NORTH YORKSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
EXECUTIVE
Minutes of the meeting held at County Hall, Northallerton on Tuesday, 22 February 2005.
County Councillor John Weighell in the Chair. County Councillors Jim Clark, John Fort BEM,
Carl Les, Caroline Patmore, and Peter Sowray.
Officers present: Jeremy Walker, Gordon Gresty, Stephen Knight, Derek Law, John Moore,
Mike Moore, Simon Smales and Cynthia Welbourn.
COPIES OF ALL DOCUMENTS CONSIDERED ARE IN THE MINUTE BOOK
532.
MINUTES
RESOLVED –
That the Minutes of the meeting held on 15 February 2005, having been printed and
circulated, be taken as read and be confirmed and signed by the Chairman as a correct
record.
533.
EXCLUSION OF THE PUBLIC
RESOLVED –
That the public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of each of the items of
business listed in column 1 of the following table on the grounds that each involves the likely
disclosure of exempt information as defined in the paragraph(s) of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to
the Local Government Act 1972 as defined in column 2.
534.
Item on the Agenda
Paragraph No
13
7&9
FEEDBACK FROM AREA COMMITTEES
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Head of Committee Services relating to the meeting of County Committee for
Hambleton on 7 February 2005
County Councillor Caroline Patmore referred to the strength of feeling about the closure of
the central reserve gap at Black Swan Crossroads and suggested that this was a matter
which the next Council might wish to pursue.
The Executive RESOLVED –
That the report be noted and that the closure of the central reserve gap at Black Swan
Crossroads on A19(T) be placed on the agenda of the Hambleton Area Committee following
the County Council elections.
81919500/1
535.
BROADBAND GAP PROJECT FOR NORTH YORKSHIRE
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Financial Services, who introduced the report, providing
an update on progress with the Regional Broadband Aggregation Project and seeking
approval for the County Council to act as Accountable Body for Objective 2 funding
purposes to move the Project forward. He made clear that the project had three distinct
phases and said that phase 1, which would update 14 telephone exchanges which fall within
the North Yorkshire Objective 2 area in order to provide a Broadband service to all those
areas, would be funded completely by Yorkshire Forward. Phase 2 would involve creating a
suitable partnership vehicle capable of delivering the benefits of next generation Broadband
services and would be fully funded from grant. It is proposed that the County Council should
act as Accountable Body for both phases. It was, however, impossible, to indicate, at this
stage, whether the County Council’s WAN would form part of the technical configuration in
Phase 3.
County Councillor Jim Clark noted that most of the project was being financed from specific
grant and asked what costs would fall on the County Council. In response, the Corporate
Director – Financial Services indicated that the County Council’s contribution currently
amounted to the time of 2 members of staff engaged on the project, together with
commitment of some of his own time, at least until the special purpose vehicle was
established.
County Councillor Peter Sowray commented that, even with this project completed there
would remain a number of people in the County who could not get access to Broadband
services because they were based more than 6 kilometres from an enabled exchange. In
response, the Corporate Director – Financial Services agreed that that was the case but said
that, at this stage, it was not possible to specify how many people would be in that position.
Once phases 1 and 2 of the project were completed this situation could be examined again
and it was possible that the WAN might provide a solution for these areas. He suggested
that one of the justifications for the County Council acting as accountable body for the
project was in order to provide universal access to Broadband in the County.
County Councillor Carl Les welcomed the fact that additional households and businesses in
the County would gain Broadband access through the project and he accepted that the role
of the County Council’s WAN was not clear in the immediate future.
County Councillor John Weighell indicated that, whilst it was recognised that the Corporate
Director – Financial Services was fulfilling an important role in taking forward this project, it
would not be the wish of the Executive that the personal commitment of his time to the
project should be too great.
The Chief Executive Officer stressed that the provision of Broadband was very important for
the County and its economy and he suggested that the County Council was undertaking an
important community leadership role in seeking to ensure its provision. He believed that the
County Council needed to be prepared to invest time and energy in ensuring the provision of
Broadband but stressed the need for there to be a break point before any subsequent
phases of the project, which might expose the County Council to some risk, were
implemented.
