CABINET
Minutes of a meeting held on 20th
January, 2010.
Present: Present:
Councillor G.C. Kemp (Chairman); Councillor T.H. Jarvie
(Vice-Chairman); Councillors Mrs. J.E. Charles, P. Church, G.A.
Cox, A.M. Ernest, A.D. Hampton, H.J.W. James, R.L. Traherne and
Mrs. D.M. Turner.
C741
MINUTES -
RESOLVED - T H A T the minutes of the meeting
held on 6th January, 2010 be approved as a correct
record.
C742
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST -
No declarations were received.
C743
TIMETABLE OF MEETINGS: MAY 2010 - MAY 2011 (CX) (SCRUTINY -
CORPORATE RESOURCES) -
Having had regard to the draft timetable of
meetings for the above period, it was
RESOLVED -
(1) T H A
T the timetable of meetings for May 2010 - May 2011 as set out in
Appendix A to the report be approved, subject to any future changes
in arrangements for meetings being deemed appropriate by the Mayor
of the Council or the relevant Committee Chairman.
(2) T H A
T when published, the timetable of meetings include the dates of
school holidays.
Reason for decision
(1&2) To approve / publish a calendar of
meetings for the forthcoming municipal year.
C744
WALES AUDIT OFFICE (WAO) ANNUAL LETTER 2008/09 (CX) (SCRUTINY -
CORPORATE RESOURCES) -
Cabinet were advised of the views of the Wales
Audit Office on the overall position of the Council in relation to
audit and inspection work.
The Council's Relationship Manager had
published her Annual Letter in December 2009, a copy of which was
attached to the report.
The letter reflected the fact that 2009 was
yet another good year for the Council, and Members attention was
particularly drawn to paragraphs 71 and 79 of the Letter which
illustrated the progress made in embedding the principles of good
governance across the Council.
This was a matter for Executive decision.
RESOLVED -
(1) T H A
T the contents of the Annual Letter be noted.
(2) T H A
T the letter be referred to the Audit Committee.
(3) T H A
T Audit Committee be asked to investigate the level of audit and
inspection fees for 2010.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To
provide feedback to the Relationship Manager.
(2) To
provide more detailed consideration of the Relationship Manager's
Annual Letter.
(3) To
investigate the level of audit and inspection fees for 2010.
C745
PENARTH PIER PAVILION - PENARTH ARTS AND CRAFTS LIMITED (DEER)
(SCRUTINY - ECONOMY AND ENVIRONMENT) -
Cabinet were updated on the bid submitted to
the Heritage Lottery Fund by Penarth Arts and Crafts Limited and
their recent request for additional financial support to enable
them to take forward their bid for Heritage Lottery Fund Grant
following its stage 1 approval in November 2009.
Following an agreement from the Council to
commit £800,000 towards the costs of the restoration and
redevelopment of the Penarth Pier Pavilion building for use as a
cinema, cafe, observatory and multi-purpose community area, and the
financial support granted approval in April 2009, the Penarth Arts
and Crafts Limited submitted a bid to the Heritage Lottery Fund for
a first round pass with a development grant of £99,000.
Penarth Arts and Crafts Limited had received
notification in November 2009 that their bid was successful.
Penarth Arts and Crafts Limited sought funding
support with a ceiling of £15,000 to match the £99,000 from the
Heritage Lottery Fund and to enable the second stage submission to
take place. The second round submission deadline allowed
further submission in either June or November 2010. It was
proposed that this further £15,000 be provided from the £50,000
currently allocated in this year's capital programme and that the
agreed allocation of £800,000 grant support be reduced
accordingly.
This was a matter for Executive decision.
RESOLVED -
(1) T H A
T the Council provide grant support of up to £15,000 to Penarth
Arts and Crafts Limited based upon an appropriate funding Agreement
setting out costs of consultancy, project management and a
programme of work to culminate in a second stage application to the
Heritage Lottery Fund.
(2) T H A
T the Director of Legal, Public Protection and Housing Services in
consultation with the Director of Finance, ICT and Property be
authorised to prepare, complete and execute the necessary funding
Agreement with Penarth Arts and Crafts Limited upon such terms and
conditions as they deem appropriate following consultation and
agreement with the Cabinet Member for Economic Development and
regeneration.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To
ensure that sufficient financial resources are available in support
of the second stage bidding process to the Heritage Lottery Fund
and to match the £99,000 granted to Penarth Arts and Crafts Limited
by the Heritage Lottery Fund to date.
(2) To
ensure that the Council's interests are adequately protected.
