Community Engagement Focus Group – Hove

• 14 – Stakeholder Forum for partners, businesses & voluntary sector in Eastbourne

• 14 – Community Engagement Focus Group – Hastings

• 17 – Mayfield Station Open Day

• 17 – Bexhill Station Open Day

174

5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications: 5.1 There are no direct financial implications to the Council arising from the

recommendations of this report. The business case attached to the report goes into some detail with regard to financial issues from page 53 onwards.

Legal Implications: 5.2 The legal framework for merger is in section 2 of the Fire and Rescue Services Act

2004. It provides that the Secretary of State may by order make a scheme constituting a fire and rescue authority for the combined area of two or more existing fire and rescue authorities. A scheme under this section may be made only if it appears to the Secretary of State that, in the interests of–

(a) economy, efficiency and effectiveness, or

(b) public safety,

there should be a single fire and rescue authority for the combined area.

A scheme may be made by the Secretary of State to give effect to a draft scheme submitted to him by the existing authorities in question, or on his own initiative. An order under section 2 may make provision about certain specified matters including, the composition of the combined authority; the financing of the combined authority; the transfer of staff, property, rights and liabilities to or from the combined authority and the payment of compensation in respect of loss suffered by any person in consequence of the constitution of the combined authority.

Lawyer Consulted: Liz Woodley Date: 01/09/2011 Equalities Implications: 5.3 Any closer working/merger will need to ensure that equality and diversity are

promoted. The attached business case outlines that equalities are part of the strategic vision of both authorities currently and would be addressed as part of the strategic direction of a merged organisation.

Sustainability Implications: 5.4 Merger options will need to consider any sustainability implications. The strategic

vision of both organisations currently seeks to address sustainability issues. Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.5 Fire and Rescue services have an important role to play in the wider community safety

agenda. Members will want to be assured that any agreed way forward will not reduce the ability of the fire and rescue service to engage with this agenda.

Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.6 The attached business case contains risk assessments from page 81 onwards.

175

Public Health Implications: 5.7 Members will want to be satisfied that the business case provided for the various

options being considered mean that the level of fire and rescue service delivered is acceptable.

Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.8 The attached documents seek to address the implications for the city.


Appendices: 1 Business Case for the Merger (not circulated with Cabinet papers, can be viewed online

with the OSC papers) 2 Public Consultation Document 3 FAQs


176

9

Proposed merger between

East and West Sussex

Fire & Rescue Services

Public Consultation

177

2

� 0845 130 8855

The following formats are available on request:

Large print (reformatted and increased

to 18 point sans serif font)

CD ROM in plain text format to enable computer ‘reader’ systems to

access and translate the information. Audio tape, audio CD and braille.

Pictoral format suitable for people with learning difficulties (‘easy read’).

For translations of this document please contact the

Media and Communications Officer.

Tel: 0845 130 8855

Fax: 01323 462003

Alternative formats and translation

Albanian

Arabic

Bengali

Cantonese

Farsi

Russian

Gujarati

Kurdish

Portuguese

Polish

Thank you for your interest in East Sussex Fire Authority

and its Fire & Rescue Service.

Proposed Merger to create a new Fire Authority covering

East and West Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove

Over the years, we have striven to deliver high quality services to all

our local communities, at a price council tax payers can afford to pay.

These are the key priorities you have identified as being the most

important from our annual consultation exercises. As such, we have kept

council tax increases low and made efficiency savings to avoid cutting

our services to local communities. However, most public services are

facing more difficult budget decisions and we are no different, yet we

remain committed to making the right decisions and prioritising our

resources effectively after taking your views into account.

We believe that a larger Fire Authority covering East and West Sussex

and our City would be better in terms of building a more resilient

organisation to deliver much needed services as well as giving more

scope to reduce management and overhead costs. We explain why

in this consultation document.

Your views on such a crucial issue are extremely im

portant to us, and this

consultation provides you with the opportunity to give us your feedback

before any decisions are taken on the way forward.

You can do this by completing the questionnaire on page 9, or you can

contact us by phone, letter or email via the contact details on the back

cover. Further details and supporting documents are available on our

website – www.esfrs.org– or printed copies can be sent on request.

East S

ussex

Fire & Rescu

e Service

Chief Fire Officer

& Chief Execu

tive

Des Prichard

East S

ussex

Fire Autho

rity Cha

irman

Coun

cillor

John Livings

178

3

Background

In December 2010, West Sussex County Council and East Sussex

Fire Authority jointly announced they would explore options for

closer collaboration, up to and including a full merger of the two

Fire & Rescue Services. The aim was to increase operational

capacity and help preserve services to local communities. Since

then, both Services have considered the benefits that collaboration

could bring to residents, businesses and visitors across Sussex*.

Both East Sussex Fire Authority and West Sussex County Council

have now considered the resulting business case, which examined

the pros and cons of a number of options for closer collaboration,

and both organisations believe it shows that a full merger is the

best way to achieve these aims. This is subject to satisfactory

future funding arrangements being settled with HM Government.

We will also take account of the outcomes of our consultation

process. The business case is available to view on our website.

Copies are also available at local libraries.

So, before any final decision is made, both Services want to

consult their residents, local partners, businesses and staff –

because they are your fire & rescue services.

* All references to Sussex mean the combined areas

of the City of Brighton & Hove, East Sussex and West Sussex.

179

4

Why are East Sussex Fire Authority and

West Sussex County Council proposing

to merge their fire & rescue services?

HM Government is reducing the grant it pays to fire & rescue

services and as a result we have to make an estimated combined

annual budget saving of £3.8m over the next three to four years.

The proposed merger is to protect fire & rescue services to

local communities from the im

pact of grant reductions to local

authorities and continue to provide the excellent fire & rescue

services to people across Sussex.

Our key aims from a merger would be to achieve:

•Streamlined senior management and support costs, making

services more cost effective.

•Improved overall operational performance, such as our ability

to provide specialist operational resources across a wider

area, while avoiding duplication of specialist teams.

•Improved civil protection and related operational resilience

(e.g. flooding or terrorist incidents).

•A stronger community voice and leadership across Sussex.

•Providing services across a similar area to Sussex Police.

Both fire & rescue services agree that either staying as we are

or just collaborating with each other more closely without merging

and absorbing the grant reduction would result in cuts to

operational firefighting resources, other community services,

significant increases to your council tax or all of these. Merging the

two Services would save money –especially in the long term –and

is considered the most economical and the best way to maintain

service levels.

