Agenda and minutes

Overview & Scrutiny Committee
Tuesday 10 September 2019 9.30 am

Venue: Committee Room 2, East Pallant House. View directions

Contact: Democratic Services on 01243 534685  Email:

No. Item


Chairman's Announcements

Any apologies for absence will be noted at this point.


Apologies were received from Mr Bell, Mr Dignum and Mr Palmer.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 112 KB

To approve the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 18 June 2019.


To receive an update on progress against recommendations made to the Cabinet and the Council.




That the minutes of the meeting held on 18 June 2019 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.


Matters Arising


Minute 285: Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2018-19: Members noted that full Council had received the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Annual Report 2018-19 at its July meeting.


Minute 284: Pallant House Gallery Monitoring Report: With regard to the leaking roof, a member asked for an update on Pallant House Gallery’s request for the Council to produce a maintenance plan for the building and asked officers to circulate the plan when ready. Mrs Apel, the Council’s representative on Pallant House Gallery Trust and Company, advised that this matter would be discussed at the Gallery’s Risk Committee the next day, after which she would be able to advise in more detail.  Mrs Hotchkiss advised that the Leader of the Council had met with Pallant House Gallery regarding the concerns raised.  Mr Bacon, Building Services Manage, would shortly have a meeting with the Gallery.   The tenant was responsible for the maintenance of the guttering and roof.     


Minute 285: Annual report 2018-19 and Work Programme 2019-20: Public Attendance: Feedback was requested from the Communications Team on the steps taken to encourage public attendance at meetings.  Mrs Hotchkiss advised that she would check to see if this meeting had been promoted on social media.  She referred to the new Communications Plan being prepared that had been considered by the Consultations Task and Finish Group that included Overview and Scrutiny Committee members.   The Chairman advised that he would speak to the Communications Team about publicising the Council’s meetings on social media. 



Urgent Items

The Chairman will announce any urgent items that due to special circumstances are to be dealt with under the agenda item below relating to late items.


There were no urgent items.



Declarations of Interests

Members and officers are reminded to make any declarations of disclosable pecuniary, personal and/or prejudicial interests they may have in respect of matters on the agenda for this meeting.


Mr Sutton declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 6 as the Chichester District Council appointed representative of Petworth Vision Ltd. 


Mr Sutton declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 12 as a Governor of Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust Council.


Mr Sutton declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 12 as a member of Petworth PPG Group.


Mr Sutton declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 12 as a sponsor and supervisor of the Petworth Gardens.


Mrs Sharp declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 7 as a former member of Everyone Active.



Public Question Time

The procedure for submitting public questions in writing no later than 12:00 on 9 September 2019 is available upon request from Democratic Services (the contact details for which appear on the front page of this agenda).


The following public questions had been received as follows:


Mr Raincock had submitted questions in relation to item 6 (Chichester Vision, Chichester Bid and the Retail Offering, and Southern Gateway).  Mr Trundle was in attendance on behalf of Mr Raincock to read out the questions as follows.


Question 1 – Masterplan -


The Development Brief references a ‘Masterplan for the area that was adopted in November 2017 as a Supplementary Planning Document’.

Does the Overview and Scrutiny Committee believe this Masterplan is appropriate in September 2019 and if so what economic benefits will it bring to Chichester?

What efforts have been made by the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to challenge this Masterplan because if implemented the opportunity will be lost to modernise the railway station, find a long term solution for the railway crossings and position Chichester as a ‘go to’ location on the south coast for a new creative industry, business, education and leisure?

Finally, does the Overview and Scrutiny Committee truly believe the Masterplan will be the catalyst for positive change across The District and in particular central Chichester?


The following answer as provided by Mr Moss


Yes the Masterplan remains relevant today and remains the adopted statutory planning document.  It is a sufficiently flexible document that allows a variety of solutions to be proposed for consideration and implementation.  The potential benefits are significant and are fully described in the Project Initiation Document approved by Council previously but includes an estimated 365 homes; 1100 new jobs; improved night-time economy; business space and public realm.  All members of Council were engaged in the production of the masterplan and the development brief and will continue to be so in order to ensure that its delivery delivers the change it is designed to.