C746
PAYMENTS OF DONATIONS TO CHARITIES RECYCLING HOUSEHOLD WASTE (DEER)
(SCRUTINY - ECONOMY AND ENVIRONMENT) -
Cabinet were requested to consider whether
there were any environmental or financial benefits to the Council
for making financial donations to charities recycling household
waste within the Vale of Glamorgan.
It was reported that where a person or charity
collects household waste for the purpose of recycling, the
collection authority may make to those charities payments in
respect of the waste it collects.
There was no duty to make these payments and
formal payments of this nature had not been introduced by WAG
across all Councils, although some Welsh Authorities had
arrangements in place to make donations to charities such as St.
John's Ambulance, SCOPE, and the Heart Foundation. Merthyr
County Borough Council currently paid a sum of £10 per tonne on a
monthly basis following the electronic submission of weighbridge
tickets, delivery notes and load composition reports, to Clothes
Aid for textiles collected and recycled in their area.
Whilst at this time not adopted in Wales,
there was a recycling credit scheme in England to encourage
recycling and promote more sustainable waste management. The
scheme sought to make savings in disposal and collections
arrangements to support third party organisations that were
carrying out these collections and recycling the materials
collected.
In principle any household waste that failed
to be collected by the collection authority under Section 45 of the
Environmental Protection Act 1990 could be subject to these
payments. However, they could not be made where the
collection of the waste would normally be made. This would
therefore exclude any schools, colleges or third party commercial
recycling organisations. However, it would allow charitable
bodies to receive any donations. Furthermore, payments could
only be made where the household waste was recycled or
re-used. Therefore, the sale of second-hand books or clothes,
and the use of returnable or refillable bottles or containers would
not be eligible for donations.
Whilst there were many charities within the
Vale of Glamorgan, to date only SCOPE and Clothes Aid (on behalf of
all charities that recycled textiles) had made formal applications
for recycling credit, and the resulting level of tonnage claimed
was likely to be low. Clothes Aid has stated in their
application that they only recycled about 12 tonnes per month of
textiles.
It was felt to be important that the Council
received the benefit of using the small additional recycling
tonnage to assist with meeting its Welsh Assembly Government
recycling targets. Any figures provided by the charities
would be fully auditable and compatible with the requirements for
entry on WAG's 'Wastedataflow' web-based reporting system. It
was recommended that this be a non-negotiable condition for any
eligible charities, should the proposals be supported.
It was reported that the following controls
would need to be adopted to ensure that there was no error or fraud
when making donations:
·
full details of the tonnage claimed
·
the waste had not been previously presented to this or another
authority for payment
·
the waste originated from the non-chargeable household waste
stream
·
the waste originated from the Vale of Glamorgan
·
the waste is to be removed from the authorities waste stream before
rather than after collection by the Council
·
waste on which donations were claimed is being recycled.
This was a matter for Executive decision.
RESOLVED -
(1) T H A
T the introduction of a fixed payment of £10 per tonne to
registered charities that provide full auditable records of any
household waste collected within the Vale of Glamorgan that it
subsequently recycled be supported.
(2) T H A
T a report be submitted to Cabinet on the operation of the scheme
after 12 months.
Reason for decision
(1&2) To recognise the merits of
paying charitable donations for household waste arising in the Vale
of Glamorgan that is recycled and to contribute toward the
Council's recycling and landfill diversion targets.
C747
COUNCIL HOUSING STOCK - TO CONSIDER TENANT CONSULTATION ON THE FORM
OF REGISTERED SOCIAL LANDLORD; TO ESTABLISH A SHADOW BOARD (DLPPHS)
(SCRUTINY - HOUSING AND PUBLIC PROTECTION) -
Cabinet received a report which requested:
(i) consultation
with tenants on the type of Residential Social Landlord (RSL) that
could be formed
(ii)
the establishment of a Shadow Board.
At its meeting on 14th October,
2009 the Council had resolved to consult its tenants by way of
ballot as to whether the Council's housing stock should be
transferred to an alternative provider. The Welsh Assembly
Government had given its provisional approval for the Council to
proceed to ballot stage.
WAG policy was to give consent only to
transfers to existing or newly created RSL's registered with the
Assembly Government.
The Council was required to set up a Shadow
Board to represent the potential transferee RSL in negotiations
with the Council prior to the issue of the formal consultation
'offer document' and to establish that the Council's commitment to
its tenants is both financially viable and deliverable by the new
landlord.