Merging would be a good ‘strategic fit’ as both existing Services

are similar in terms of geography, resources, fire stations, people

and budgets. We share a border, have similar community profiles

and respond to the same type of risks.

A Sussex Fire Authority would still be accountable to the people of

Sussex, be locally managed and respond to local needs.

180

5

Will there be changes to my local fire station

or other community services?

The merger proposals are not designed to reduce the number of

fire stations or the level of operational capability. However, both

Services are considering future options, including possible

changes to their control centres now that HM Government has

rejected earlier plans for Regional M

obilising and Control Centres.

A merger would help to safeguard fire & rescue community

services, as the focus would be on savings in the management

and support costs.

The proposed new Service would have one person acting as both

Chief Fire Officer and Chief Executive, supported by a single

management team.

Will merging affect my council tax bill?

There would be some transitional costs in merging the two

Services but we plan to merge without significantly increasing the

cost to you through your council tax. The cost for the new Sussex

Fire Authority would be shown as a precept on your council tax bill,

in the same way it is shown for Sussex Police.

It would be im

portant to achieve equalisation of council tax, so that

residents in West Sussex, East Sussex and the City of Brighton &

Hove would eventually pay the same for their fire & rescue service.

HM Government has indicated this equalisation could

be achieved over a period of five years.

How will the new Fire & Rescue Service

be governed?

Merging would mean the creation of a new Combined Fire

Authority (CFA) across Sussex, with statutory responsibility for

providing and deciding the future direction of fire & rescue

services and this new organisation would decide on the future

direction of fire & rescue services across Sussex. West Sussex

County Council would then no longer have responsibility for fire &

rescue within its area and East Sussex Fire and Rescue Service

would cease to exist as a separate entity.

Elected councillors from Brighton & Hove City Council, East

Sussex County Council and West Sussex County Council would

govern a Sussex Fire Authority. The name for the new Authority has

not yet been determined. Sussex Fire Authority is a working title.

A Sussex Fire Authority would have proportionate representation

from East Sussex, West Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove.

For example, if the new Fire Authority has 24 members, it would

have 12 representing East Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove,

and 12 representing West Sussex.

The Chief Fire Officer would also be the Chief Executive of the

new Fire & Rescue Service, would report to the Sussex Fire

Authority and would be accountable for all areas of performance,

including operations and service delivery, budget and business

planning.

181

9

East and West Sussex Fire & Rescue Services

Fire Station Locations

182

9

The map shows the area that would be covered by a

combined Fire & Rescue Service for East and West

Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove. It shows the

locations of fire stations and also the closest stations

from neighbouring fire & rescue services.

Images of Sussex

1.The Seven Sisters

2.The Amex Stadium, Brighton

3.Cowdray, Midhurst 4.Bosham Quay

5.Royal Pavilion, Brighton 6. View across the Weald

7.Battle Abbey 8.St. Nicolas Church, Pevensey

12

34

56

78

183

8

When would the merger happen?

The public consultation runs from July 14th to October 6th and all

responses will be considered before both East Sussex Fire

Authority and West Sussex County Council make final decisions in

December 2011. Both bodies will have to agree to a merger for a

new authority to come into being.

If agreed, a merger would still be subject to consent from HM

Government and, if approved, the likely date it would take effect

would be on April 1st 2013.

What would happen

if the merger does not go ahead?

Should the authorities decide not to pursue a merger then work will

continue on closer collaboration to identify any further

opportunities for financial savings and organisational efficiencies.

These would be shown in our respective annual Service plans.

Current forecasts show that the outcome may result in a reduction

in operational posts, station closures or removal of appliances.

Have the authorities considered other

options for making these savings rather than

affecting Fire & Rescue Services?

East Sussex Fire Authority is a stand-alone organisation, which is

required to make savings in line with reductions in its grant from

HM Government.

West Sussex County Council is making substantial savings across

a wide range of public services and most areas have to make very

difficult budget cuts. Many of those savings plans for other public

services are already being put into place. The current policy of

both organisations is to look for savings in management and

support costs and from closer working with partners before

reductions to operational fire & rescue services.

184

9

MOISTEN HERE

MOISTEN HERE

MOISTEN HERE

FOLD HERE FOLD HERE

�

Strongly

Tend to

Neither

Tend to Strongly

agree

agree

agree nor disagree

disagree

disagree

Do you agree that this

document helps to explain

the reasons for a merger?

Do you agree that the focus

should be on reductions in

management and administrative

costs to deliver savings and

improve operational resilience?

Do you agree with the proposed

merger of Fire & Rescue

Services across Sussex?

If you believe that there is anything about the proposed

merger that needs further consideration before a decision

is taken please include your comments below:

..............................................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................................

..............................................................................................................................................

We want to hear your views...

We would be grateful if you would fill in this questionnaire.

When completed, please detach this page, fold and stick as indicated

and post to the FREEPOST address on the reverse.

Com

pletion of th

is sec

tion is volun

tary, b

ut th

e inform

ation will help us

ens

ure that all

grou

ps are in

clud

ed. Y

ou sho

uld on

ly sup

ply us

with

inform

ation ab

out y

ourself tha

t you

are co

mfortab

le w

ith sha

ring

at this po

int. (P

lease cros

s the relevant box

es)

Where do you live?

East Sus

sex

Wes

t Sus

sex

The City

of B

righ

ton & H

ove

Age

16 – 24

25 – 34

35 – 44

45 – 54

55 – 65

66 or ov

erPrefer no

t to say

Gender

Male

Female

White En

glish/Welsh

/Sco

ttish

/ Northern Irish

/Britis

h Irish

Gyp

sy or Irish

Trave

ller

Any

other W

hite bac

kgroun

d

Black

/African

/Caribbe

an/B

lack Britis

h

African

Caribbe

an

Any

other Black

/African

/Caribbe

an bac

kgroun

d

Mixed

/Multip

le Ethnic

White and

Black

Caribbe

an

White and

Black

African

White and

Asian

Any

other M

ixed

/multip

le ethnic ba

ckgrou

nd

Asian

/Asian

Britis

h

Indian

Pa

kistan

i Ban

glad

eshi

Chine

se

Any

other Asian

bac

kgroun

d

Other Ethnic Group

Arab

Any

other ethnic grou

p

To which of these ethnic groups do you feel you belong?

Christia

n (including Church of

England, Catholic, Protestant

and all other Christian denominations)

Jewish

No relig

ion/be

lief

Bud

dhist

Mus

limHindu

Any

other religion/be

lief

Prefer no

t to say

What is your religion/belief?