Question 2 - Deliverability


Does the Overview and Scrutiny Committee think the whole Masterplan is deliverable?

Does the Overview and Scrutiny Committee believe a developer would actually build out the quantum of commercial space (21,600 square meters) outlined in The Masterplan without a significant pre-let agreement in place from an end user of the space?

If so, what is the prospect of securing a significant pre-let from a credible end user to underpin the success of the Masterplan and has this been tested with the shortlisted developers?


The following answer as provided by Mr Moss


As Mr. Raincock will be aware the Council and its partners are in the midst of a procurement process to appoint a development partner.  Deliverability is a key consideration of this process and as such it would not be appropriate to comment in detail at this time suffice to say that a response to this question will form an important part of the Council’s decision making process.


Question 3  – Timetable


The proposed timetable for the appointment of a developer by Chichester District Council is set out in The Development Brief that was issued in May 2019 to parties interested in being appointed to regenerate The Southern Gateway. This brief clearly states the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 292.


Chichester Vision, Chichester BID and the Retail Offering and Southern Gateway - Growth and Place Portfolio pdf icon PDF 103 KB

Due to recent changes in Cabinet responsibilities and in agreement with the Chairman  no Cabinet member will be present to address the Committee. The Committee is asked to note the report and agree any questions or actions they wish to take.

Additional documents:


Mr Dignum had been invited to present his priorities and areas of focus over the next year and to answer questions from the Committee on progress towards achieving the aims of the Council’s Corporate Plan priorities.  However, due to recent changes in Cabinet responsibilities, following Mr Dignum’s resignation as Leader on health grounds, and in agreement with the Chairman no Cabinet member was present to address the Committee.  The Committee was asked to note the report and agree any questions or actions they wish to make.


Members made a number of comments. It was important to state that the rural visions were an important consideration for the Council’s Development Plan.  Effort was also required to make stakeholders work closer together in future.  If living and working in the District was an aim of the Chichester Vision, then the issue of high house prices should be addressed in the Vision.  With regard to the West Sussex Gigabyte Project and whether or not it would be completed on time, Mr Ward undertook to provide members with an answer outside of the meeting.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        


The Chairman read out an email submitted by Mr Palmer, who was unable to attend today, concerning his views on the Southern Gateway project, which expressed his support for a Task and Finish Group.


Members discussed the decision taken by the Council to progress the Southern Gateway project had taken place before the District Council elections in May 2019 and the Council now had a different political balance.  Comments were made that there were still many issues unanswered as well indications during the Southern Gateway public consultation that the community had concerns about issues such as the railway crossing proposals.  Concern was raised as to whether the timings for the southern gateway process achievable considering that the timetable for the partner agreement was scheduled for October 2019 and the signing of the contract scheduled for December 2019.  However, it was noted that there was a fixed schedule set by the Council to be adhered to conform to the rules required by the process. 


Members discussed whether or not a Southern Gateway Task and Finish Group should be set up, as soon as possible.  Officer advice was requested on the proposal for a Task and Finish Group, at this late stage in the Southern Gateway process, whether at this late stage it was practicable and also sought advice concerning the impact on the development market if delayed.


The Chairman informed the Committee that the Council, including this Committee, over an extended period of time had been determined in the delivery of the Southern Gateway project.  However, he believed it was appropriate for the Overview and Scrutiny Committee to look at how the project was progressing.  It did not mean that the project as a whole was being questioned, as the Council was in favour of the redevelopment of Chichester.


Mr Ward responded to the advice requested by members.  With regard to Mr Palmer’s comments concerning different types of mix and uses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 293.


Leisure Services Performance Review pdf icon PDF 66 KB

The Committee is requested to receive the 2018-19 Annual Report from Everyone Active (Sport and Leisure Management Ltd).  To review the report and agree that the contractor is achieving satisfactory levels of performance against the outcomes in section 2.0 and the key performance indicators in section 4.0 of the 2018-2019 annual report.


