Canon Andrew Piper, Precentor of Hereford Cathedral, led the Council in prayer.

To receive apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors SPA Daniels, DW Greenow, MAF Hubbard, JK Swinburne, AP Taylor, DC Taylor, NL Vaughan and WJ Walling.

To receive any declarations of interest by Members in respect of items on the Agenda.

There were none.

To approve and sign the Minutes of the meeting held on 13 November 2009.

RESOLVED:            That the minutes of the meeting held on 13 November 2009 be approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

                                    For completeness, the formal records of the named votes taken at the 13 November 2009 meeting to be submitted for approval at the Council meeting on 5 March 2010.

To receive the Chairman's announcements.

The Chairman reported on the following:

·         Expressed his thanks to all those who had contributed to keeping Herefordshire going during the recent severe weather conditions, in particular Amey, the Emergency Services, Paramedics, postal workers and the many volunteers who helped out in those areas affected by the snow and ice.  Many Council staff across directorates worked hard to keep the County moving and up-to-date.  Further challenges were anticipated due to the possibility of more snow during February.

·         The Customer Service Team was congratulated on successfully achieving the Customer Service Excellence Award. The Assessor was particularly impressed with the new Customer Insight Unit and the Business Improvement Technique NVQ projects that had been taking place throughout the year.

·         The tragic death of Lance Corporal Daniel Cooper of the 3^rd Battalion The Rifles was reported to Council.  Lance Corporal Cooper attended Whitecross High School prior to joining the army and was deployed to Afghanistan in October last year.  He died at the age of 21 as he tried to clear a path south of the Sangin district in northern Helmand Province.  He was highly thought of by his comrades and commanders.  On behalf of the Council, the Chairman expressed his sympathy to his family.

·         All Members were invited to the Chairman’s Civic Service which would be held on Sunday 14 March at 3.30pm at Hereford Cathedral, followed by afternoon tea at the Town Hall.

To receive questions from members of the public.

Copies of all public questions received by the deadline, with the written answers, were distributed prior to the commencement of the meeting.  Supplementary questions were asked by Mr N Jones and Mr P McKay.  A copy of the public questions and written answers together with the supplementary questions and answers are attached to the minutes as Appendix 1.

To receive any written questions from Councillors.

Question from Councillor WJS Bowen to the Cabinet Member Resources

1.1       What figure does the Cabinet Member for Resources consider to be substantially below 3% and what is the definition of substantially below 3%?  Have adequate and effective plans been put in place for alternative budgets for figures that might be more substantially less than 3% than the currently proposed 2.9%?  What are the odds of being capped by the Government if we actually use 2.9% as our Council Tax increase? 

Answer from Councillor H Bramer Cabinet Member Resources

1.1             The government has not defined what it believes is “substantially below 3%” and is unlikely to provide any such definition; it is generally accepted that any increase above 3% will bring with it a risk of capping.  The government has previously indicated it will look at the average level of increase across local government and, to some extent, whether any council stands out in comparison with others.  It is for this reason we are seeking an in principle increase in the level of council tax. 

A lower level increase would require us to review budgets, as stated in the report before Council today at agenda item 9.

No supplementary question was asked.

Question from Councillor GFM Dawe to the Cabinet Member Highways and Transportation

2.1       The Council have said they will help pay for an east or west bypass (ODR) around Hereford with contributions from developers from the new housing in the next plan period 2011-2026.  What percentage of the cost of the road will come from the housing and what percentage from other sources?  How much will each new house have to contribute?

Answer from Councillor DB Wilcox Cabinet Member Highways and Transportation

2.1       This Administration remains committed to the delivery of an outer distributer road; the study undertaken jointly for the Council and the Highways Agency made clear there could be no growth within the city without such additional transport infrastructure. Whilst the precise route, and therefore funding requirement, has yet to be determined it is clear that any developers will need to contribute to the costs of the infrastructure required.

Given the significant funding that will be required to build the road, all possible funding streams are being explored.  This is likely to include seeking contributions from Central Government, the Council and developers.

Supplementary question:

If developers are required to contribute to the ODR how can the houses be classed as affordable housing?

Answer from Councillor DB Wilcox Cabinet Member Highways and Transportation

The amount is not yet defined.  Funding for the ODR would be provided from a range of sources.  Affordable housing is a separate issue which is determined in line with appropriate policies.

Question from Councillor GFM Dawe to the Cabinet Member Corporate and Customer Services and Human Resources

2.2       How much has the Council paid on the wrap-around AdMag and Herefordshire Journal advertisements?

Answer from Councillor JP French Cabinet Member Corporate and Customer Services and Human Resources

2.2       The Council is required to undertake  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69.

No Notices of Motion have been received for consideration by Council.

There were none.

To propose the three year draft financial strategy for 2010/13 that includes the 2010/11 budget.

The Leader introduced the item and drew Members’ attention to the amended recommendation to the Draft Financial Strategy 2010/2013 which had been circulated in advance of the meeting.

