Agenda for City Council on Monday, 14th November, 2016, 2.00 pm

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Council Chamber - at the Council House. View directions

Contact: Rav Kalsi, Governance Officer  Email: rav.kalsi@nottinghamcity.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

46.

Apologies for absence

Minutes:

Councillor Eunice Campbell – personal reasons

Councillor Alan Clark – non-Council business

Councillor Georgina Culley – personal reasons

Councillor Mohammed Ibrahim – personal reasons

Councillor Alex Norris – personal reasons

Councillor Michael Wildgust – personal reasons

 

47.

Declarations of interests

Minutes:

None.

48.

Questions from citizens

Minutes:

Mr J.M. asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Community Services:

 

In light of continuing budget pressures on the City Council, does the Portfolio Holder for Community Services agree that the University of Nottingham should make a substantial financial contribution to the cost of Community Protection in dealing with noise and antisocial behaviour caused by a significant minority of students whose behaviour causes deep distress to many residents of New Lenton, The Triangle and The Park Estate?

 

Councillor Heaton responded as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor and could I give thanks for this question. 

Nottingham is one of the UK’s most popular destinations for university students with two internationally renowned universities attracting over 60,000 students every year. Both of our universities are key contributors to our local economy supporting over 24,000 local jobs whilst also having an estimated annual total economic impact of over £1 billion across the city of Nottingham and the wider conurbation. Their students also have a strong positive social impact on our local communities through a number of successful volunteering initiatives. 

 

Despite the many economic and social benefits that the universities in Nottingham bring, their close proximity to the residential areas of New Lenton, the Lenton Triangle and the Park Estate, mean that a significant proportion of student housing is situated alongside longer-term residential housing. It is acknowledged that in these areas noise nuisance and poor waste disposal practices can be a cause of tension between a small minority of students, landlords and longer-term residents and that this can have a negative impact on quality of life for everyone.

 

Nottingham City Council and the University of Nottingham over the last few years have formed a strong working relationship to try and alleviate some of these key issues in the areas concerned.  At the start of this academic year, we undertook a series of joint enhanced engagement and education activities to remind new and existing students on the importance of keeping good relations with their neighbours. This involved increased foot patrolling in the areas by council and university staff that focussed upon pre-enforcement engagement and communicating behavioural expectations with students.

We also held a number of information stalls and door knocking activities at key locations to inform students on the importance of noise management and respecting their neighbours. 

 

Despite this level of enhanced preventative activity there are some early indications to suggest that noise nuisance and trade waste issues have become more pronounced this academic year. Our Community Protection Service which looks to provide both a preventative and enforcement service for student-related issues has already reported an increase in the levels of enforcement action taken against students and student housing landlords. 

In the academic year to date, there have already been three times as many Section 46 Notices issued by our Community Protection Officers for trade waste in the Lenton Triangle area compared to the entire previous academic year. That is968 Section 46 Notices for this academic year compared to 357 for  ...  view the full minutes text for item 48.

49.

Petitions from Councillors on behalf of citizens

Minutes:

Councillor Gul Khan submitted a petition on behalf of 37 signatories requesting that local CPO Michael Shawkey be assigned back to the Dales Ward following his temporary reassignment to the City Centre.

 

50.

To confirm the minutes of the last meeting of Council held on 12 September 2016 pdf icon PDF 390 KB

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 12 September 2016 were agreed and signed as a true record by the Lord Mayor.

 

51.

To receive official communications and announcements from the Leader of the Council and/or the Chief Executive

Minutes:

 

The Chief Executive reported the following:

 

Nottingham City Council’s ambitious Good to Great transformation programme has won the Association of Project Management’s Mike Nichols Award. This celebrates inspirational projects and programmes. Nottingham’s successful bid highlighted our ethos of putting Citizens at the Heart of everything we do, creating jobs and investment in Nottingham, working in partnership and improving services, whilst investing in our workforce in the context of over £150m in funding reductions. The judges commented afterwards that Nottingham’s approach was exceptional and an example to other local authorities.

 

The Council’s Nottingham Works Programme has been awarded winner of the ESF Equality Leader Award for a Specialist Project. The project has helped hundreds of young people in Nottingham, including some of the most vulnerable groups, with support to find training and employment. The award recognises the Council’s commitment to reducing the number of workless young people in Nottingham.