(Please cross one only)

The Eq

uality Act 201

0 de

scribe

s a pe

rson

as disabled

if th

ey have a long

stan

ding

phy

sica

l or

men

tal c

onditio

n that has la

sted

or is likely to

last at lea

st 12 mon

ths; and

this con

ditio

n ha

s a

subs

tantial a

dverse

effe

ct on their ab

ility to

carry out normal day-to-da

y ac

tivities

.

Do you co

nsider yourself to have a disa

bility or long

term limiting

cond

ition?

Yes

No

Prefer no

t to say

CUT HERE185

Opinion Research Services

FREEPOST (SS1018)PO BOX 530

Swansea

SA1 1ZL

NO

STAMP

REQUIRED

�

Proposed merger between

East and West Fire & Rescue Services

Public Consultation

186

11

187

9

East Sussex Fire & Rescue Service

Headquarters

20 Upperton Road, Eastbourne

East Sussex BN21 1EU

Tel: 0845 130 8855

Fax: 01323 725574


Web: www.esfrs.org

188

14th July 2011 PROPOSAL TO MERGE EAST AND WEST SUSSEX FIRE & RESCUE SERVICES

The following Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) have been written to inform debate on the proposed merger of East and West Sussex Fire & Rescue Services under a new Fire Authority covering East and West Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove. Final decisions on merging will only be taken after a full twelve-week public consultation, and the answers provided here are only to provide guidance on some of the key points if the merger goes ahead. Questions have been sub-divided into:

1. General 2. Service Delivery 3. Organisational Change 4. Finance 5. Governance and Accountability 6. Consultation 7. Decision process

1. GENERAL Q. Why are we proposing a merger? A. We have a duty to provide the best possible service to our local community and believe merging is the best way to achieve this. Putting it simply, we want to maximise the operational and organisational benefits of a larger, combined Service whilst at the same time doing our best to preserve services to local communities in the wake of the cuts to public spending. If we opt not to merge, and still have to make the scale of savings required from within existing services and budgets, it will almost certainly result in cuts to fire stations and other community services. Q. What are the benefits of merging? Is it just about saving money? A. It is not just about saving money although that is certainly a factor, and merging will deliver significant savings especially in the medium to long term. Merging is the best way to protect fire stations and other services to local communities in the current economic climate. Streamlining our operational support functions and senior management will improve the ratio of support staff to frontline staff and therefore make frontline services more cost effective. Merging will give us more resilience to cope with major incidents, or staff absences from pandemic flu, etc. It means we can share expertise and avoid duplication of specialist teams or functions and it will give us a strategic voice across Sussex in line with other emergency services. The overriding reason is to deliver the best service possible to our local communities and people across Sussex and the City of Brighton & Hove.

189

Q. Why just East and West Sussex and not other FRSs? A. The business case to support merging has to satisfy three factors: operational service, finance and governance (accountability to the local community). This is a good ‘strategic fit’ for Sussex which may not be the case if we were to merge with other neighbouring services. Both existing Services are similar in terms of geography, resources, fire stations, people and budgets. We obviously share a border, but we have similar community profiles and respond to the same type of risks. Merging keeps a local identity for the fire & rescue service and we feel this is important in order to best respond to local concerns and be readily accountable to local people. Q. When will the merger take place? A. If a merger is supported after the public consultation it will take effect on 1st April 2013. The consultation runs from 14th July to 6th October and the decision on whether to proceed is expected to be made in December 2011. 2. SERVICE DELIVERY Q. Will a merger mean fewer fire stations or other services to local communities? A. Merging should mean we can preserve fire stations and there are no plans to close any stations. Other services like community safety schemes for the vulnerable or educating young people will be co-ordinated and streamlined with fewer managers and some savings on administrative roles where there is unnecessary duplication, but with the same levels of service being delivered. Q. Will a merger increase emergency response times? A. No. We will work together to achieve a common standard by which to assess our performance but, by keeping existing fire stations, emergency response times should remain as they are now. 3. ORGANISATIONAL CHANGE Q. What will be the name of the Authority and Service if we combine? A. The Authority is likely to be named Sussex Fire Authority and its service as Sussex Fire & Rescue Service, although this still has to be confirmed. Q. Who will be Chief Fire Officer & Chief Executive of the newly combined Service? A. There will be an open and transparent appointment process for the appointment of a new Chief Fire Officer & Chief Executive, and we aim to have the new CFO&CE designate in place by autumn 2012. This will be one of the first decisions taken following the creation of a shadow fire authority to oversee the transition of services, and to develop priorities and business plans for the new organisation from April 2013 onwards. Q. Where will the HQ be located? A. The headquarters of East Sussex FRS is in Eastbourne and for West Sussex it is in Chichester. The building or location of a HQ for the combined Service still has to be decided, but it is very unlikely to change in the foreseeable future and arrangements will be made to continue to work out of both locations.

190

Q. Where will the Control Room be located? A. Options for providing a command and mobilising function, including how and where this will be located, are still being examined and will be discussed with staff and representative bodies. Q. What will the new organisational structure be? A. As we go to consultation, no decisions have been taken on organisational structures, functions or teams as these will be determined during the planning for implementation stage. At this stage, it has only been agreed that there will be a single management team. This will be led by a Chief Fire Officer who will also be the Chief Executive. The organisational structure of other functions and the precise make up of teams will be considered once more detailed preparations commence. Any outcomes will be published once they have been agreed following a period of staff consultation. Q. How will we decide which teams to combine? A. The new organisational structure will streamline the management of all operational and support posts. Over the next few months we will be reviewing all these functions in detail to examine the similarities of roles in each Service and try to possibly identify more efficient ways of working. This will include control rooms, senior operational managers on rota and specialist support teams. When potential savings have been identified, in sufficient detail, they will be consulted upon and discussed with staff and the representative bodies before being made public. 4. FINANCE Q. How much money does each Service have to save? A. Both Services have identified the need to achieve additional savings of at least £3.8m over the next four years in addition to any savings already approved. West Sussex has to save £2.5m, in addition to the £1.5m it has already saved through its Fire Redesign programme in 2010/11. East Sussex has to save a further £1.3m on top of £5m savings already identified through its Rural Review and service prioritisation programme. Q. Are there other options to save £3.8m? A. Both Services have assessed different options and they will continue to drive out efficiency savings where they can be identified, but merging is considered the only way to achieve the scope and scale of savings required without adversely affecting levels of service to the public. Q. Where would the savings come from? A. The focus will be savings in management costs and streamlining operational support functions. Q. Will there be some transitional costs before money can be saved? A. Yes, in the short term, but these will be heavily outweighed by savings in the longer term. We will try to offset some of the transitional costs by applying for support from the coalition government. A local and voluntary merger like this supports their political agenda and was an option put forward by the Fire Minister after the Comprehensive Spending Review.