Additional documents:


Mrs Peyman presented the report.  Mr Mills, Everyone Active Contract Manager, was in attendance to answer questions.


Mrs Peyman reported that the Council continued to work closely with Everyone Active to ensure that the leisure needs of the community were being met.  Mr Mills outlined the successes during 2018-2019, which included the achievement of an excellent Quest Assessment at all three sites.  Westgate Leisure had also achieved outstanding in a Q Stretch assessment.


Officers answered members’ questions as follows:


·      Increasing the membership for the over 50 was something the centres were looking into. A review of over 50’s activities had been undertaken and changes made where necessary.  The centres were also looking at how activities should be marketed.  After quarter 1 this year membership had increased.

·      There were currently no plans to expand Bourne Leisure to include a community hub.  However, Mr Mills advised he would be happy to look into the possibility.  Although this centre was not at full capacity the sports hall was well used and Southbourne Community College had plans to development outside area, which it was hoped that the centre could utilise.  Mrs Peyman added that the Sports and Leisure Team were consulted on future leisure needs as part of the planning development process and discussions took place with the parishes and leisure providers.  Mrs Peyman undertook to liaise with Mrs Bangert about talking to Southbourne Parish Council about their needs.

·      With regard to the use of green renewable energy, Mr Mills undertook to find out who supplied the energy to the centres.  Mrs Peyman advised that the Westgate and Grange car parks were operated by the District Council.  The car park at the Bourne was jointly operated with Southbourne Community College.  Mrs Hotchkiss provided details of a grant received by the Council for the installation of electric charging points, of which the Grange.  Mr Mills undertook to contact the school to discuss the possibility of providing electric charging points at the Bourne centre car park.

·      Officers were aware of the difficulties experienced by some members when booking classes online, as spaces for some classes ran out quickly.  Reviews were undertaken and where possible the number of classes were adjusted to suit demand.

·      There was the opportunity for members of the public to be on the Westgate Leisure focus group. The Bourne and the Grange held meet the manager sessions.  He undertook to carry out promotion of the focus group.

·      With regard to apprentices and the living wage, and concerns raised that some were not able to pay for public transport to travel to work, Mr Mills advised that apprentices received a standard rate across the three leisure centres.  He undertook to look into any individual cases. 

·      Sussex Otters Swimming Club, that provided swimming facilities for disabled people, had discontinued about six months ago following a reduction in numbers, despite Westgate encouraging them to hire less pool space to reduce their costs.  The swimming pool was accessible to disabled users

·      Mrs Peyman explained that the repairs  ...  view the full minutes text for item 294.


Visit Chichester Monitoring Report pdf icon PDF 67 KB

The Committee is requested to receive the annual update report from Visit Chichester for 2018-19 and assess performance in line with the Service Level Agreement.

Additional documents:


Mrs Peyman was joined by Ms Adlam, Destination Marketing Executive, and Mr Hobbs, interim Chairman and the CDC appointed representative for Visit Chichester.


Mr Hobbs introduced the report.  He thanked the previous Chairman, Mr Craig Gershater who had a challenging task to set up the corporate entity that became Chichester Vision.  What had become clear since he had become the interim Chairman was the sense that the name ‘Chichester’ was causing disquiet in other areas of the District who felt that a lot of the activities were ‘Chichester centric’.  Visit Chichester was trying to increase tourism by encouraging people outside the District to visit.  It was important, therefore, to consider how the project could broaden its message.  He stressed that lot of work had been carried out to make it clearer that the project was about the Chichester District, including Midhurst, Petworth, Selsey and the whole of the Manhood area.  He explained that the purpose of Visit Chichester was to ‘Coordinate’ all the fantastic tourism activities that went on within the District, To ‘Help’, particularly the smaller organisations that may not have the ability to promote themselves, and also in a more coordinated way to the wider community.  ‘Inspire’ people to buy into Visit Chichester’s message and ‘Inform’ because he felt that the Visit Chichester’s messages were not necessarily getting out to the wider community.  The potential for third party funding from a National cycling organisation was being investigated to fund a network of 20-30 bicycle destinations, such as shops or public houses around the District.  Each destination could have maps promoting activities and local businesses etc, encourage people to stay overnight and possibly provide bicycle hire.  He enthused that if Visit Chichester was doing its job it should present opportunities to the Council and other organisations for joint funded opportunities to make a difference to the community, assist the climate change agenda, the broader tourism agenda, and encourage everyone in the District to make a contribution and think about how they could inspire their own local communities.  He referred to the fantastic education establishments in the District and advised that there could be an opportunity to engage some of these students in projects to help individual parishes.  Most importantly young people could be given work experience or other opportunities that would assist their CVs. 