The Executive RESOLVED –
That the County Council acts as accountable body for Phases 1and 2 of the North Yorkshire
Broadband Gap Project, with the caveat that it reserves the right to review the participation
of the County Council in any subsequent phases of the Project, on the basis of the Business
Case arising from Phase 2.
81919500/2
536.
IMPLEMENTING ELECTRONIC GOVERNMENT : PROGRESS REPORT
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Business and Community Services.
County Councillor Carl Les introduced the report, updating Members of the progress that
has been achieved to date in meeting E-Government Targets.
The Corporate Director – Business and Consumer Services referred to updated information
on the current position on ODPM priority outcomes and said that the position in respect of
BVPIs would be reported to a future meeting. He also informed the Executive that, since the
introduction of the new website, the numbers visiting the site had increased very
substantially.
The Executive RESOLVED –
That the progress and action taken to date to deliver the e-Government targets, be
noted.
537.
BUSINESS CASE FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A TELEPHONE CONTACT CENTRE
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Business and Community Services, who introduced the
report, seeking approval for the development of a County Council Telephone Contact
Centre. He said that this was the third strand of the Public Access Strategy, the eGovernment agenda and Gershon. The County Council currently had about 150 telephone
numbers but little information about the approximately 2m calls a year it was receiving, about
1m of which were to County Hall. He said that the report set out a number of options for the
establishment of a Contact Centre, either based on maintaining the status quo; or
developing a Directorate-based solution or seeking to take a phased approach leading to a
single Telephone Contact Centre. He acknowledged that further work needed to be
undertaken to clarify the number and nature of existing telephone enquiries and to identify
how many of those a dedicated call centre would be able to deal with. In the circumstances,
Members were not being recommended to make a final decision on the provision of such a
Centre, but were being asked to indicate approval, in principle.
County Councillor Carl Les suggested that contact by telephone was likely to continue to be
a major way in which the public contacted the County Council and he suggested that the
phased approach might be appropriate, with the Executive receiving more detailed reports at
subsequent stages.
County Councillor Jim Clark expressed concerns about the costs and sought clarification on
whether the estimated ongoing revenue costs were net costs and whether any savings had
been taken into account. In response the Corporate Director – Business and Community
Services said that more precise costings would be available once further detailed work had
been undertaken, but stressed that the figures set out in the report would be offset by the
cost of existing switchboard arrangements and back office savings still to be identified.
County Councillor Jim Clark commented that it was essential that anticipated savings were
analysed very carefully and that the Council benefited, in taking forward this project, by
learning from examples of the introduction of telephone contact centres in comparable
organisations.
81919500/3
County Councillor John Fort expressed support for the recommendations in the report saying
that, in carrying forward this project, it was important that the County Council maintained the
standard of call handling currently achieved by switchboard staff, which were often
commented on positively by those outside the organisation. He agreed that it was essential
to learn from the introduction of such arrangements in other authorities, so that pitfalls could
be avoided.
The Executive RESOLVED –
538.
1.
That the development of a County Council Telephone Contact Centre be approved.
2.
That the development of the Centre be staged as in Option 3 outlined in paragraph
6.0 of the report.
3.
That recommendations 14.1 and 14.2 of the report be subject to the necessary
capital and revenue finance being made available and a more detailed costing report
being brought to the Executive at the earliest possible stage.
CPA INSPECTION ON CULTURAL SERVICES
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Business and Community Services.
County Councillor Carl Les introduced the report, informing Members of the outcome of the
recent Audit Commission Cultural Services inspection. He said that the County Council had
certainly made progress although that there were still some weaknesses which had been
identified, but which were being addressed.
The Corporate Director – Business and Community Services commented that the report
mentioned that a full copy of the inspection report had been placed on the County Council’s
website. That report had, however, been embargoed until Wednesday but would be
available thereafter.
County Councillor Jim Clark congratulated those involved in achieving the progress made on
cultural services.
The Executive RESOLVED –
That the report be noted and actions be undertaken, as set out in the report, in order to
deliver further improvements within its cultural services
539.
CITY-REGION/NORTHERN WAY
CONSIDERED –
A Joint report of the Corporate Director – Business and Community Services and Corporate
Director – Environmental Services. The Corporate Director – Business and Community
Services introduced the report saying that it was very important for the economic
development of the region. Whilst it was generally acknowledged that the city areas were
primarily responsible for driving the local economy, there was a concern that, under the
Northern Way Strategy, rural areas might lose out. He stressed that there were significant
areas of North Yorkshire which were not included in the hinterland rural areas for the city
regions and he also commented that there currently appeared to be no link between the
DEFRA Rural Strategy and the City Region Strategy.