191

Q. How will the newly combined Service be funded? A. Fire & Rescue Service funding is a combination of a ‘formula grant’ from central government plus a proportion of locally raised council tax. In a combined fire authority like East Sussex the formula grant is paid direct and the remainder is raised through council tax. The amount is shown as a precept on your local council tax bill, similar to the precept charge for the police. In a county council run fire service like West Sussex the formula grant and council tax is paid directly to the County Council and they allocate an annual budget to the Fire & Rescue Service as part of the county’s overall budget plan. There is no additional precept charge shown on local council tax bills, but the cost of the Fire & Rescue Service is shown in breakdown of County Council spending. If a merger takes place it will mean a Combined Fire Authority for Sussex so it will be financed like the current East Sussex model. Q. Will a combined Service mean changes to council tax? A. Council tax is set locally by East and West Sussex County Councils, and Brighton & Hove City Council or the relevant district and borough council for the particular area. Added to these are the precepts from other bodies such as Sussex Police and Town and Parish councils. Creating a new Sussex Fire Authority should mean that roughly the same amounts will be paid by council tax payers in East Sussex and the City of Brighton and Hove as currently planned. For West Sussex council tax payers the expectation is that the reduction in the West Sussex County Council council tax bill due to the transfer of its fire & rescue service to the new Fire Authority should equate to the precept of the new Fire Authority. There are strict rules set out by DCLG on this issue, called ‘council tax equalisation’, in order to ensure local council taxpayers are not adversely affected by such structural changes. As such, significant increases to the overall amount of council tax paid are not allowed, although changes to bring about one precept figure being applied across the whole of the area may be phased over a period of up to five years, subject to Government approval. The exact amounts will not be known until budgets are set and formula grant for 2013/14 is known. The precise amount of precept paid will be shown on your council tax bill from April 2013. 5. GOVERNANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY Q. How does a Combined Fire Authority (CFA) work and how is it governed? A. Combined Fire Authorities have a statutory responsibility to provide the functions of a fire & rescue service under the terms of the Fire & Rescue Service Act 2004. The CFA is made up of elected members from all the County Councils or Unitary Authorities in its designated area. In a Sussex Combined Fire Authority these Elected Members will come from Brighton & Hove City Council, East Sussex County Council and West Sussex County Council.

192

East Sussex Fire & Rescue Service is already governed by the East Sussex Combined Fire Authority, which comprises eighteen elected members - twelve from East Sussex and six from the City of Brighton & Hove. West Sussex Fire & Rescue Service is not a CFA and is currently governed by West Sussex County Council, which is the statutory fire authority for West Sussex. The statutory responsibilities of both the East Sussex Combined Fire Authority and West Sussex County Council will be transferred across to a new CFA for the whole of Sussex in the event of a merger. The maximum number of members allowed for a CFA is 25. In a Sussex CFA we will need to ensure that there is equal representation from both existing fire authorities. For example, if the new CFA has 24 members, it will have eight members representing East Sussex, four members representing the City of Brighton & Hove and twelve representing West Sussex. Conversely, if there are eighteen Members, the numbers will be six, three and nine respectively. Combined Fire Authorities must have three appointed officers to advise them. These are the Treasurer, the Monitoring Officer and the Chief Fire Officer. The Chief Fire Officer (& Chief Executive) is the appointed officer to manage the Fire & Rescue Service and is accountable for all areas of performance including operations and service delivered, budget and resource management and business planning. The Treasurer has statutory responsibility for the effective management of the Fire Authority’s financial arrangements. The Monitoring Officer also has statutory duties in order to ensure Members meet their statutory responsibilities, maintain standards of public office and keep within the law. 6. CONSULTATION Q. What are the dates for the public consultation? A. The public consultation will run from 14th July – 6th October 2011 Q. What consultation opportunities will there be for staff? A. Each Service will be responsible for its own internal consultation with staff, but there will be some joint consultation with representative bodies. Precise arrangements and dates are still to be confirmed, but staff consultation will be face-to-face wherever possible in the form of seminars, briefings and team meetings. These will be backed up with written and electronic communications in the form of emails, Service Brief and the intranet. We will ensure ALL staff have opportunities to discuss the merger, ask questions, and submit feedback. Q. What consultation opportunities will there be for the public? A. We will proactively use local media to promote awareness of the merger and consultation period. We will offer to present our proposals at relevant public meetings and there will be consultation opportunities at fire station open days and other public

193

events (for example, Brighton Pride). The dates of all these events will be sent to local media and published on our websites. We will hold forums for businesses and voluntary organisations, and focus groups for the public, all facilitated by an independent consultant. We will write to every organisation or individual registered as an existing consultee for our Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMPs). A consultation document will be available online and printed copies will be available in libraries, reception areas of Council offices and on request. Everyone will have the opportunity to have their response recorded at one of these events, or their feedback can be given by phone, letter or to a dedicated email address. Q. How will feedback be recorded and evaluated? A. Feedback from all events will be recorded on a standard form and entered onto a database. Feedback and issues raised will be shared between Services. We will respond within five working days to all feedback received via email or letter to confirm it has been received and noted. Feedback requiring a more detailed response or further research may take longer, but this will be explained at the time. All feedback will be weighted and evaluated by Opinion Research Services (ORS), an independent social research organisation with extensive experience of public consultations in the Fire sector. Their report and conclusions will be presented to both organisations before any final decisions are taken. It will also be published on our websites, but without contravening data protection laws or breaking personal confidences. 7. THE DECISION PROCESS Q. Who makes the final decision and when? A. Both the East Sussex Fire Authority and West Sussex County Council have to make their own separate decision, and only after considering the feedback from the public consultation. In East Sussex, the decision will be made by the eighteen members of East Sussex Fire Authority. In West Sussex the decision will be made after being debated at a meeting of the full County Council, open to all 71 Elected Members. These decisions are expected to be made in December 2011, but any decision to merge and create a new statutory fire authority for Sussex will be subject to the approval of the Minister of State for Fire on behalf of central government. Q. What will be the timescale if a merger is agreed? A. December 2011: Decision made by ESFA and WSCC.