The Chairman welcomed Ms Adlam to the meeting.


Ms Adlam provided details of current activities.  A new membership scheme was being launched on 17 September 2019 at its first networking event at the Guildhall, Priory Park, Chichester.  The aim was to bring the community and businesses together to benefit from what Visit Chichester.  The first walking event, of 21 walks, had taken place recently over a weekend with 160 people attending. On a wider scale there were a number of exciting projects happening, such as, access to a new PR database with the hope of increasing local and national newspaper coverage.  Work had taken place with travel magazines to run Chichester District led features.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 295.


Ice Skating Update pdf icon PDF 69 KB

The Committee is requested to receive the further information requested at the March 2019 Overview and Scrutiny Committee regarding reinstatement of grass and a breakdown of costs that Chichester District Council incurred as a result of the ice rink.



The Committee considered the report circulated with the agenda.


Mrs Peyman provided an update to the Committee concerning the reinstatement of the grassed area in Priory Park following the use of part of the park for a temporary ice skating rink, as requested as its meeting on 12 March 2019.  Following additional works required by the contractor, adverse weather conditions had resulted in the grass seed not initially taking as well as hoped and therefore additional seed was over sown at a cost of £190.  This amount was taken from the contractor S3K Limited’s deposit and the remaining £810 would be returned.  With regard to the cost of the statutory work undertaken by Development Management for the planning application, Environmental Protection to assess issues such as noise nuisance, and Licensing to progress the premises licence, this work would still have to take place whether or not the event was on Council land.  Officer time and costs for the hire of land element of the project were £669.79, which were higher than normal as it was a first event.  The costs calculated for the amount of time that officers had spent dealing with complaints about the event was £6,992.70 (excluding on costs).  New guidance had been issued with clear guidance on how to deal with the receipt of unreasonable complainants and the learning curves of holding the ice skating event had been taken into account when producing the guidance.


Members’ made the following comments and received answers to questions as follows:


·      This was a one off learning curve but in future officers should ensure that the licensing fee covers the costs: A peppercorn rent was charged due to it being the first event of its kind with the contractor taking on all the financial risk of running the event.  If the event was repeated full rent for the hire of the land would be charged to the contractor.  Officers believed that part of the costs had been recovered by car park usage during December 2018, which was estimated at £2,500 higher than the same period the previous year.  Members were pleased to hear that the additional car parking income which went some way to offset some of those costs and accepted that the officer time and costs could not be quantified.

·      Has the additional grass seed been successfully sown?:  The contractor had been required to reinstate the grass as part of a planning permission condition.  A number of meetings were held with the contractor before it was decided that the grounds maintenance staff would carry out the over sowing at a charge to the contractor.  Due to conditions, such as the weather, the grass did not take as well as hoped.  The area is now fully reinstated, as well as the area where the archaeological dig took place on the event space.  

·      Mrs Sharp was allowed by the Chairman to briefly paraphrase questions from residents that had been in contact with her who could not attend today’s meeting: With regard to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 296.


Economic Development Strategy and Inward Investment and Growth Strategy pdf icon PDF 73 KB

The Committee is requested to receive the draft Economic Development Strategy and draft Inward Investment and Growth Strategy prior to the strategies being considered by Cabinet.