The Cabinet Member Resources advised Council that:

·         The Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) was based on an ‘in principle’ council tax increase of 2.9%, which equated to a rise of £0.66p per week for Band D properties and which would be the lowest level of council tax set by the Council. An on going review of the MTFS would take place in advance of the 5 March 2010 Council meeting.

·         All public services were experiencing increasingly challenging times balancing lower funding levels with the need to maintain front line service delivery.

·         Whilst the Local Government Settlement provided an increase of £2.2million for 2010/11 additional budgetary pressures of £5.5million had been identified.

·         Careful review of the budget identified additional costs for Integrated Commissioning, Children’s’ Services, Adult Social Care (in anticipation of the costs relating to the implementation of the Personal Care at Home Bill), and winter maintenance, as well as the need to reimburse reserves.

·         Planning the strategic and operational intentions of the Council over three years during a period of such uncertainty was challenging and Members were advised that flexibility was needed in the process to allow for informed assumptions to be reflected and amended in the MTFS.

The recommendations were moved and seconded.

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee outlined the following key points raised by his Committee in considering the report:

·         the expectation that funding in subsequent years would be substantially cut year on year at a rate of -5% or more.

·         noted government’s expectation that council tax increase should be ‘substantially’ below 3% and queried the definition of ‘substantially’ in light of the proposed (in principle) council tax level of 2.9%.

·         that vital information was lacking to enable support for or against the Executive’s recommendations (e.g report on capital projects, information relating to the superannuation fund).

Members acknowledged the challenges in relation to the development of the MTFS during such uncertain times; however a number of Members expressed concern regarding the lack of detail with which to make an informed decision on the recommendations.  The following specific points were raised:

·         Clarifications were sought on; (i) the additional cost incurred in relation to shared services and improved procurement processes; (ii) the rationale of recruiting an additional 100 staff in the previous 12 months; (iii) uplift in relation to contracts; (iv) the Connects project anticipated £6million savings; (v) when compatible IT systems would be in place.

·         Comments were made regarding budget allocations; specifically in respect of dementia sufferers and archaeology.

·         It was important to ensure the organisation and the services it delivered were effective as well as efficient.

·         Clarification was sought as to why there remained a debt of £27.7million which originated from the previous Hereford and Worcester County Council.

·         The deficit buildings should not be considered for sale until the economic climate was more favourable.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 71.

To invite Council to approve the Council and NHS Herefordshire Joint Corporate Plan vision, objectives and long-term outcomes.

The Leader presented the report and highlighted the following:

·         The amended version of the corporate plan which had been circulated in advance of the meeting, the amendments being highlighted in red.

·         The joint corporate plan outlined the overall objectives of the deep partnership between the Council and NHS Herefordshire which were increasingly important within the context of tighter budgets.  It was considered a positive and effective aid to move forward constructively.

·         The plan additionally outlined the close linkages with other partners in the public, private and third sectors.

·         That increasingly in the future, Herefordshire would be considered within the Total Place context (quantifying all public monies in the area and identifying how it can be put to best use for the public).

·         Appendix 2, which identified actions and performance targets, complemented the Corporate Plan.  It would be used by Members and Officers to monitor progress and spend.  Such an approach would assist the organisations in developing further a businesslike approach by targeting knowledge and identifying areas where funding would have the greatest impact.

The recommendations were moved and seconded.

Councillor H Davies left the meeting.

The Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee outlined the following key points raised by his Committee in considering the report:

·         Welcomed the new format of the Joint Corporate Plan and its close links with Performance Plus.

·         That consideration be given to the following specific points:

(i)                 That the STEAM report be used as a basis for measuring the delivery of long tem objective 1.3 ‘visitors to the county’;

(ii)               The targets for the processing of planning applications against long term objective 1.4 should measure the quality of decisions.

(iii)               The targets for recycling waste should be made more ambitious

(iv)             That long term objective 6.2 relating to CO2 and climate change targets should be more robust.

(v)                Affordable housing objectives had a long way to go

(vi)             Some of the information contained in the corporate plan did not align with the Draft Financial Strategy e.g. capital programmes.

In discussion the following points were raised by Members:

·         An agreed approach was required regarding use of appropriate terminology.

·         The work undertaken to achieve the plan and its SMART targets was recognised and the Policy and Performance team commended.

·         In recognising that the Appendix 2 was work in progress, the finance would need to be monitored

·         Concerns were raised regarding the differing cultures and ethos of Herefordshire Council and the NHSH.  It was commented that much work was required to embed a single organisational approach and vision.

·         The Joint Corporate Plan was a positive and logical approach which emphasised the benefits of a deep partnership, however it was stated that there was a long way to go in ensuring appropriate integration e.g. IT systems, and that the opportunity for further joint working needed to be considered e.g. approach to obesity.

·         Concern was expressed that the joint corporate plan was a wish list of desirable outcomes which were unachievable within budget.  It was commented that the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 72.