The Chairman explained that the purpose of the meeting was to consider whether Cabinet followed due process in making its decision on the selection of route SC2 as the preferred route for the Southern Link Road (SLR).  The Chairman emphasised that the committee needed to focus on the reasons for the call-in and he explained how the meeting would be conducted.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies for absence had been received from Councillors DW Greenow and DB Wilcox.  Apologies had also been received from Councillors RI Matthews and J Millar (Cabinet Member Young People and Children's Wellbeing).

To receive details of members nominated to attend the meeting in place of a member of the committee.

Councillor Brigadier P Jones CBE substituted for Councillor DB Wilcox.

To receive any declarations of interest by members.

No declarations of interest were made at the meeting.

To note questions received from the public and the items to which they relate.

(Questions are welcomed for consideration at a scrutiny committee meeting so long as the question is directly related to an item listed on the agenda below.  If you have a question you would like to ask then please submit it no later than two working days before the meeting to the officer named on the cover of this agenda.

Note: To ensure that the committee has sufficient time to consider the call-in, it is not intended that verbal questions will be received from the public at the meeting, so please submit questions in writing no later than 5.15pm on Thursday 27 November 2014).

The Chairman thanked members of the public for their interest and for the fifty questions that had been received.  Attention was drawn to Supplement 2 to the agenda which contained the questions, along with officer responses to those questions considered relevant to the call-in; written responses would be provided to the remainder in due course, in the order submitted.

The Democratic Services Officer reported that a draft version of the questions had identified Mr. Bryant as a member of Callow and Haywood Group Parish Council but both Mr. Bryant and the Chairman of the group parish council wished to make it clear that the question had not been submitted on behalf of the group parish council.

To consider the call-in of the Cabinet decision on the South Wye Transport Package.

The Cabinet report and appendices are available at:

http://councillors.herefordshire.gov.uk/ieIssueDetails.aspx?IId=50007922&PlanId=0&Opt=3#AI34921

Adjournment to review the agenda supplements

A committee member noted that Supplement 2, containing the ‘Questions from the public’ and the ‘Response to South Wye Transport Package Call-in’ documents had been published two hours before the meeting and requested that the meeting be adjourned to provide members of the committee with additional time to review the documents; it was also noted that Supplement 1, containing a report by Alan James and an extract from the draft and unapproved minutes of Cabinet of 13 November 2014, had been published the day before the meeting.

The Assistant Director, Governance suggested that an adjournment of an hour should be sufficient for members to familiarise themselves with the documents; it was noted that the response document addressed the matters set out in the call-in notice and provided further detail but it did not raise new issues.  In response to a question, the mover of the motion said that he was personally content with an adjournment of an hour.  The motion was seconded and agreed by the committee.

Comments by the members that submitted the call-in notice

Upon the recommencement of the meeting, the Chairman invited the members that submitted the call-in notice to address the committee.

A committee member commented on: the potential complexities of the planning process; the need to be assured that the processes were done thoroughly; the call-in provided an opportunity to review the issues ahead of any challenge; there was a perception of haste and perhaps even pre-determination; he felt that the response document raised more questions than it answered; he considered it difficult to understand some decisions without sight of the original brief to the consultants; four routes options had been ruled out as they impacted on ancient woodland but the route selected would impact on ancient woodland at Grafton Wood; and limited direct consultation with English Heritage could leave the authority vulnerable to challenge.

Another committee member commented on: it was welcomed that the call-in notice had been accepted and the level of public interest was evidence of wider public concerns; in addition to the stated reasons for the call-in, he considered that the decision was based on incomplete and flawed evidence and an unsound option appraisal process, and the consultation was based on misleading and partial information and failed to engage with key stakeholders; and he also considered that the decision could result in a challenge, with the potential for loss of scheme funding.

Executive response

The Cabinet Member Infrastructure read out a statement, the principal points included:

•        Cabinet had selected route SC2 as the preferred route for the Southern Link Road (SLR) at its meeting on 13 November 2014;

•        the call-in reasons were noted and Cabinet Members, whilst of the view that the decision was sound, wanted to hear what the committee had to say;

•        a comprehensive response had been provided to the reasons in the call-in notice;

•        Cabinet had considered the work undertaken by Parsons Brinckerhoff (PB) and the officer report;  ...  view the full minutes text for item 40.