Additional documents:


Mrs Burgoyne introduced the draft Economic Development Strategy and draft Inward Investment and Growth Strategy.


In response to members’ questions, Mrs Burgoyne undertook to look into the suggestion that growth and employment, page 81 (Priority 3), should be a primary aim.  Mrs Burgoyne provided details of the work that the Economic Development service had undertaken with businesses in preparation for Brexit that included providing links on the Council’s website to enable businesses to prepare for Brexit.  The West Sussex Growers Association had been looking into the effect of Brexit on the horticulture sector.  With regard to the difficulties businesses had as a result of the high house prices in recruiting suitably qualified employees from Chichester College and the University of Chichester, as well as the issue of some secondary school exam results falling short of other local authority areas, Mrs Burgoyne advised that the Economic Development service was able to work with partners to influence, which was why education was a secondary aim in the Economic Strategy.  It was agreed that a suggestion for the Committee to look into education would be dealt under the Forward Plan item.  A suggestion was made that reference to preserving and protecting the environment should be included.  With regard to branding, Mrs Hotchkiss advised that the feedback received from businesses outside the District on the draft Inward Investment Strategy, included comments that they did not know what the District had to offer for businesses.  A marketing branding package would be put together to attract businesses outside the District as well as providing support for those businesses already in the District to help them grow and to provide employment.  It was felt by members that more should be done was made to reduce the amount of local produce being exported from the District.


The Chairman advised that having been the owner of a small business in the District he would send Mrs Burgoyne his comments separately. 


The Chairman expressed his support for both strategies.  He felt that the Council should be selling itself more and suggested that the Draft Inward Investment and Growth Strategy’s introduction could include more of the great things the District had to offer.  He referred to a Coast to Capital meeting he had attended earlier this year, as the Council’s representative, where their own ongoing strategy was discussed.  He stressed the importance of being closely aligned with Coast to Capital’s emerging revised strategy and offered to share his notes of the meeting he had written with Mrs Burgoyne. 




That the draft Economic Development Strategy and draft Inward Investment and Growth Strategy be noted prior to the strategies being considered by Cabinet.



Universal Credit Review pdf icon PDF 132 KB

The Committee is requested to receive an overview of the impact of Universal Credit.  It is recommended that the impacts of Universal Credit continue to be monitored to inform service delivery of Revenues, Housing and Communities; the Council continue to assess how adverse effects can be mitigated by the provision of Council Services and partnership working; and that relevant Council Policy’s be reviewed to ensure that they support those that are vulnerable to welfare reform.


Mrs Rogers outlined the report and provided an overview of the impact the rollout of Universal Credit (UC) review in the District.  Mrs Standing was also in attendance.


During the discussion members discussed the impact following the rollout of UC.  There was concern that less than 100% of claimants received their payments on time, with just 86% receiving their payment on time in February this year and with the loss of income in real terms despite the introduction of easements.  Foodbanks in Chichester had confirmed that the introduction of UC was responsible for the increase in people using them.  Referring to paragraph 6.3.3., members considered that the introduction of an Anti-Poverty Strategy would be a positive move.  The Council Tax Reduction scheme should be publicised more widely to ensure those in need were aware of the financial support available.       Food banks were set up to help urgent one off cases not to be a necessary support for a large number of families for periods of up to six weeks.  It was not fair that a number of charities, as a result of the introduction of UC, had to take on these urgent cases. With regard to the complex circumstances of some claimants, it was thought that around 60% of the homeless had problems with reading, writing and dyslexia.  With that in mind, although support could be given concerning a homeless person’s initial claim, many did not have the skills or resources to access IT on a regular basis to keep their claim details up to date. 


Mrs Rodgers confirmed that the comments in paragraph 5.2 referred to the Department of Work and Pension’s view of how the rollout of Universal Credit had gone.  The Council’s community referrers’ project aimed to alleviate some of the issues created by UC.  The UC was aimed at mitigating some of the issues cause by the introduction of UC.  Nationally there had been a 52% average increase in the use of foodbanks in areas where UC had been rolled for a year ago, but she did not know if this information was reported to central Government.    


