Agenda and minutes

Overview & Scrutiny Committee - Tuesday 12 March 2019 9.30 am

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

Contact: Katherine Davis on 01243 534674  Email:

No. Item


Chairman's Announcements

Any apologies for absence will be noted at this point.


The Chairman welcomed everyone to the meeting.


Apologies for absence had been received from Mr Dunn, Mr Galloway, Mrs O’Kelly and Mr Ransley.



Minutes pdf icon PDF 131 KB

To approve the minutes of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 15 January 2019.


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




That subject to an amendment to Minute 258 – Declarations of Interest: Add “Mr Martin declared a personal interest in respect of agenda item 7 as friends of Chichester Festival Theatre” the minutes of the meeting held on 15 January 2019 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.


Matters Arising: Minute 262: Cabinet at its meeting on 5 February 2019 had approved the Business Plan.



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.



Public Question Time

The procedure for submitting public questions in writing no later than 12:00 on 11 March 2019 is available upon request from Democratic Services (the contact details for which appear on the front page of this agenda).


The following public question had been submitted by Mr P Robinson who was in attendance at the meeting to ask his question:


Mr Robinson addressed the Committee. It was a delight to come and see a Committee with a very important role in the preservation of our democracy.  Probably today was symbolic that Committees such as this do fulfil a vital role.  On the substantive question there were many issues that we had about the report submitted to the Committee.  The Chichester Vision on page 42 stated “we wish to take community with us”. He made an observation that he felt slightly disappointed that this did not happen in the proceedings associated with the ice rink, which he bitterly regretted.  With regard to his public question, He advised that he was a historian and spent his life searching for evidence looking for the traces of history and completing the jigsaw puzzle and trying to reach a conclusion.  He was intrigued that when the alleged outcome of the ice rink was looked at, and its so called success, the promotors had declared there had been 19,072 skaters.  However the following day the figure was altered to 21,000.  He was intrigued about the lower figure, which contrasted with the forensic analysis carried out on the actual number of skaters day by day on S3K limited’s website, as this showed that the number of skaters totalled just short of 11,000.  He was also intrigued by the claim in the report that many people had watched the skaters, which did not correspond with his own observations on several occasions.  Neither did the photograph published by the Chichester Observer on Thursday 7 March 2019, which did not seem to show many people on the ice rink.  He was intrigued way the report before members made no reference to the concessions used to support the ice rink.  He had been led to believe that none had made a profit and that three of the concessions had wanted to leave early but could not as they were boxed in.


Mr Robinson asked his question as follows which was answered by the Chairman:


Question: Will the Committee seek, and publish an independently verified assessment of the numbers of tickets sold to skaters at the ice-rink in Priory Park, together with information from the ‘ancillary food and drink concessions’ on their evaluation of the event?


Answer: Mr Robinson, in response to your question can I first clarify the role of Overview and Scrutiny Committee today.  We will, later in today’s agenda, receive a Review report from officers regarding the temporary use of Priory Park to host an Ice skating Rink.  The Committee will seek to satisfy themselves of the process officers have followed in undertaking their review, before commenting on the findings of the review.  This Committee is not undertaking an evaluation of the event.


I understand that officers have received confirmation data of daily sales figures from the contractor which correspond to the overall figure of 19,072 skaters  ...  view the full minutes text for item 272.


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.


There were no declarations of interests.



Ice Skating Review pdf icon PDF 72 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee considered this report circulated with the agenda.


Mrs Hotchkiss, Mrs Peyman and Mr Whitty were in attendance.


Mrs Peyman introduced the report, providing details of the background to the provision of an ice rink in Priory Park, Chichester open to the public from 1 December 2018 to 6 January 2019, lessons learned and the procurement exercise for the ice rink. The Chichester Vision included themes aimed at providing more events in Chichester to support the night time economy and the high street.  During March 2018, it was decided to explore an ice skating event further.  Chichester Bid had not been able to hold its large Christmas event within the City Centre due to repair works at Chichester Cathedral.  During the event 19,072 skaters took to the ice and a large number of spectators attended.  A number of Council departments were involved in the process, including Licensing, Development Management, Health Protection and Culture & Sport and representatives were in the audience should any questions arise.  The Culture and Sport Division was responsible for the use of the land, insurance, health and safety, and compliance monitoring.  A planning application was submitted and the Environmental Protection Team had assessed the applicant’s desktop noise assessment, monitored noise during the event and responded to complaints about noise.   The chillers and generator initially exceeded the imposed noise limits, but was solved by the installation of additional sound proofing material, so there was no breach of the planning condition relating to noise and no statutory nuisance was identified.Due to a significant number of objections to the premises licence application, it was considered by the Alcohol and Entertainment Licensing Sub-Committee and granted.  No incidents were reported concerning the sale of alcohol or regulated entertainment.  Car parking tickets purchased during December 2018 increased by nearly 5,000 when compared to the previous year and the recent pattern of a fall in the use of these car parks.  The use of the Christmas Park and Ride also increased slightly during this Christmas period compared to last year.  Chichester Bid had reported an increase of 67,480 visitors to the City compared to the previous December, to which visitors to the ice rink are likely to have contributed.


Following the success of the event, the contractor was keen to hold the event again this year.  The preferred site was Priory Park.  The contractor intended to work with other partners to complement the event, such as combining it with the Christmas Market and other festive activities.  With regard to the lessons learned, set out at paragraph 5.3, it was acknowledged that the timescale for the implementation of the initial event had been short.  Therefore, steps had been put in place to start discussions earlier for an event this year. A land licence template had been developed for future applications, planning officers had made some comments about their requirements if the event went ahead again relating to aesthetics and investigation of a three phase electrical connection to negate the need for the use  ...  view the full minutes text for item 274.