 

David Taylor, the former Lord Mayors’ Secretary, passed away on 17 October. David was Secretary at Nottingham City Council for 25 years, retiring in 1991. Over the years David organised visits for virtually every member of the Royal family, as well as overseeing the Freeman of the City Ceremony for Torvill and Dean in April 1983.

 

Councillor John Hartshorne spoke in tribute to David Taylor and a minute’s silence was held.

 

52.

Questions from Councillors - to the City Council's lead Councillor on the Nottinghamshire and City of Nottingham Fire and Rescue Authority

Minutes:

None.

53.

Questions from Councillors - to a member of Executive Board, the Chair of a Committee and the Chair of any other City Council body pdf icon PDF 106 KB

Minutes:

Councillor Georgina Culley submitted her apologies for the meeting and was unable to ask her question of the Portfolio Holder for Business, Growth and Transport. A written response would be provided in response to this question.

 

Councillor Jim Armstrong asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Business, Growth and Transport:

 

The Buses Bill 2016-17, sponsored by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon was recently debated in the House of Lords on the 24th October, with an extensive discussion on Clause 21 of the Bill. Lord Ahmad said, and I quote:

‘Let me at the outset answer a question that was asked of me. I have said this before and I will say it again: there are existing municipal bus companies, such as Reading Buses and Nottingham City Transport that deliver a high standard of service. They can expect to continue to do so. Their ability to do that will not be affected by this clause; nor will it prevent local authorities working in partnership with a bus company. That is an underlying thread of the Bill.’

Does the Portfolio Holder accept that Clause 21 of the Buses Bill 2016-17 will have no impact on Nottingham City Council and Nottingham City Transport’s current arrangements?

Councillor Nick McDonald replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor. Yes, I think the word used by Lord Ahmad are fairly clear, however what I would say is that I’m not sure they’re entirely correct. Actually, when one reads the legislation, I think there are activities and commercial decisions which a publically owned bus company might make that could be affected by that Clause. We don’t know, it’s not clear, the government haven’t explained it and a lot of the guidance notes I was reading this morning, do not make it clear either.

 

Secondly, and I’ll leave it to colleagues to tell the Conservative Group why publically owned bus companies have been such a valuable asset for authorities who have had them for a number of years. I think our experience in Nottingham is having a publically owned bus company has been extremely important to the way that we run the city, to the way that we think about transport networks and the way we think about connecting our communities. That is why we don’t think other councils should be prevented from owning their own bus networks. There are a number of other interesting things in the Buses Bill, it’s a complicated piece of legislation and there are all sorts of things that could come from it for the future of councils and their transporting policies.

 

However, at a time when local authorities are being required to be more commercial by the cuts they are receiving year on year, actually, what they’re saying is, ‘not only are we going to require you to be more commercial, we’re going to make it more difficult for you to be more commercial,’ makes no sense whatsoever. Our point is not just in relation to Nottingham or Reading or other  ...  view the full minutes text for item 53.

54.

Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2015-16 pdf icon PDF 204 KB

Report of the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Councillor Brian Parbutt, the Chair of Overview and Scrutiny Committee, submitted a report on the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2015-16, as set out on pages 23 to 38 of the agenda.

 

RESOLVED to accept the Overview and Scrutiny Annual Report 2015-16.

55.

Amendments to the Constitution pdf icon PDF 315 KB

Report of the Leader

Minutes:

The Leader presented a report on amendments to the Constitution, as set out on pages 39 to 46 of the agenda.

 

RESOLVED to:

 

(1)  Note the addition of Community Centres to the responsibilities of the Portfolio Holder for Strategic Regeneration as agreed by the Leader of the Council and outlined in paragraph 5.2 of the report;

 

(2)  Note the new/revised executive delegations as agreed by the Leader of the Council outlined in paragraph 5.3 and appendix one of the report;

 

(3)  Agree the new/revised non-executive delegations outlined in paragraph 5.4 and appendix one of the report;

 

(4)  Approve the amendments of the Constitution required by the above changes.

56.

Decisions taken under urgency procedures pdf icon PDF 193 KB

Report of the Leader

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Leader submitted a report on decisions taken under urgency procedures, as set out on pages 47 to 52 of the agenda.

 

RESOLVED to note the urgent decisions taken, as follows:

 

(1)  Urgent decisions (exempt from call-in);

 

Decision ref number

Date of decision

Subject

Value of

Reasons for urgency

2597

15/09/16

Financial dispensation request for urgent building works

£98,000

Imminent replacement of equipment required to ensure continued health and safety compliance.

