Agendas, reports and minutes

Minutes of Meeting of the Highland Council held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Thursday, 30 October 2014 at 10.35 am.

1.  Calling of the Roll and Apologies for Absence
A’ Gairm a’ Chlàir agus Leisgeulan

Present:

Dr D Alston, Mr R Balfour, Mrs J Barclay, Mr A Baxter, Mr I Brown, Mrs C Caddick, Mrs I Campbell, Miss J Campbell, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr A Christie, Mr B Clark, Dr I Cockburn, Mrs G Coghill, Mr J Crawford, Mrs M Davidson, Mr N Donald, Ms J Douglas, Mr A Duffy, Mr D Fallows, Mr G Farlow, Mr B Fernie, Mr M Finlayson, Mr J Ford, Mr C Fraser, Mr L Fraser, Mr H Fraser, Mr B Gormley, Mr K Gowans, Mr A Graham, Mr J Gray, Mr M Green, Mr R Greene, Mr A Henderson, Mr D Hendry, Mr R Laird, Mr B Lobban, Mr C Macaulay, Mrs L MacDonald, Mr J McGillivray, Mrs D Mackay, Mr D Mackay, Mr G MacKenzie, Mr A Mackinnon, Ms A MacLean, Mr T MacLennan, Mr K MacLeod, Mrs B McAllister, Mrs I McCallum, Mr D Millar, Ms L Munro, Mr B Murphy, Mr F Parr, Mrs M Paterson, Mr G Phillips, Mr T Prag, Mr M Reiss, Mr I Renwick, Mr G Rimell, Mrs F Robertson, Mr J Rosie, Ms G Ross, Mr G Ross, Mr R Saxon, Dr A Sinclair, Mrs G Sinclair, Mrs J Slater, Ms M Smith, Ms K Stephen, Mr J Stone, Mr B Thompson, Mrs C Wilson, Mr H Wood

In Attendance:

Chief Executive
Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Development
Director of Development & Infrastructure
Director of Care and Learning
Director of Finance
Director of Community Services
Inverness City Manager

Mr J Gray in the Chair

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr D Bremner, Mr J Gordon, Mr D Kerr, Mr N MacDonald, Mr W MacKay, Mr H Morrison, Mr M Rattray and Mr A Rhind.

Preliminaries

Prior to the commencement of the formal business, the Council AGREED to convey congratulations to Mr Sandy Adam and Mr Bob Brown of Saltburn, Easter Ross, who had received the Environmental Award from the RBS “Finding Scotland’s Real Heroes 2014 Awards” for creating the Saltburn Woodland Walk in Invergordon.

2.  Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

The Council NOTED the following declarations of interest:-

Item 3 – Mr K Gowans (financial), Dr D Alston, Mr G Farlow, Mr T Prag, Ms G Ross, Ms K Stephen (all non-financial)
Item 10i – Dr D Alston (non-financial), Mr I Brown (financial)
Item 11 – Mr G Farlow, Mr R Greene, Mr M Reiss, Mr R Saxon (all non-financial)
Item 13 – Mr D Hendry (non-financial)
Item 15 – Mr G Farlow, Mr D Hendry, Mr T Prag, Ms G Ross, Mr R Saxon (all non-financial)
Item 17 – Mr A Christie, Mrs D MacKay (both non-financial)
Item 19 – Mr I Brown, Mrs H Carmichael, Ms J Douglas, A Duffy, Mr D Fallows, Mr B Fernie, Mr K Gowans, Mr B Lobban, Mrs L MacDonald, Mr T MacLennan, Mr D Millar, Mrs J Slater, Mr T Prag, Mr J Stone, H Wood (all non-financial) Mr B Lobban and Mr G Rimell (financial)

3.  Presentation – University of the Highlands & Islands
Taisbeanadh – Oilthigh na Gàidhealtachd is nan Eilean

Declarations of Interest

Mr K Gowans declared a financial interest in this item as an employee of UHI but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that his interest did not preclude his involvement in the discussion.