The adopted form of RSL would work to a set of
rules comprising
·
a Memorandum of Association - setting out the organisations
purpose, objects, powers and legal status
·
Articles of Association - which explain the way the organisation
conducts its affairs.
RSL's are non-profit making organisations
requiring any surplus to be used for the purposes of the
organisation as set out within its objects.
Both a transfer to an existing or to a newly
created RSL would normally follow a similar Board make up of 1/3
Council Nominees, 1/3 Tenant Representatives and 1/3 Independent
Members.
WAG guidance provided that 'the Assembly
Government would normally expect tenant representation to comprise
at least 1/3 of the transfer landlords Governing Board. In no
circumstances may LA members, officers or other nominees exceed 1/3
of the membership, since borrowing by the transfer landlord would
otherwise be classified as public expenditure.'
The report outlined the advantages and
disadvantages of the following:
(i) Transfer to a
new subsidiary of an existing RSL whereby the subsidiary was
established within a group structure of an existing parent
RSL.
Such a body was usually given autonomy within
an agreed business plan that was reviewed annually. Provided
the subsidiary kept within the business plan targets and conducted
its affairs efficiently the parent organisation would not
intervene.
The subsidiary would have its own Board of
Management and was often permitted to nominate one of its own Board
Members to sit on the Board of the parent organisation.
Conversely, the parent would also want Board representation on the
subsidiary.
(ii)
Transfer to a newly formed RSL whereby the Council sponsored a new
organisation set up specifically to take ownership of the Council's
housing stock and to meet the stock improvements and service
promises set out within the consultation offer document.
Over the transfer period the new RSL would
need to be established and achieve registration with the Assembly
Government.
There were a number of different stand alone
corporate bodies that could be adopted and dependent on the model
chosen the new RSL may also be required to register with the
Charity Commission.
WAG Guidance required the Council to consider,
in consultation with their tenants, whether the stock should be
transferred to an existing RSL, or a new subsidiary of an existing
RSL.
There was no definitive advice from WAG in
respect to how consultation with the tenants should be managed or
the extent of consultation.
Experience in Wales had shown that the
majority of Councils had consulted with a representative body of
tenants rather than a wider group of tenants. This was mainly
because of the level of knowledge and understanding of the transfer
issues that the representative body would have compared to most
individual tenants.
Initial consultation had already taken place
with the Tenants Panel, a group comprising of mainly
chairs/committee members of recognised Tenants Groups and the
Tenant's Working Group which was a group of tenants who had been
working with the Housing Department over the previous 18 months
reviewing and developing a range of key housing policies.
The view of the Tenant's Panel and Tenant's
Working Group was unanimous in its support for a newly formed
RSL.
The report proposed that following an
appointment, the Council's Legal Advisers make a presentation to
Cabinet and provide more detail on the constitutional model to
enable Cabinet to make an informed decision on a model constitution
to be offered to the Shadow Board.
The size of the Shadow Board was a matter for
each Council but was normally no less than 12 and no more than 18
on the basis of 1/3 Council nominees, 1/3 tenant nominees and 1/3
independent members as mentioned earlier in the report.
A large Shadow Board was mainly seen in
transfer organisations with large stock or where there was a
complicated management and committee structure.
The report proposed that a Shadow Board of 12
be established which would be sufficient to serve a committee
structure of a Board and two main committees plus sub-committees as
required. With regard to the Council nominees for Shadow
Board Membership it was not a requirement that nominees be serving
Councillors.
The report stressed the importance that the
new RSL was not seen as being aligned to any one political group
and that the Shadow Board (and ultimately full Board) members are
effectively company directors whose allegiance is to the RSL when
engaged on RSL business.
This was a matter for Executive decision.
RESOLVED -
(1) T H A
T tenant consultation be carried out, with all tenants, to
ascertain whether a transfer of the housing stock, if approved,
should be to an existing or newly created RSL.
(2) T H A
T a Shadow Board of 12 comprising of four tenant representatives,
four Council nominees and four Independent Representatives be
approved.
(3) T H A
T the four Council representatives to sit on the Shadow Board be
Councillors J.C. Bird, E. Hacker, N. Moore and J.W. Thomas.
(4) T H A
T Independent Members be appointed by the Shadow Board (Council and
Tenant Members) following public advertisement.
Reasons for decisions
(1) To
enable the Housing Stock Transfer pre-ballot process to progress in
full compliance with the Welsh Assembly Government's Transfer
Guidance.
(2&3) To approve the size and
composition of the Shadow Board.
(4) To
provide for the appointment of independent members.