Agenda and minutes

The Reverend Charles Razzall said prayers, at the request of the Mayor.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors G Baxendale, C Beard, J Goddard, M Hollins, O Hunter, A Martin, B Howell and A Kolker.

To provide an opportunity for Members and Officers to declare any personal and/or prejudicial interests in any item on the agenda

The Mayor asked those Members who had any personal or prejudicial Interests on general agenda items, to declare them, but before doing so, drew Members’ attention to Item 8 on the agenda (Electoral Review – Submission on warding arrangements) and stated that she proposed to ask the Borough Solicitor to record the declaration of a Personal Interest by every Member who was also a member of a Parish Council, in accordance with the Members completed Register. Council confirmed that it was content with this approach and therefore, all members of Parish Councils declared personal interests to that effect.

To approve, as a correct record, the minutes of the Annual Council meeting held on 1 April and reconvened on 2 April 2009.

RESOLVED

That, subject to the addition of Councillors Howell, Alcock, S Jones and Narraway to the list of those present at the reconvened meeting held on 2 April, the minutes be approved as a correct record.

To receive such announcements as may be made by the Mayor.

The Mayor :-

(1) Announced that Since taking office on 1 April, she was pleased to report that she had now had the opportunity to visit all the former constituent borough areas (Congleton, Crewe and Nantwich and Macclesfield) and was getting to know her way around the Cheshire East boundaries.  

(2) Announced that the first Armed Forces Day had taken place on 27 June 2009 and she was honoured to have had the opportunity to attend the local version of this event, which started, on 22 June, with flag-raising events in Sandbach, Crewe and Macclesfield. She had attended the Crewe event, with the Leader attending at Sandbach and the Deputy Mayor in Macclesfield. This was followed, on Saturday the 27 June, with receptions in the same three towns to mark the contribution of the British Forces in conflicts throughout the world.  This date in the calendar each year would be an opportunity for the nation as a whole to show support for men and women who make up the armed forces community, which included not only those who were currently serving and their families, but also the veterans and new recruits.  Across the country people had been involved by holding local events and she was honoured to have the opportunity to host the Crewe event, which she felt was both moving and up-lifting and was also a time for reflection.

(3) Announced that, on the Tuesday, 2 June, the Mercian Regiment 1st Battalion (Cheshire), on which the Freedom of the Borough had been conferred, exercised its right to march through the towns of both Congleton and Nantwich with “bayonets fixed and flags flying” The roads were closed during the march, and there was a good turn-out by members of the public for both events. 

(4) Announced that she have been humbled by being given the opportunity to meet various volunteers of the Voluntary sector.  She considered that the Voluntary sector was vital to the well-being of any community. Despite the proliferation of welfare assistance, the state could not always provide for the needs of all and there would always be gaps in provision.  Without the unstinting dedication of those people who choose selflessly to helped others, society would be much poorer.  Volunteering could be a two-way experience; not only does it help those who are receiving the services, but it could be very rewarding for the volunteers themselves.

(5) That an early highlight of her year had been attending the Royal Garden Party on Tuesday, 14 July.  Along with her Consort and with fellow Councillors she went to London. It was an event where they were able to mix with people from all walks of life; other Mayors, volunteers, business-people, veterans and young people. There were over several thousand people in attendance. The party had been delighted that His Royal Highness Prince Philip chose to come over to speak to them about Cheshire East.   

(6) Referred to her Civic Report, which had been circulated at the meeting and stated that,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 119.

In accordance with Council Procedure Rule 35, a total period of 15 minutes is allocated for members of the public to address the Committee on any matter relevant to the work of the Committee.

Individual members of the public may speak for up to 5 minutes but the Chairman will decide how the period of time allocated for public speaking will be apportioned where there are a number of speakers.

Note: In order for officers to undertake any background research, it would be helpful if any questions by members of the public were submitted at least one working day before the meeting.

Mr B Evans used public speaking time to suggest that the Council organise an open doors event in the following year, during Local Democracy Week, whereby Council buildings, including administrative offices, would be open to the public. This was a national initiative, which normally took place in September and also involved factories and other institutions. The event would enable the public to look around the Council buildings. In addition, he suggested that, by 2010, the Council should have structures in place and by this time, the Boundary Committee would have completed its review and this would provide the opportunity to invigorate the electorate. 