The undernoted Members all declared non-financial interests in this item but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion –

Dr D Alston - Independent Member of the Court of UHI
Mr G Farlow – Chair of North West Highland Geo Park Ltd
Mr T Prag – having received an honorary fellowship of Shetland College
Ms G Ross - Member of the North Highland College Board
Ms K Stephen – student of UHI

A presentation was undertaken at the meeting by Professor Clive Mulholland, Principal of the University of the Highlands & Islands, who outlined the UHI strategic vision for further and higher education. In this regard, UHI’s vision was to be recognised as a leading integrated university which encompassed both further and higher education and all levels of the Scottish Qualifications Framework from apprenticeships through to PHD research. Its reputation would be built on its innovative approach to learning and a distinctive research and curriculum enriched by the people, natural environment, economy and culture of the region and communities. Being locally based, it would have a regional structure with a national and international reach.

Encompassing 13 academic partners located in different parts of the region, UHI’s operations were complex. This would benefit from a streamlined vision which was summarised under three strategic themes. In terms of students, it was the aim to attract and reach a diverse local, national and international student base and achieve high levels of student satisfaction and success. UHI would adopt a stronger business-facing approach attracting investors to engage in UHI’s transformational impact on the development and prospects of the region.  Research excellence would be inspired by the natural environment, culture, industries and social infrastructure of the region and it was the aim for its outputs to have national and international recognition. Applied research, consultancy and knowledge would make a real difference to the environment, to the business community, to the economy and to peoples’ lives.

During discussion, Members welcomed the presentation, expressed their appreciation for the work that UHI did across the region together with other community planning partners and raised the following issues:-

• ·           it was recognised that UHI would have a huge impact on current and future generations in the Highlands and Islands and it was welcomed that it would seek to demolish barriers between higher and further education and skills development. In the current challenging economic environment, it was queried how UHI, as a new institution, would increase student numbers;
• ·           the potential to attract investment which currently benefited other University cities would be a welcome transformation for the Highland economy;
• ·           more effective local democracies would lead to communities taking more control of local issues. Training and knowledge in local areas, such as social care and early years development, would be central to the economic future of the Highlands and should be prioritised by UHI.  Audit Scotland reports cited an alarming rate of NHS locum staff which was partly connected to difficulties in recruiting trained personnel in Highland.  UHI was encouraged to consider sustaining Highland communities by supporting and fostering these skills from within the Highlands. This approach would also minimise costs and subsequent debts associated with tertiary education;
• ·           North Highland College was attracting students from outside the region and internationally and was adapting to the needs of the local workforce.  This was a unique model and it was queried what plans UHI had for development and research capacity for the future and its relations with partner colleges;
• ·           UHI should develop its expertise and engage closely with earth sciences and exploit the area’s natural environment, landscape and geology;
• ·           it was queried what innovations UHI intended to undertake to address the needs of students with additional support needs;
• ·           pressure to achieve economies of scale would lead to facilities being centralised which, on account of geographic scale, would have detrimental impacts on many small remote communities in the Highlands and Islands;
• ·           the flexible model of learning and training adopted by UHI and its predecessors was particularly welcomed by mature students;
• ·           it was hoped that UHI could play its part in revitalising and attracting business to the former Kishorn Yard; and
• ·           further clarification was sought on what technology was currently used and how this might evolve to support UHI’s operations for the future.

Thereafter, the Convener, on behalf of the Council, thanked Professor Mulholland for his attendance at the meeting and his extremely informative presentation.

The Council NOTED the position.

4.  Confirmation of Minutes 
Daingneachadh a’ Gheàrr-chunntais

There had been submitted for confirmation as a correct record the Minute of Meeting of the Council held on 4 September 2014 as contained in the Volume which had been circulated separately which was APPROVED subject to the following -

Item 18: Page 447: Fort William Office Review – Declaration of Interest

The Council NOTED clarification that Mr A Baxter’s declaration of interest had been on the grounds that the landlord’s agent had contributed to his election expenses.