September 2012: Combination Order (statutory instrument to create a new fire authority) laid before Parliament.

April 2013: Statutory responsibility transferred to the new Sussex Fire Authority and creation of Sussex Fire & Rescue Service.

194

Q. Where can I get further info? A. Hopefully we have answered many of your questions on the merger in these FAQs, but if you would like further information or have specific questions you can contact Assistant Chief Officer Diana Williams via email - [email protected]

195

196


Subject: Investment in City Infrastructure – Car Park Improvements Phase II



Contact Officer: Name: Austen Hunter Tel: 29-2245



Ward(s) affected: Queen’s Park; Regency; St Peter’s & North Laine

FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 This investment is being made in line with the 3 new delivery principles recently

established in the council’s third Local Transport Plan [LTP3], which are to ‘maintain, manage and improve’ the city’s transport infrastructure and facilities. The provision and operation of high quality public car parks forms part of the city’s overall transport system and infrastructure that helps to:

§ Provide choice for local people § Improve the experience of visitors § Reduce congestion § Reduce anti-social behaviour § Support the local economy, tourism and local business.

1.2 This report sets out the investment requirements to upgrade 4 car parks in the

city centre - Regency Square, Trafalgar Street, Carlton Hill and Oxford Court – by enhancing their access and internal environments to increase public safety and maintain levels of income. The improvements will be delivered through an ‘invest to save’ proposal of up to £4.298 million. The original decision to invest in these car parks was agreed at Budget Council in February 2011.

1.3 The additional revenue that is expected to be received from these car parks after

they are improved will provide an opportunity to fund carbon reduction transport initiatives, vital transport services for the city (such as free bus travel for the elderly and disabled) as well as other projects of benefit to the city (such as sign strategies as part of the Local Transport Plan). Access improvements will contribute towards reducing congestion by reducing unnecessary traffic circulation and therefore help improve air quality and reduce vehicle noise. Carbon reduction will be encouraged by including electric vehicle charging. The procurement specification will also highlight the requirement to reduce, where feasible, the carbon footprint and environmental impact of the car parks.

197

2. RECOMMENDATIONS:

2.1 That £4.298m of funding be invested in the improvement, in line with the scope of works set out in Appendix B, of Regency Square, Trafalgar Street, Carlton Hill and Oxford Court car parks, with the borrowings to be repaid over a minimum of 10 years.

2.2 That Cabinet grant approval for Council officers to undertake an approved

process in accordance with the Council’s Contract Standing Orders and Procurement legislation and under the guidance of officers from Procurement and Legal Services for the sustainable and legally compliant procurement of relevant works and services.

2.3 That Cabinet grant delegated authority to the Strategic Director, Place to approve

and award contract(s) following the procurement process referred to above. 3. RELEVANT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/CHRONOLOGY OF KEY

EVENTS:

3.1 This report sets out an “invest to save” proposal for the improvement of four car parks (previously under the control of NCP), which were brought back in-house by the council in 2008. The car parks are: Regency Square, Trafalgar Street, Carlton Hill and Oxford Court. A location plan of these car parks can be found in Appendix A.

3.2 Phase I of the programme of works, at The Lanes and London Road car parks, provides a useful benchmark for quality standards, levels of investment and returns on that investment. In 2011, The Lanes Car Park won the British Parking Award for Best Refurbished Car Park in recognition of the quality transformation achieved. Accredited by the Police with the “Park Mark” for Safer Parking, crime rates have reduced dramatically, customer feedback has been extremely positive and income has increased by over 75% compared to 2008.

3.3 At present, the four ex-leased car parks have access difficulties, with unwelcoming and low security environments for users. To promote a positive customer experience, it is estimated that these proposals require a total investment of £4.298 million.

3.4 £4m will be funded by borrowing. The remaining £0.298m will be funded using the balance in the earmarked reserve for invest to save car park refurbishment. The estimated level of investment in each car park and its associated access arrangements is:

Spaces Investment

Regency Square 507 £2,423,000

Trafalgar Street 284 £1,792,000

Carlton Hill* 50 £64,000

Oxford Court* 36 £19,000

Total investment £4,298,000

* Carlton Hill and Oxford Court have been completed.

198

3.5 The improvements are projected to result in an increase on current income of between £717,000 and £957,000 per annum with an average payback of £511,000 per annum over 10 years. Elements of the works (e.g. structural works) may be paid back over a longer period. The investment will be paid back through the increase in income.

Borrowed investment 4,000,000

Payback period 10 yrs

Rate 4.72%

Annual payback (average) -£511,000

3.6 Previous experience at the Lanes and London Road, has shown that

refurbishment has led to an increase in income of over £900,000 per annum since 2007/08:

07/08 Tariff uplift

Increased use

10/11 Variance

Lanes £883,756 53% 18% £1,588,883 £705,127

London Road

£332,883 33% 20% £531,037 £198,154

£1,216,639 £2,119,920 £903,281

All surplus income from car parks is invested back into environmental and transport services such as the provision of free bus travel for the elderly and disabled and other initiatives which will help fulfil council priorities.

3.7 Projected income for the proposed programme for the additional four car parks is

set out below. These figures reflect a full 12 month operation following completion of the projects. Completion is projected to be in April 2013 (see 3.11 for projected timescales).

11/12 Forecast

Full year range following

completion

Variances

Regency Square £1,020,000 £1,400,000 - £1,500,000

£380,000 - £480,000

Trafalgar Street £906,000 £1,200,000 - £1,300,000

£294,000 - £394,000

Oxford Court £78,000 £90,000 - £105,000

£12,000 - £27,000

Carlton Hill £159,000 £190,000 - £215,000

£31,000 - £56,000

£2,163,000

£2,880,000 - £3,120,000

£717,000 - £957,000

199

Projected additional annual income following refurbishment £717,000 - £957,000

Annual investment payback (10 years) -£511,000

Additional income £206,000 - £446,000

3.8 Overall, the projected uplifts are conservative when compared to actual uplifts

experienced at Lanes and London Road. 3.9 These increases in income assume an increase in tariffs of circa 30%-40%,

which reflects the transformation in the quality and safety of the car parks and reflects experiences at The Lanes and London Road car parks following refurbishments and increases in tariffs and usage. Tariffs vary according to the location of the car park. The Lanes is in a prime location and received higher levels of investment and hence a higher tariff increase was applied than at London Road. Regency Square has the greatest potential of the four car parks to achieve comparable results to those in The Lanes.