81919500/4
The Corporate Director – Environmental Services referred to the housing and transport
issues linked with the City Region/Northern Way Strategy and suggested that there was a
danger that areas of the County might be regarded as solely dormitory areas for the city
region. He also expressed concerns about possible impacts on the Local Transport Plan
and suggested that it was important that the Council engaged with the proposal and sought
to influence views to the benefit of the County.
County Councillor Peter Sowray commented that, in the past, consideration had been given
to how far the economic benefits of the development of cities in the region had impacted on
surrounding rural areas and County Councillor John Weighell commented that a number of
other areas adjoining the city regions were concerned about the possible impact the strategy
might have on their areas.
The Chief Executive Officer raised the question of the relationship between the emerging
Regional Spatial Strategy and the Northern Way Strategy and asked whether more rapid
change was arising in the area around the Tees Valley city region, rather than the Leeds city
region. He also commented on the priority in the Tees Valley City Region Development
Programme of realising the potential of the hydrogen economy, building on existing biodiesel
and biomass plants, and questioned whether areas of North Yorkshire might have a role in
producing the necessary biomass.
The Assistant Director Planning and Countryside Unit commented that the Regional Spatial
Strategy had yet to test out the implications of the Northern Way Strategy, though the
timetable for the development of both was interlinked. Members and officers were ensuring
that the issues of importance to North Yorkshire were being made known, but there
continued to be some concerns. The Regional Spatial Strategy was, however a statutory
document and the Northern Way Strategy did not have that status.
The Corporate Director – Business and Community Services commented that, under the
Northern Way Strategy, the airport at Newcastle was identified as the key airport for the
region. He suggested that that might have implications for the airport at Durham Tees Valley
which could itself have implications for North Yorkshire.
The Executive RESOLVED –
540.
1.
That the issues set out in the report be noted and the Chief Executive Officer be
authorised to finalise comments to be made to the Northern Way Steering Group.
2.
That the Economic Development and Regeneration Scrutiny Committee and the
Executive be kept informed of developments on the Northern Way/City-region
Strategy.
THE CHILDREN ACT 2004
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Education Service.
County Councillor Jim Clark introduced the report, seeking to identify County Council
priorities for inclusion in the Local Change Programme, which is the inter-agency plan for
implementation work on The Children Act in the period up to April 2006; outlining an interagency Commitment Statement which would provide the basis for that work and proposing a
programme of future reports on key strategic changes or performance issues for the County
Council arising from the legislation. He said that this would be one of a series of reports
which would concentrate on outcomes for children and which would be focused on delivering
for young people. In order to carry this matter forward it would be necessary to engage with
81919500/5
a lot of the County Council’s partner organisations and this report started to chart out how
the County Council might deliver on this.
The Corporate Director – Education Service said that the County Council would have three
roles in meeting its responsibilities under the legislation; a leadership role, a partnership role
and a service provider role. She said that giving local authorities the responsibility of leading
on these matters was a major investment of trust from the Government, particularly
associated with the responsibilities of local authorities for community leadership and the
general powers to promote the wellbeing of their areas. Whilst technically implementation of
the legislation was scheduled up until 2008, in practice authorities were already being
judged on their progress. The leadership of the County Council, which was itself a major
service provider, needed to be powerful enough to develop a partnership with a range of
other agencies which was sufficiently advanced for those agencies to agree to share
resources. Whilst the safeguarding of children was not the only issue which The Children
Act 2004 addressed, it was an issue which the legislation returned to time and again. The
term “Children’s Trust” was used in the legislation to capture the combination of systemic
integration of services around the needs of service users. That had to be achieved in a
comprehensive and sustainable way across each local authority area by 2008. The needs
of individual service users were likely to be obscured, if not disrupted, by an approach which
required massive structural change across a number of agencies in order to create a single
County identity and discussions with other agencies suggested such an approach would not
be welcome. On the other hand, the ability to secure the necessary outcomes could be
compromised if overly fragmented local arrangements were agreed. Instead, what was
needed was an effective County Strategic Partnership. In addition, a major piece of
strategic planning, involving all partner agencies, would be required to produce the Children
and Young People’s Plan, by April 2006. She commented that this process was not going to
be easy since, in North Yorkshire, the agencies involved had scarce spare resources.