2599

16/09/16

Supply of books and DVDs to Nottingham Library Service, including library in HMP Nottingham, over 4 years

£828,000

In order to meet the deadline for the submission urgent approval is required.

2605

28/09/16

Purchase of Sneinton Dale police station and leaseback of part to create new library and Police contact point.

Exempt

Urgent purchase in order to let the refurbishment contract.

2606

28/09/16

Procurement for a Cafe/Bar & Event Catering Management Concessionaire at The Nottingham Theatre Royal and Concert Hall

Exempt

Urgent decision required in order to maximise the income to the Council.

2610

29/09/16

Purchase of Civica Software with House of Multiple Occupancy and Mobile Modules

£350,507

Urgent decision in order to benefit from discounted Civica quote.

2614

03/10/16

Commercial Opportunity for Energy Services

Exempt

In order to meet an urgent submission date.

2617

03/10/16

Unity Learning Centre - additional funding

£219,000

A delay would jeopardise an academisation decision.

2644

17/10/16

Property Investment Acquisition – Project Highland

Exempt

To allow for a timely purchase.

 

 

 

 

 

(2)  Key decisions (taken under special urgency procedures).

 

Date of decision

Subject

Value

Decision Taker

Reasons for special urgency

28/09/16

Procurement for a Cafe/Bar & Event Catering Management Concessionaire at The Nottingham Theatre Royal and Concert Hall

Exempt

Leader of the Council

The decision was urgent in order to meet the deadline, maximise the quality of tender and increase the amount of income to the City Council.

29/09/16

Letting of Vacant Office Space at No. 1 Nottingham Science Park, Jesse Boot Way, Nottingham, NG7 2RU

Exempt

Leader of the Council

The decision was urgent because terms had been agreed between the parties which included the date on which the lease was to commence.

14/10/16

Invest in D2N2 Nottingham City as Accountable Body

£ 2,369,624

Leader of the Council

It has only recently been announced by government that ERDF bids approved before the Autumn Statement will be honoured, so there was a requirement to seek approval to the change in role to ensure approval of the bid.

 

57.

Motion

Motion in the name of Councillor Cat Arnold:

 

“Nottingham City Council recognises and values local pharmacies as a vital primary care health service and as an integral part of the fabric of local communities throughout our city.

This City Council notes that:

• community pharmacies in Nottingham offer a range of services such as dispensing prescriptions, disposal of unwanted medicines and supporting self-care

• pharmacies play an important role in promoting wellbeing such as healthy eating, smoking cessation, exercise, flu vaccination, sexual health and more

advice and support services are also available to care homes

several local pharmacies have achieved Healthy Living Pharmacies (HLP) status recognising and evidencing their role in improving the health of their local population.

This City Council is greatly concerned about Government imposed threats to pharmacies as a result of cuts in the budget of £170m nationally.  This is a 6% cut in cash terms but could effectively mean a cut of 12% during the financial year which could potentially close up to a quarter of pharmacies with an increased focus on warehousing dispensary and online services.  Service cuts in pharmacies put more residents at risk as well as putting pressure on GPs and on hospital services and therefore increasing NHS costs. A fully funded community pharmacy service is cost effective and is in the interest of patients and carers.

Nottingham City Council agrees to write to the Secretary of State for Health and NHS England detailing its concerns and demanding an immediate reversal of these proposals.”

 

Minutes:

Moved by Councillor Cat Arnold, seconded by Councillor Glyn Jenkins:

 

“Nottingham City Council recognises and values local pharmacies as a vital primary care health service and as an integral part of the fabric of local communities throughout our city.

 

This City Council notes that:

 

  community pharmacies in Nottingham offer a range of services such as dispensing prescriptions, disposal of unwanted medicines and supporting self-care

  pharmacies play an important role in promoting wellbeing such as healthy eating, smoking cessation, exercise, flu vaccination, sexual health and more

  advice and support services are also available to care homes

  several local pharmacies have achieved Healthy Living Pharmacies (HLP) status recognising and evidencing their role in improving the health of their local population

 

This City Council is greatly concerned about Government imposed threats to pharmacies as a result of cuts in the budget of £170m nationally. This is a 6% cut in cash terms but could effectively mean a cut of 12% during the financial year which could potentially close up to a quarter of pharmacies with an increased focus on warehousing dispensary and online services. Service cuts in pharmacies put more residents at risk as well as putting pressure on GPs and on hospital services and therefore increasing NHS costs. A fully funded community pharmacy service is cost effective and is in the interest of patients and carers.