3.10 Other car parks owned by private companies charge higher tariffs. By way of

comparison, 3 hours parking at Regency Square currently costs £4.50, whilst Russell Road car park, within 200m, which is not run by the council, costs £10.

3.11 The timescale for the programme of works is estimated as follows:

Design development (pre-appointment) 3 months

Tender period 6 months

Design development (post-appointment) 3 months

Main works 5 months

Total project duration 14 months

3.12 Detailed designs and costs have been prepared. The works required are set out in Appendix B.

3.13 Of the four car parks, Regency Square offers the greatest potential for

improvement and therefore increased use, located as it is within 200m of Churchill Square and the central shopping area, the Brighton Centre, cinemas and providing direct access to the seafront. This increased use can be partly achieved by initially attracting a greater number of existing car drivers to the car park, therefore reducing some journey lengths or altering some journey patterns. In addition, the proposed i360 viewing tower immediately to the south of the car park is also expected to have a very significant impact on patronage, although this factor is not included in these projections Reconfiguration of junction at Regency Square

3.14 Reconfiguration of the A259 / Regency Square (west) junction will significantly improve access in and out of the car park for pedestrians and vehicles. A simpler, more direct access and exit route for drivers (in from the east and out to the west) will help to reduce unnecessary circulation into the West Street /

200

Aquarium / Old Steine / A23 London Road areas. This will reduce pollution and congestion on these routes that are amongst the most congested in the city.

3.15 The works to the junction will also improve pedestrian access in this location making it easier and safer to access the seafront and the potential i360 development. Traffic into Preston Street will be reduced allowing potential future improvements to be made. Traffic through the Montpelier area will also be reduced. Traffic may increase on the West side of Regency Square and out of town via Hove. Increases to the delay on A259 traffic will be negligible due to the signal controlled junctions being linked.

4. CONSULTATION 4.1 Appropriate consultation will be carried out, in discussion with local ward

members, in the light of this report and as soon as draft designs are available. 5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS: Financial Implications:

5.1 The combined cost of the investment already undertaken at Oxford Court and

Carlton Hill, and the proposed new refurbishment work is £4.298 million. This will be funded through unsupported borrowings of up to £4 million and £0.298m from the balance in the earmarked reserve for Invest to Save Car Park Refurbishment. The borrowing will be repaid over a minimum period of 10 years, financed by improved revenue streams at the car parks, as detailed in section 3 of this report.

Finance Officer Consulted: Karen Brookshaw Date: 08/09/2011 Legal Implications: 5.2 Any procurement of works and/or services must be undertaken in compliance

with procedural requirements as set out in the council’s contract standing orders and, where applicable, the Public Contracts Regulations 2006 (as amended). Advice and guidance from Legal Services and Procurement should be sought from the outset of any procurement process.

Lawyer Consulted: Sonia Likhari Date: 03/08/11 Equalities Implications: 5.3 As part of the design phase, full Equality Impact Assessments will be carried out

to ensure that all aspects of the improvements incorporate appropriate facilities to make them accessible to everybody, and in particular comply with the Disability Discrimination Act.

Sustainability Implications: 5.4 As part of the design & procurement phase, sustainability issues will be

addressed in accordance with the council’s Sustainable Development Strategy. A requirement of the procurement process will be to include in the scope of works low energy lighting, charging facilities, improved disabled access, energy

201

efficient ventilation, sustainable materials where possible and integration with pedestrian and bus networks. More details on the scope of works can be found at Appendix B.

5.5 The city’s Traffic Control Centre actively manages demand to car parks by

monitoring occupancy levels and informing motorists - in real time - via Variable Message Signs on the road network. This helps to reduce levels of circulating traffic.

Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.6 Security and safety measures will be transformed in the same way as they have

been achieved with great success at The Lanes and London Road car parks. The introduction of modern access controls, better lighting, 24-hour CCTV surveillance and security support will offer a significantly improved customer experience.

5.7 Designs will prioritise security and safety. Achievement of “Park Mark” under the

Safer Parking Scheme, administered by the Police, will be a requirement. All necessary measures to discharge the council’s duty to prevent crime and disorder will be taken.

Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.8 A full risk analysis has been undertaken for this project as part of the business

planning process. The risk log will be updated and monitored as the project progresses by the project manager, overseen by the Project Board. Risk mitigation actions that have been identified include achievable income projections; employing specialist professionals to advise on key aspects e.g concrete repairs, prior to awarding the contract; contractual requirements/penalties to ensure completion on time; creating a project team/Board; involving councillors in decision-making where required; and appropriate Health & Safety management.

5.9 Financial risks associated with pricing sensitivity and recent proposals by NCP have been assessed, analysed and incorporated within the Business Case Contingency to ensure this remains a viable project.

Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.10 These proposals support the council’s key commitments to improve the customer

experience, especially tourism, and save money. 5.11 As described in more detail earlier in the report, the investment will help

contribute towards the strategic, local transport objectives set out in LTP3, which are supporting economic growth (increased visitor / shopper offer); reducing carbon emissions (reduced congestion and improved energy efficiency); promoting equality and opportunity (improved access); contributing towards safety, security and health (safer environment); and improving quality of life (more attractive environment).

202

5.12 Creating a safer, more easily accessible and pleasant parking experience will help to support local business. Special rates for overnight parking will further help to promote tourism, supporting local hotels and encouraging visitor spend in the city.

5.13 Special rates for residents will help to reduce parking waiting lists in the area. 6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S): 6.1 The alternative to do nothing was considered however this would constitute a

failure to manage and maintain essential council assets, make it impossible to meet the income objectives, detailed at 3.7 of this report, and achieve the wider policy objectives set out in section 5.

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 This investment will substantially improve car park access, security, environment

and further help provide choice for local people and improve the experience of visitors, therefore supporting tourism and local businesses. Improved vehicle and pedestrian access arrangements will also reduce unnecessary traffic circulation and journeys into the city centre.

7.2 It is being made in line with the 3 new delivery principles recently established in

the council’s third Local Transport Plan [LTP3], which are to ‘maintain, manage and improve’ the city’s transport infrastructure and facilities.

7.3 It is also consistent with the principle of seeking to make off-street car parking

more attractive than on-street in order to reduce pressure on those spaces and reduce the intrusion of vehicles in central areas.

7.4 The additional revenue that is expected to be received from these car parks after

they are improved will provide an opportunity to fund carbon reduction transport initiatives, vital transport services for the city (such as free bus travel for the elderly and disabled) as well as other projects of benefit to the city.