Mrs Standing advised that the Department of Work and Pensions payments description of on time payment was payment within one month, which was in line with monthly salaries.   The Citizens Advice Bureau had launched a Help to Claim scheme in April this year, specifically set up to help residents with their initial UC claim and to provide Work Coaches to provide additional support for the more vulnerable so they could be referred to the Job Centre to get additional specific advice.  With regard to the concerns raised by members about the increase in food bank usage, the Department of Work and Pensions offered advance payments and budgeting loans for those waiting for their initial UC payment, as long as these were publicised and people were claiming they would go some way to alleviate people struggling financially.


With regard to the advance payments and budgeting loans available, concern was expressed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 298.


Social Prescribing pdf icon PDF 69 KB

The committee is requested to consider the Chichester Social Prescribing report for year 1 and to note the progress and success of year 1 of the service, and outcomes of the service and next steps in the evaluation report


Additional documents:


Mrs Bushby outlined the evaluation report and provided details of progress and successes during year 1 of the Chichester Social Prescribing service.  It was aimed at giving the right support at the right time to those in need of the service.  It was hoped that members agreed that the evaluation reflected the success of the project so far, with the caveat that the service was new and there was a lot more work to be done.  She clarified that social prescribing was not concept.  It was an approach that looked at the demand on medical services for non-medical services.  Neither was the project a response to welfare reform, although it was noted that almost a third of the referrals were as a result of welfare and benefits.


Mrs Bushby responded to members’ questions and comments.  She undertook to find out if any research had been undertaken in respect of links of mild to moderate special needs, such as dyslexia or autism spectrum disorders to depression and mental health issues.  There was not necessarily a direct link that having such a condition would affect their mental health, but if someone had a condition that limited their ability to access services that may have a negative impact on their mental health.  The initial assessments carried out by the social prescribers of clients specific needs would include signposting to other services they may require. 


Mr Sutton advised that, as the Council’s representative on the Western Sussex Hospitals NHS Trust Council of Governors, and as a member of the Community Trust and a member of a patient participation group at a GP surgery where a Social Prescriber was active, he had practical experience of the Social Prescribing service.  He considered that there was a strong referral system to help signpost people to the services they required. The project at Petworth had led to a reduction in social isolation in the elderly and could be used in innovative ways.  He cited Duncton Parish Council as an example of engaging with the community to reduce social isolation, for their elderly residents.


Mrs Bushby explained the professional background and experience of the social prescriber, which included social work and homeless services backgrounds.  The recruitment process had specifically looked for clear indications that the prescribers could deal with individuals with complex issues.  Initially the project had not seen large reductions in the demand on GPs.  However, what had been seen was a reduction in the number of social economic reasons for seeing a GP and as a result these patients now made appointments for more relevant issues. She had advised that other social prescribing projects had seen similar results.  With regard to making the service more secure, in particular ensuring there was funding going forward, Mrs Bushby referred members to paragraph 5.2 of the report. She explained that there were risks with the funding sustainability it was in the NHS England’s long term plan, who had committed five years funding for the project.  Funding would be sought at  ...  view the full minutes text for item 299.


Corporate Plan Mid-Year Review - Terms of Reference pdf icon PDF 61 KB

The Committee is requested to consider and agree the Terms of Reference for this Task and Finish Group, to agree the membership and appoint the Chairman.

Additional documents:


The Chairman advised the Committee that the Task and Finish Group (TFG) would work to the agreed terms of reference and present their findings to the next meeting.  It would focus on the Amber and Red markers.  The Committee would be expected to ask questions and look at the report based on the terms of reference.


Mr Buckley reported that this year the report included a summary of the performance indicators and projects that supported the Corporate Plan. This was to give the wider Committee the opportunity to see if there were any specific projects that they wished the TFG to consider.  He advised that the Council’s performance indicators were produced quarterly and were available to view on the Council’s website on a quarterly basis.