County Councillor Caroline Patmore commented that it was not clear from the report which
partner agencies were involved and she suggested that it would be helpful if this was made
explicit in future.
The Chief Executive Officer commented that the implementation of The Children Act was
extremely important for the County Council and all its Members. He referred to Appendix 1
to the report and suggested that specific reference needed to be made to the role of the
Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the involvement of non-Executive
Members in policy development.
The Executive RESOLVED –
1.
That the proposed County Council priorities for inclusion in the Local Change
Programme set out in Appendix 1 to the report, be approved.
2.
That the inter-agency Commitment Statement enclosed as Appendix 2 to the report,
be adopted.
3.
That future reports as set out in paragraph 6.2 of the report, be brought for
consideration by the Young People Overview and Scrutiny Committee and the
Executive.
81919500/6
541.
NORTH YORKSHIRE MINERALS AND WASTE DEVELOPMENT SCHEME
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Environmental Services.
County Councillor Peter Sowray introduced the report, seeking approval to the Local
Development Scheme for Minerals and Waste prior to its submission to the Government
Office for Yorkshire and the Humber. He said that there had consultation on the Scheme
with District Councils, through Area Committees and the Planning and Regulatory Functions
Committee.
The Executive RESOLVED –
542.
1.
That the draft Local Development Scheme appended to the report be approved
for submission to GOYH by 28 March 2005.
2.
Officers be authorised to incorporate any final detailed revision to the draft LDS
as may be suggest by GOYH prior to its final submission to GOYH.
A19 BURN BYPASS
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director – Environmental Services.
County Councillor Peter Sowray introduced the report, seeking to establish a preferred route
for the A19 Burn Bypass. He said that the preferred route for the bypass was to have been
considered by the Selby Area Committee, at its meeting scheduled for 21 February. That
meeting had, however, been postponed, due to weather conditions and the proposal would,
therefore, be considered by the Area Committee at a future date. He suggested that any
decision by the Executive should be subject to the views of Selby Area Committee.
County Councillor Caroline Patmore said that she understood that the development of a
bypass would open adjacent land for development but asked how far proposals for such
development were advanced. She also commented that the provision of bypasses was
generally based on agreed priorities but there appeared to be no significant accident record
at Burn; not exceptionally high levels of traffic and a relatively small population who were
affected. She also expressed concerns about a possible Site of Importance for Nature
Conservation in the vicinity.
In response, the Corporate Director – Environmental Services said that the justification for
the scheme arose on a number of grounds and the opening up of land on the airfield was
only one of a number of issues. Based on the assessment of net present value and taking
into account accident data, the scheme was justified and the local community fully supported
it. He stressed that, since the estimated cost of the bypass would be less than £5m it was
classified as a major/minor scheme, which would be funded entirely within the block grant
from the Local Transport Capital Expenditure Settlement. That expenditure could be spread
over two financial years. It was scheduled for 2007 and 2008 and much more was likely to
be known about possible development of the airfield by that time. No concerns had been
expressed by officers developing the proposals about impacts on the Site of Importance for
Nature Conservation.
81919500/7
The Executive RESOLVED –
That, subject to no contrary views being expressed by Selby Area Committee, the blue route
option incorporating roundabouts at the approximate locations shown on Drawing No.
340974/035 attached to the report, be adopted as the preferred route for the Burn Bypass.
The following item was considered in private
and the public have no right of access
to the Minute or the related report
543.
ACQUISITION OF 31 OSGODBY LANE, SCARBOROUGH
CONSIDERED –
A report of the Corporate Director - Environmental Services, seeking consideration to the
acquisition of 31 Osgodby Lane, Scarborough.
The Executive RESOLVED –
That 31 Osgodby Lane, Scarborough be purchased on terms to be agreed by the Corporate
Director, Environmental Services.
544.
FORWARD WORK PLAN
The Forward Plan for period 1March 2005 to 28 February 2006 was presented.
The Executive RESOLVED –
That the forward work programme be noted.
81919500/8