The Leader of the Council agreed that consideration would be given to the suggestion.

Mr B Cartwright, representing Cheshire Anti Incinerator Network (CHAIN), used public speaking time to urge the Council to refuse the planning application, submitted by Covanta Energy, to build a waste burning incinerator in Middlewich. Mr Cartwright outlined the objections to the proposal, which included lack of need, the fact that it was clear that waste would have to be transported from outside the County and the fact that the Cavanta site was not one of the 6 preferred sites chosen as potential development sites and  deemed suitable. He also outlined the grounds on which it was considered that the application should be refused, which related to landscape matters, visual impact, height, distance from the nearest urbanisation, affect on air quality, traffic impact/additional HGVs and public opinion/objection.

Mr Leonard used public speaking to question why several planning applications had been refused, for the development, for housing, of a contaminated Brownfield site in the Green Belt, in his ownership. He stated that, whilst he could accept that the reason given was inappropriate development in the Green Belt, he did not feel that the same rule applied to other sites in the Borough. Mr Leonard provided a list of examples of other applications for development Green Belt, in the former Macclesfield Borough, which had been granted planning permission.

The Prosperity Portfolio Holder, Cllr Macrae, thanked Mr Leonard for his question and stated that, as Mr Leonard was aware, his site lay within the North Cheshire Green Belt. Cllr Macrae was well aware of the history of the site, as Mr Leonard had approached him in the previous year. Whilst he could not comment on any individual application, a review of the Core Strategy for the Local Development Framework Plan would be taking place shortly and the Council would be consulting on it, which would provide the opportunity for Mr Leonard to make comments. Councillor Macrae undertook to provide a written response to Mr Leonard.

To consider the attached Notice of Motion, submitted by Councillor A Arnold and seconded by Councillor J Narraway.

Consideration was given to the following Notice of Motion, submitted by Councillor A Arnold and seconded by Councillor J Narraway:-

“That Cheshire East Council suspends car parking charges, on Saturdays, in Macclesfield Town centre, for a trial period of three months initially, subject to a review of its effect in increasing local trade, will, if proved successful extend the duration of the scheme and implement the same measures to other town centres in Cheshire East, requiring assistance in regenerating local businesses.

Given the urgency of the need for regeneration assistance within our town centres, the trial scheme in Macclesfield should be implemented as quickly as possible”. 

RESOLVED

That the motion stand referred to Cabinet.

           To report to the Council the work of the Electoral Review Task Group, concerning the preparation of a submission to the Boundary Committee for England on the Warding Arrangements to be made for Cheshire East Council.

Consideration was given to a report relating the work of the Electoral Review Task Group, concerning the preparation of a submission to the Boundary Committee for England on the Warding Arrangements to be made for Cheshire East Council.

The Council was requested to consider and approve the submission prepared by the Task Group, which set out the Authority’s proposals for Warding Arrangements under the Electoral Review of the Cheshire East area and to authorise the Borough Solicitor and Monitoring Officer to make any necessary technical and detailed amendments to finalise the document, to ensure that it complied fully with the wishes of the Council and was delivered by the Boundary Committee’s deadline of 4 August.

A revised appendix 3 – Warding table, an additional appendix 5 – Summary of representations received on the warding arrangements being recommended to Council and a revised list of recommendations were circulated at the meeting.

The motion as set out in the resolution below was moved and seconded.

A requisition for a named vote was submitted and duly supported, in accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 15.2 of the Constitution.

The motion was put to the meeting with the following results:-

The motion was declared carried, with 49 votes for,18 against and 5 not voting.

RESOLVED

1. That the proposed submission to the Boundary Committee on Warding 

arrangements for Cheshire East Council, as prepared by the Member Task Group, be approved subject to –

a) the inclusion of the revised Appendix 3 as circulated to the Council, and subject to paragraph b) below, the proposed Ward names as shown therein;

b) the following changes being made to the proposed Ward names:

     Poynton Rural Ward being renamed Poynton East and Adlington Ward

    Gawsworth Ward being renamed Henbury and Gawsworth Ward

    Holmes Chapel Ward being renamed Dane Valley Ward;

c) confirmation that the Congleton Rural Ward is to be represented by one Councillor;

d) the area north of the Holly Bush Inn, Crewe Road, Winterley and the roundabout adjoining the Haslington and Wheelock bypasses (containing 82 electors) being transferred from the Sandbach West Ward to the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 122.