Mr Hyland stressed that when the TFG’s report was presented to the Committee it was not for members of the wider Committee to highlight other areas of performance that the TFG had not focused on.


The Committee confirmed they had no specific issues to raise that they wished the TFG to consider.


The Terms of Reference for this TFG were agreed.


It was agreed to seek one further volunteer from the wider membership.




That Mrs Apel, Mr Moss and Mr Sutton (Chairman) are confirmed as members of the Corporate Plan Task and Finish Group.  


Post meeting note: Subsequent to the meeting no volunteers from the wider membership were forthcoming.



Forward Plan pdf icon PDF 166 KB

Members are requested to consider the latest Forward Plan and whether any items should be added to the Committee’s Work Programme.


The Committee considered the latest Forward Plan.



Work Programme pdf icon PDF 76 KB

The Committee is requested to consider the latest Work Programme


The Committee considered the latest Work Programme.


The following items were added to the Work Programme for further involvement by this Committee:


·      Process of the Pay Review: Mr Ward advised that it would not be possible for officers to report the review details of individual staff or groups of individuals.  The whole process had already been reported upon to both Joint Employee Consultative Panel, as well as full Council where the final decision was made prior to the District Council election.  The reports and minutes were available for all members to read.  The process had already been considered and therefore if reviewed by this Committee it would be a duplication creating additional work.  He suggested that members may wish to take into account this information when deliberating whether or not to add this to the work programme.  The Chairman suggested, which was agreed by members, to take the report as it stood to give members, especially for the newer members in office, the opportunity to understand it in the first instance.  Mr Ward confirmed that it would not be a confidential report unless members got into the detail of individual staff, which would not be appropriate anyway.  

·      Education Update from WSCC Education Service: Requested that an officer from West Sussex County Council be invited to attend when the item was considered. 

·      Universal Credit – Anti Poverty Strategy: With regard to task and finish groups, Mr Ward reminded members of Section 5, Protocol 5.7 of the Council’s Constitution concerning the creation of task and finish groups.  Section 10 stated that the Business Routing Panel has overall control of the number of task and finish groups created, as they created additional officer time with some lasting for one meeting and others lasting a period of several months. It would depend on whether members were keen to see an Anti-Poverty Strategy investigated and drafted by officers, which is something that they can just get on with.  He suggested that if this was the case, officers would take it forward in consultation with the Cabinet Portfolio Holder.  If members wished to see the draft Strategy before its consideration by Cabinet they could do.  However, if members wished a much broader subject that would be too complex or too lengthy a debate to get into at the meeting, or contained sensitive information, a task and finish group would be suitable. It was agreed that the subject matter should be broadened out, as a general anti-poverty strategy, to look at the social issues and challenges in these areas faced by those in the District in receipt of Universal Credit, food banks etc.


Current Work Programme Items:


Air Quality Action Plan – Review of existing and briefing paper on proposals for new Midhurst AQAP  – 19 November 2019: The proposed new Air Quality Management Area, due to be considered by Cabinet on 1 October 2019, was Westhampnett Road, Chichester. Mr Potter raised his concern that the introduction of the new roundabout at Westhampnett Road, to service  ...  view the full minutes text for item 302.


Chairman's Closing Remarks


The Chairman announced that Mr Hyland and Mrs Rudziak, who had looked after the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for a number of years, would no longer support the Committee, as going forwards it would be the Divisional Manager to support the Committee.  He thanked them both for the scrutiny work they had carried out during this time and Mr Hyland for the fantastic support that he had given to the previous Chairman, Mrs Apel, as well as himself.  He welcomed Mrs Bushby, Communities Divisional Manager, who would in future be the Committee’s support officer.



Late Items

Consideration of any late items as follows:


a)    Items added to the agenda papers and made available for public inspection.

b)    Items which the Chairman has agreed should be taken as matters of urgency by reason of special circumstances reported at the meeting.


There were no late items for consideration.