203

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION Appendices: Appendix A – Location of sites Appendix B – Scope of works Documents in Members’ Rooms None Background Documents 1. Budget Council approval ~ February 2011 2. BHCC Procurement Toolkit 3. BHCC Third Local Transport Plan [LTP] - 2011 4. BHCC Annual Parking Report

204

Item 78 Appendix 1

Location of sites

Spaces

Regency Square 507

Trafalgar Street 284

Carlton Hill 50

Oxford Court 36

205

Item 78 Appendix 2

Scope of works Regency Square

• Reconfiguration of main access on A259 to include a new pedestrian crossing

• Provide secure car parking restricting vehicular and pedestrian access to customers only.

• Undertake essential repairs to structure and refurbish.

• Replace parking management systems, fire alarm, CCTV and connect to the city’s Traffic Control Centre.

• New lighting installation and controls in order to reduce electricity consumption and enhance environment for customers.

• Reconfiguration of parking spaces to provide additional spaces and defined disabled parking spaces.

• Enhance health and safety by creating pedestrian designated walkways and provision of barriers and railings.

• Alteration works to ‘close off dead areas’ to discourage anti-social behaviour.

• Signage strategy to ensure easy wayfinding and co-ordination with principal destinations for pedestrians and drivers.

Trafalgar Street

• Provide secure car parking restricting vehicular and pedestrian access to customers only

• Undertake essential repairs to structure and refurbish

• Apply corrosion inhibitor to structure and anti-carbon coating and membrane coating system to car park decks in order to prolong life-span of existing structure

• Replace parking management systems, fire alarm, CCTV and connect to the city’s Traffic Control Centre

• Improve vehicular circulation by connecting levels

• Sprinkler repairs

• Redecoration of walls / columns and soffits to improve environment

• New lighting installation and controls in order to reduce electricity consumption and enhance environment for customers

• Reconfiguration of parking spaces to provide additional spaces and defined disabled parking spaces

• Enhance health and safety by creating pedestrian designated walkways and provision of barriers and railings

• Alteration works to ‘close off dead areas’ / certain staircases to discourage anti-social behaviour

• Signage strategy to ensure easy wayfinding and co-ordination with principal destinations for pedestrians and drivers.

Carlton Hill Car Park

• replacement to perimeter fencing (to north and west elevations)

• removal of rubbish and asbestos behind old fencing

• replacement to perimeter edge protection (to north, south and west elevations)

206

• reconstruction of damaged boundary wall to south elevation

• repair and decoration of wall facing Kingswood Street

• replacement of height restrictor

• white lining works

• signage replacement

• cleaning of drains Oxford Court Car Park

• white lining works

• re-connect and meter existing central lighting column

• repairs / re-lamping to lighting column

• protection to lighting column

• enhance lighting over pay-machine

• signage replacement

207

208


Subject: Procurement of the Corporate Security Contract



Lead Member: Cabinet Member for Finance & Central Services

Contact Officer: Name:

Angela Dymott Ivan Watts

Tel: 29-1450 29-5047

Email:

[email protected] [email protected]



FOR GENERAL RELEASE 1. SUMMARY AND POLICY CONTEXT: 1.1 To obtain delegated authority from Cabinet for the proposed re-tendering and

subsequent award of the council’s corporate security contract for alarm response, static guarding and security key holding services under European Regulations. The current contract has run for three years since 2008 and expires on the 31st March 2012 following an agreed one year extension.

2. RECOMMENDATIONS:

2.1 That Cabinet:

(a) Gives approval for a tendering exercise to be undertaken in compliance with relevant Public Procurement legislation for the procurement of the corporate security contract for alarm response, static guarding and security key holding services. The tendering process will lead to the award of a 4 year contract, with the council having the option to extend for up to a further 2 years. The new contract will start on the termination of the existing contract.

(b) Grants delegated authority to the Strategic Director, Resources to award

the contract and take all steps necessary towards the implementation of the proposals.


EVENTS: Current Contract 3.1 The current corporate security contract covers a large proportion of the council’s

operational portfolio including civic and housing offices, most schools, libraries, residential homes and day care centres, children’s centres, car parks and some commercial starter units.

209

3.2 The services provided fall into the areas of alarm monitoring & response,

supported by security patrols and emergency key holding out of hours. During business hours, additional capabilities such as static guarding, manned CCTV monitoring, ‘Front of desk’ support and manned security presence during events / Council meeting’s is provided as required.

3.3 The current contractors over the last four years have worked with us to

standardise our security needs, creating much leaner documented processes. Testament to this work has been the growth in their site responsibility and security cover. Emprise currently has a contract portfolio of some 150 sites which they operate on behalf of the council. We are therefore seeking service providers that have the capability to continue this progress.

Proposal

3.4 With a much greater emphasis now being placed on proactive security measures such as access control, the risk of damage, theft, or loss can be considerably reduced. Staff, contractors and the public, can easily be assigned personalised I.D. cards that give them access rights to any of the council’s premises that are linked into the system. Access control also retains records of who has passed through the controlled area and when, thus retaining user lists in the event of a problem. Similarly, the deployment of CCTV is becoming more & more relevant in the operation of our buildings, as well as keeping records of asset access and movement, it is able to track & monitor persons acting suspiciously under live circumstances. Successful bidders will therefore need to be able to supply staff that are both appropriately trained in security matters and who are able to operate the defined technology with appropriate industry certification.

3.5 The security needs under the Corporate landlord approach which will bring together all property functions are expected to increase as will the numbers of premises that fall under Property & Design’s responsibility. Accordingly, capacity growth paths and contractor flexibility are key to the current and any future provision.

3.6 The expected value of the contract is £1.5m over four years and is above the EU threshold for services contracts. Accordingly, the contract will be subject to EU and UK public procurement legislation and the Council’s financial regulations. OJEU tenders are subject to a period of tender advertising, where potential tenderers respond to a PQQ (Pre qualification Questionnaire), with an ITT (Invitation To Tender). Those selected to proceed will then need to respond in full to the contract specification and include a pricing structure / framework. The evaluation of the tenders and pre-qualification questionnaires will be undertaken by a cross functional evaluation panel consisting of representatives from procurement & P&D. The OJEU timetable is set out in Appendix 1.

3.7 Given the previous contract successes, it is proposed to let the new contract for a

period of 4 years with the possibility of a further 2 years extension. The emphasis of this approach will be the continued growth of the service provision, standardisation of premises security and the optimisation of costs gained by economies of scale delivering overall best value to the Council. Bidders will also be measured on their responses to service level agreements, customer

210

satisfaction, delivery plans, value for money, continuous improvement, quality of service, employee issues, leanness, Health & Safety and applicable environmental Issues. Best solutions will achieve a good marriage between business needs & costs, eliminating any operational risks or gaps.

4. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION 4.1 Consultation with respect to the proposed new tender, has taken part at two

levels. The community engagement framework is not applicable to the consultation process.

(a) Gradual implementation of the corporate landlord model, which is resulting in

more and more Delivery Unit Heads and customers being encouraged to use the council’s preferred contract provider. The driver for this is cost effectiveness & a standardised approach which was previously offered on the basis of an ‘opt-in’ service. For the new contract, it is proposed that ‘opting out’ will become the exception, and will only be considered on the grounds where specialist service needs, or business location apply. Opting out would therefore need to be agreed by the Corporate security manager as a specialist need. This approach requires considerable consultation with the major stake holders, some of whom continue to look for their service needs from existing contractors.

(b) Business needs within the council are driving us toward a much leaner and

more sophisticated approach to security. Accordingly, in parallel to this contract a Council Security policy has been written. It is intended that this document will form the back bone standard under which the council will operate and future contract contenders will bid for work in the council. The document will also identify the benefits and means by which information exchange and collaboration will be achieved between the council and other emergency services. To achieve this we have had to consult across the councils, taking on board all security needs and estimating expected spend on core activities from the specialised work that would still need to be opted out. A forecast has then been produced over four years to ensure that the OJEU tender is correctly set value wise.

4.2 Internal consultations will be undertaken across the organisation during the OJEU tender process through the contract evaluation team and will continue after contract ward with our partners in the City who may wish to continue or begin to opt in to the contract.

5. FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS:

Financial Implications: 5.1 The value of all current contracted services is approximately £350,500 per

annum. With expected growth and ‘take up’ of service over a four year period it is estimated that the annual contract could rise to £410,000 p.a. at year four. This would equate, with inflationary rises, to a total contract value of £1,557,000 over the four year contract and potentially costing £2,370,000 with a further two year extension.

211

5.2 Each service is responsible for funding its own security budget within existing

revenue budgets. The Facilities and Premises Team receive all invoices for security services and carry out recharges for each service opted in to the contract. Under the Corporate Landlord this process will be managed entirely by Property & Design resulting in efficiencies.

Finance Officer Consulted: Rob Allen Date: 22/07/11 Legal Implications: 5.3 The value and nature of the services makes them subject to the requirements of

EU Public Procurement Directives and associated UK Regulations. The report indicates that an approved procurement strategy will be undertaken in compliance with relevant legal obligations and the Council’s Contract Standing Orders. Contracts exceeding £75k in value must be in a form approved by the Head of Law.

Lawyer Consulted: Sonia Likhari Date: 24/08/11 Equalities Implications:

5.4 The contract will be drawn up and awarded to support the Council’s race equality

scheme, inclusivity policy and its broader equalities duties. Sustainability Implications: 5.5 The contract will be let and awarded in accordance with the sustainability code of

practice for procurement. Crime & Disorder Implications: 5.6 The recruitment of a professional security company should enhance the

prevention of crime and disorder. Risk and Opportunity Management Implications: 5.7 There is a low risk that tender prices are higher than the budgeted provision. Public Health Implications: 5.8 There are no known public health implications associated with this request.

Corporate / Citywide Implications: 5.9 The process will provide improved efficiencies for the organisation as a whole. 6. EVALUATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTION(S):

6.1 The council already operate a tailored approach to its security employing retained

staff in specialist areas of its security needs, as well as external contractors to carry out the bulk of its premises securing, key holding and alarm response

212

requirements.

The commitment to this approach was taken nine years ago, and was based upon; a) Consolidation of a large supplier base, b) Realignment of security delivery, to assure the most cost effective approach,

and cap potential future costs in delivering the service. c) Deliver standardisation, economies of scale, and a structured framework of

costs. d) Conclusion that Security is an operational need of the council, but not part of

its core business. e) Embrace changes to the way that Health & Safety addresses the Risk

assessment and circumstances under which guarding and asset security can be completed on a 24/7 basis.

6.2 If the Council were to bring this service in-house there would be considerable

capacity, skill, resource, financial implications and choices to be made. These would revolve around ; § The need to set up this service as an internal business and provide inward

investment and initial set up costs that would outstrip the current investment required for the contracted services to national recognised security firms. For example - Business set up costs and requirements for increased manpower, Security Industry Authority training, first aid training, CCTV training, radios, transport, etc.

§ To recapture internally the capability that we draw on through the security contract the council would need to initiate the formation of an in-house bid which could take up to a year to eighteen months to work up. This would need to be before the old contract expires to effect an essential seamless continuation of service. The service would need to be commissioned and the specification agreed with all internal customers following detailed stakeholder consultations and analyses of the legal, financial and human resource implications.

§ As the skills, capacity and resources to support the full security needs of the council are not presently available to us internally we would need to embark upon a proactive recruitment campaign well before any supporting contract expires which could mean paying twice for the service in certain areas.

§ Our current adopted approach is the most lean and flexible business solution and prevents us in many areas having to double our operational budgets. For example where we contract security staff the council pay for the deployment of that resource and the responsibility for a replacement during holiday or sickness, then becomes the responsibility of the supplier.

§ The introduction of recent Health & Safety regulations now places a heavy emphasis on risk assessing guards involved in front line duties, single points of working, shifts & out of hours working practices. This all becomes the contractor’s responsibility when adopting our tailored approach to this requirement.

6.3 Summarising, it is recommended that our current approach to delivering this

service is the right way forward for effective and efficient customer service, business and value for money reasons that will meet the diverse security demands that we face over the next four years.

213

6.4 Having established that a security service is an operational need of the council and not part of its core business we need to be consistent in our future contract letting. Switching between the two options provides the worse of conditions at the greatest cost.

7. REASONS FOR REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 This report makes recommendations on the future provision of security services

for the council and on the process and timing and tasks that need to be completed between now and the end of the security current contract award. It takes into account the legal and financial business requirements of both the council and the EU procurement legislation.

It promotes the preferred business route that; i) Positions the council in its pursuit of Corporate Landlord goals, ii) Ensures commonality of service provision, leanness, value for money and

quality.


Appendices: 1. OJEU Timetables Documents In Members’ Rooms None Background Documents None

214

Item 80 Appendix 1

215

216

217

Document is Restricted

218