           To approve the design of the Coat of Arms for Cheshire East Council, together with the descriptive text, to decide an appropriate motto for the Coat of Arms and to authorise the submission of a Petition to the College of Arms, in order that the Grant of Arms may be made.

           Consideration was given to a report which set out the next steps required to enable the Council to be granted a Coat of Arms, for use by the Mayor only, as previously agreed in principle, and invites the Council to approve the design of the Arms and consider the Motto, so that a formal Petition can be submitted to the College of Arms.

RESOLVED

           1. That the design of the Coat of Arms for Cheshire East Council, together   

                with the descriptive text be approved.

            2. That the Motto for the Coat of Arms, “Working Together for Excellence”, as

                 set out in paragraph 11.3 of the report be approved.

           3. That submission of a Petition to the College of Arms, in order that the

               Grant of Arms may be made, be approved.

To consider recommendations to Council in respect of substitute Members at Planning meetings.

           On 17 June, the Strategic Planning Board considered a report, which proposed alternative arrangements to restrict the appointment of substitute members for planning matters. The Board made the following recommendation to the Governance and Constitution Committee and to Council:

“That the scheme of substitution in the Constitution be amended as follows:

a)         No substitution shall be made to the North Area Planning Committee except with a Member from the South Area Planning Committee and vice versa. The substitute Member should wherever possible come from the same political group but may come from a different political group

b)         No substitutions shall be made to the Strategic Planning Board from the area committees or at all.”

On 25 June 2009, the Governance and Constitution Committee considered the recommendations of the Strategic Planning Board and, whilst it supported recommendation (a) and recommended it to Council, the Committee did not support recommendation (b).

The Governance and Constitution Committee, therefore, recommended to Council only that:

a)     “No substitution shall be made to the North Area Planning Committee except with a Member from the South Area Planning Committee and vice versa. The substitute Member should wherever possible come from the same political group but may come from a different political group.”

Council was requested to decide whether it wished the Constitution to be changed to reflect both recommendations (a) and (b), according to the wishes of the Strategic Planning Board, or just recommendation (a), in line with the wishes of the Governance and Constitution Committee.

The Prosperity Portfolio Holder proposed that, in light of recent discussions  the recommendations set out in the report be deferred for further consideration by the appropriate Committees.

RESOLVED

That the recommendations set out on page 51 of the agenda be deferred for further consideration by the appropriate Committees.

To consider recommendations to Council of Committees and other bodies in respect of the following matters:

a.      Committee Membership Changes (Pages

b.      Additional Functions-Head of Safer and Stronger Communities (Pages

c.      Amendments to Finance and Contract Procedure Rules (Pages

d.      Member Speaking at Planning Committees (Pages

e.      Cabinet Decision-Making Arrangements (Pages

f.        Budget and Policy Framework Procedure Rules (Pages

Consideration was given to recommendations to Council from the Governance and Constitution Committee in respect of the following matters:-

Committee Membership Changes

                     The Conservative Group had notified the following proposed changes to Committee places:

         Licensing Committee

         Replace Councillor Parker with Councillor Hardy

Governance and Constitution Committee

Replace Cllr Bentley with Cllr Livesley

Public Rights of Way Committee

Replace Cllr Rhoda Bailey with Cllr Wray

The Governance and Constitution Committee, at its meeting on 21 May 2009 considered a report relating to the proposed changes and recommended that Council approve them.

RESOLVED

                     That the proposed changes to Committee places be approved.

Additional Functions-Head of Safer and Stronger Communities

           The Governance and Constitution Committee, at its meeting on 25 June 2009, had considered a report seeking a recommendation from the Committee to Council that reference to additional pieces of legislation be added to the list contained in the Constitution, relating to matters which fell within the remit of the Head of Safer and Stronger Communities.Council was recommended to approve the recommendation.

RESOLVED

1.      That the amended list of legislation, attached at Appendix A, be added to the list in the Appendix to the “Powers and Responsibilities of Officers” (section of Part 3 of the Constitution) which would have the effect of bringing responsibility for this legislation within the remit of the Head of Safer and Stronger Communities by virtue of paragraph 25.1.2 of that Part; and

2.      That such consequential amendments be made to the Constitution as the Borough Solicitor considered necessary to give effect to the wishes of Council.