Community Safety Review Final report from the Task & Finish Group pdf icon PDF 76 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee considered the report circulated with the agenda. 


Mrs Dignum, the Community Safety Review Task and Finish Group (CSTFG) Chairman, presented the report.  The CSTFG was fulfilling its annual statutory duty and had found that each year the issues were slightly different as the nature of society was constantly changing.  The CSTFG received presentations from Mrs Bushby on crime from her viewpoint, and the following witnesses gave evidence Mrs Eileen Lintill (Council’s representative on the Police and Crime Panel), Mrs Emily King (Principal Manager Community Safety and Wellbeing, WSCC), and Chief Inspector Kris Ottery.


Mrs Dignum reported the following amendments:


·         Page 29, third line of paragraph 3: ‘…running at 625,…’ should read ‘…running at 620,…’; and

·         Page 26, Paragraph 5.14: ‘…experienced.’ Should read ‘…expected.’


Mrs Bushby was in attendance and thanked the CSTFG for its support concerning the Council’s community safety partnership (CSP) work.  The Police Crime and Commissioner’s office had confirmed that the Council would receive funding again for community safety for a slightly reduced amount of £38,124.  However, there had been plans for the Police Crime Commissioner to take a 20% cut on all the CSP funding to top slice and put into a separate fund, but it was decided not to do that this year, which showed how much the work all the CSPs were doing was appreciated.


The Committee made the following comments and received answers from Mrs Bushby to questions, including the following:


·       Knife and drug problems in the District: Knife crime figures were relatively low compared to other districts.  The office of the Police Crime Commissioner had successfully bid for early intervention project funding and the fact that this District had not been selected for receipt of this money indicated there were no significantissues in the District relating to County Lines and knife crime.  Recreational drug use affected the night time economy anecdotally and was being dealt with by the night time economy providers, ChiBAC and Sussex Police working together.  Whilst not such a significant issue as in Arun District, class A drugs did attract County Lines to the District and was being addressed by the Serious Crime Group.

·       Attendance of Katy Bourne, Sussex Police and Crime Commissioner: It was not in the Task and Finish Group’s terms of reference to invite Katy Bourne to the meeting.  Mrs Purnell, observing the meeting, added that it was the responsibility of the Sussex Police and Crime Panel to hold her to account;

·       Crime in the North of the District: The Council’s Community Safety Officer was involved in a number of projects in the North of the District, but it was a case of prioritising.  Cross border meetings had been re-introduced.  The Communities Team was keen to raise the profile of the Country Watch Scheme, which had gone quiet recently.  An issue concerning where to put resources was that crime in rural areas was often unreported.   Mrs Dignum mentioned the Farm Watch and suggested that a question could be put forward at the next community  ...  view the full minutes text for item 275.


Consultations - Task and Finish Group pdf icon PDF 60 KB

Additional documents:


The Committee considered the report circulated with the agenda.


Mr Foord and Mrs Parker were in attendance and outlined the report.  Mrs Parker thanked the Task and Finish Group members for their useful contribution to the process.


Mr Foord and Mrs Parker responded to members’ comments as follows:


·       Consultation Focus: After the first meeting the Group focused more on the consultation methodology;

·       Let’s Talk Panel: there was no limit to the number of people able to sign up to the Panel.  1,000 was the target membership and members were asked to encourage their constituents to join.  Members welcomed the introduction of this Panel;

·       Planning Issues Consultation:  Although the Group was satisfied with the way the Council’s communications were delivered, a meeting would take place on 10 April 2019 to discuss localised concerns specific to planning, to include the wider planning consultation and statutory consultation for planning consultations associated with the day to day delivery of planning applications.  Officers would take advice as to whether or not a further report should be considered by the Committee on the outcomes of the meeting.  The Planning Policy consultation system was a different system used to the Council’s general consultation SNAP system;

·       What is the most effective way to ascertain what the public wants and needs?: Evaluations were key and specific groups of people could be targeted to give a clear idea of what was working.  An effective way to reach the public was via the Lets Talk Panel individually or generally about a whole range of issues.  Panel members could be contacted on a regular basis to draw their attention to certain topics.  The most popular platform depended on the target group, as some groups worked better with social media and others worked better face to face.  It was key to have a range of communication channels.  Since the introduction of the worldwide web 30 years ago communication had changed hugely in this time with people now expecting quick communication.  How we communicate with the public depended on the audience;

·       Traffic issues: Mrs Hotchkiss undertook to provide a link to the County Council’s current consultation on the Parking Management Plan in the Chichester City. 

·       Mr Oakley, observing the meeting, asked for clarification that the Task and Finish Group will cover both planning policy consultations and notifications of individual planning applications, and that there will be the opportunity for the wider Council membership to have an opportunity to see the agenda papers to be put before the Task and Finish Group and have an input, including a briefing paper detailing the statutory consultation requirements for individual planning applications?:  Officers were mindful there was a statutory framework for the day to day planning consultations and agreed to frame the next agenda to take into account of both planning policy and the adequacy of the statutory consultations. 


There was support for a proposal by Mr Shaxson that the outcomes of the Task and Finish Group on 10 April 2019 to discuss communication and consultation  ...  view the full minutes text for item 276.


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.



Chairman's Closing Remarks


The Chairman drew the Committee’s attention to the fact that this was the last meeting before the District Council elections.  She thanked the members of the Committee for their support.


In reply the members of the Committee thanked the Chairman for her chairmanship.