 

Nottingham City Council agrees to write to the Secretary of State for Health and NHS England detailing its concerns and demanding an immediate reversal of these proposals.

 

RESOLVED to carry the motion.

58.

Motion

Motion in the name of Councillor Steve Battlemuch:

 

“This council notes:

 

1.  That the Bus Services Bill currently passing through Parliament includes Clause 21 that will effectively “prohibit a local authority from forming a company for the purposes of providing a local bus service”;

2.  That the Localism Act (2011) provides general powers of competence to local authorities;

3. That municipal bus companies, such as Nottingham City Transport, provide some of the best bus services in the country and have a successful track record of increasing bus passenger numbers and providing high quality bus services;

4. That polling by We Own It found that a majority of the public (57%) oppose clause 21, whilst just 22% support it. The opposition to Clause 21 is consistent across voters from all political parties;

5.  The House of Lords voted by a majority to remove Clause 21 from the Bus Services Bill.

 

Therefore, this council believes:

 

1.  Clause 21 contradicts the spirit of the Localism Act 2011;

2.  If there is a need and a demand from their public, then Councils should be able to provide their own bus services, such as Nottingham City Transport;

3.  Consequently Clause 21 should be omitted from the Bus Services Bill.

 

This council resolves:

 

1.  To write to Lord Ahmad and to call on the Department for Transport to omit Clause 21 from the final legislation;

2.  To write to Lillian Greenwood, Graham Allen, Chris Leslie and other MPs whose constituencies are served by Nottingham City Transport to ask them to oppose clause 21 when the Bus Services Bill reaches the House of Commons and ask them to write to Lord Ahmad and the Department of Transport to raise concerns about Clause 21;

3.  To work with any organisations such as We Own It to publicise our opposition to clause 21 in local media.”

Minutes:

Moved by Councillor Steve Battlemuch, seconded by Councillor Brian Parbutt:

 

“This council notes:

 

1.  That the Bus Services Bill currently passing through Parliament includes Clause 21 that will effectively “prohibit a local authority from forming a company for the purposes of providing a local bus service”;

2.  That the Localism Act (2011) provides general powers of competence to local authorities;

3. That municipal bus companies, such as Nottingham City Transport, provide some of the best bus services in the country and have a successful track record of increasing bus passenger numbers and providing high quality bus services;

4. That polling by We Own It found that a majority of the public (57%) oppose clause 21, whilst just 22% support it. The opposition to Clause 21 is consistent across voters from all political parties;

5.  The House of Lords voted by a majority to remove Clause 21 from the Bus Services Bill.

 

Therefore, this council believes:

 

1.  Clause 21 contradicts the spirit of the Localism Act 2011;

2.  If there is a need and a demand from their public, then Councils should be able to provide their own bus services, such as Nottingham City Transport;

3.  Consequently Clause 21 should be omitted from the Bus Services Bill.

 

This council resolves:

 

1.  To write to Lord Ahmad and to call on the Department for Transport to omit Clause 21 from the final legislation;

2.  To write to Lillian Greenwood, Graham Allen, Chris Leslie and other MPs whose constituencies are served by Nottingham City Transport to ask them to oppose clause 21 when the Bus Services Bill reaches the House of Commons and ask them to write to Lord Ahmad and the Department of Transport to raise concerns about Clause 21;

3.  To work with any organisations such as We Own It to publicise our opposition to clause 21 in local media.”

 

RESOLVED to carry the motion.

 

59.

Urgent Item - Boundary Commission Proposals pdf icon PDF 255 KB

Report of the Leader

 

The Lord Mayor has agreed that this item, although not on the agenda, will be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Lord Mayor agreed that this item, although not on the agenda, be considered as a matter of urgency in accordance with Section 100B(4)(b) of the Local Government Act 1972, so that Council might consider a counter proposal for Parliamentary Constituencies in the City of Nottingham, for submission to the Boundary Commission for England, ahead of the 5 December 2016 deadline.

 

The Leader submitted a report, copies of which had been circulated.

 

RESOLVED to:

 

(1)  Endorse the counter proposal for submission to the Boundary Commission for England;

 

(2)  Note and support the “Extending Nottingham East” option as Nottingham City Council’s counter proposal, as detailed in paragraph 6.2 and appendix 2 of the report.