Amendments to Finance and Contract Procedure Rules

The Governance and Constitution Committee, at its meeting on 25 June 2009, had considered a report relating to proposed amendments to the Finance and Contract Procedure Rules and recommended that Council approve the proposed amendments.

RESOLVED

1.      That the amendments to the Finance and Contract Procedure Rules, set out in Appendix B attached, be approved.

2.      That the Borough Solicitor be authorised to continue to exercise his corrective powers with regard to the Constitution, in those cases where he considers it appropriate to do so.

Member Speaking at Planning Committees

The Governance and Constitution Committee, at its meeting on 21 May 2009, considered an amendment to the Constitution to apply a Planning Public Speaking Protocol to Members’ general speaking rights at Planning Board and Planning Committee meetings.

Procedure Rule 38 in the Constitution provided that any Member may attend

Committees to which they had not been appointed. The Member had no right to vote, but could speak with the consent of the chairman.  The Council had delegated authority to the Strategic Planning Board to adopt its own working protocols. The Board had now adopted a Protocol which gave enhanced speaking rights to a wide range of speakers who could address the Board and Committees. It was, therefore, necessary to amend the existing provisions within the Constitution relating to Member and public speaking.

The Committee had previously resolved to review Member and public speaking provisions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 125.

Under Council Procedure Rule 44, for the Leader to report to Council any Key Decision taken under the urgency provisions, contained in that rule.

The Leader of the Council reported the following Key Decisions, which had been taken under the urgency provisions contained within Council Procedure Rule 44 :-

1.      Gorsey Bank Primary School, Wilmslow – Remedial works to four classroom extension.

2.      Decision relating to the future use of County Hall, Chester.

In accordance with Procedure Rules 11, opportunity is provided for Members of the Council to ask the Chairman, the appropriate Cabinet Member or the Chairman of a Committee any question about a matter which the Council, the Cabinet or the Committee has powers, duties or responsibilities.

Questions must be sent in writing to the Monitoring Officer at least 3 clear working days before the meeting.

Councillor D Flude had submitted the following five questions:-

Question 1 - Home Office Consultation May 2009.

Together we can end violence against women and girls.

Can this Council be assured that there was a response from this council to this consultation?

Can this Council be assured that the survivors of domestic and or sexual violence in Cheshire East are provided with the services from this Council, that they need to be safe to enable recovery from their horrific experiences?

How is this Council implementing the Co-ordinated Community Response model, which has been evaluated nationally and proved to be cost effective and ensures an integrated response to all parties, including children who experience domestic and or sexual violence?

What funding is this Council allocating to the work, to prevent and respond to domestic and sexual violence now and how does it envisage securing sustained funding, as part of a strategic long term response?

The Sexual Assault Referral Centre, that is planned to be opened  at Leighton Hospital has funding from our partners, Health and  Police, what contribution to this vital resource will Cheshire East Council be making?

Question 2

A recent survey has found that that more than six out of ten people providing unpaid care for someone who is ill, frail or disabled have not had a break for more than a year and a third of them have not taken time off since they started caring.

Of particular concern are young carers who provide care for family members who have mental health, drug or alcohol problems.

Can this Council be assured that?

All carers who request or require a carer’s assessment are assessed and a timely review of their caring needs takes place and that any changes in their circumstances are acted on promptly?

That within each social work team there is sufficient clerical support to enable the vital role and expertise of Social Worker’s who carry out the social work function of assessing, setting up care packages and reviewing, to be enabled to carry out their function, recognising the ever increasing referrals to social work teams?

Are technological systems in place and are these systems fit for purpose to enable social workers to carry our designated functions in a cost and time efficient manner?

Question 3 - Criteria for Care

Cheshire East Cabinet have stated that the new model of Social Care puts the person and their carers at the heart of all we do.

A large percentage of older people fall just outside the stated group of people who would qualify for care, i.e. they are not in the Critical or Substantial range of need.

Preventive work is vital, if we are to enable older people to retain their independence. Current  guidelines have excluded many older people with lower needs from the most basic care provision, such as bathing, shopping and housework.

Recognising that basic needs are vital in preventive work; will there be greater investment in preventative services through the Supporting You Budgets, via other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 127.