5.  Minutes of Meetings of Committees
Geàrr-chunntasan Choinneamhan Chomataidhean

There had been submitted for confirmation as correct records, for information as regards delegated business and for approval as appropriate, the Minutes of Meetings of Committees contained in Volume circulated separately as undernoted:-

Caithness & Sutherland Area Committee, 23 September
Audit & Scrutiny Committee, 24 September
Nairn & Badenoch & Strathspey Area Committee, 25 September
Community Safety, Public Engagement and Equalities Committee, 1 October

The Minutes, having been moved and seconded, were APPROVED.

6.  Highland and Western Isles Valuation Joint Board 
Co-Bhòrd Luachaidh na Gàidhealtachd is nan Eilean Siar

There had been circulated Minute of the Meeting of the Highlands and Western Isles Valuation Joint Board held on 1 May 2014 which was NOTED.

7.  Customer Services Board
Bòrd Sheirbheisean Luchd-ceannach

There had been circulated Minute of Meeting of the Customer Services Board held on 16 September 2014 which was NOTED.

8.  Membership of Strategic Committees, etc                                          
Ballrachd air Comataidhean Ro-innleachdail, msaa

It was NOTED that Mr M Rattray had left the Liberal Democrat Group within the Council and had confirmed that he would be a Non-Aligned Liberal Democrat.

The Council also AGREED revised Committee membership lists as follows –

Community Services Committee – Mr H Wood to replace Mr M Rattray
Education, Children & Adult Services Committee – Mr J Stone to replace Mr M Rattray
Community Services Committee – Ms C Caddick to replace Mr J Stone
Audit & Scrutiny Committee – Mrs A MacLean to replace Ms C Caddick
Community Safety, Public Engagement and Equalities Committee – Ms J Douglas to replace Mr M Finlayson

It was NOTED that, in terms of Standing Order 17.2, the Convener had agreed that an additional urgent item of business should be considered as part of this item.

In this regard, it was NOTED that Mr D Millar had left the Liberal Democrat Group within the Council and had confirmed that he would be Non-Aligned.

The Council also AGREED further revised Committee membership lists as follows –  

• ommunity Safety, Public Engagement and Equalities Committee – Mrs A MacLean to replace Mr D Millar
• Planning, Development & Infrastructure Committee – Mrs C Caddick to replace Mr D Millar
• Planning, Development & Infrastructure Committee (Substitute) – Mr J Stone to replace Mrs C Caddick
• Education, Children & Adult Services Committee (Substitute) – Mr A Graham to replace Mr D Millar
• Gaelic Implementation Group – Ms K Stephen to replace Mr D Millar
• Gaelic Implementation Group (Substitute) – Mr T Prag to replace Ms K Stephen
• Customer Services Board – Mr G Rimell to replace Mr D Millar    

It was NOTED that the political make-up of the Council was now as follows –

Independent – 34/SNP – 21/Liberal Democrat - 12/Labour - 8/Independent Nationalist - 1/Non-Aligned Liberal Democrat – 1/Non-Aligned – 3

It was also NOTED that the formula in respect of the number of places on Strategic Committees remained as 10/6/4/2.

Chair of the Community Safety, Public Engagement and Equalities Committee

The Council was invited to appoint a Chair for the Community Safety, Public Engagement and Equalities Committee.

In this regard, Dr D Alston, seconded by Mr D Hendry, nominated Ms A MacLean.

Mrs I McCallum, seconded by Mrs C Wilson, nominated Ms J Douglas.

On a vote being taken, Ms A MacLean received 38 votes and Ms J Douglas received 30 votes, with one abstention, the votes having been cast as follows:-

Votes for Ms A MacLean:

Alston, D; Brown, I; Caddick, C; Christie, A; Clark, B; Cockburn, I; Duffy, A; Fallows, D; Farlow, G; Ford, J; Fraser C; Gormley, B; Graham, A; Gray, J; Hendry, D; Laird, R; Lobban, B; Macaulay, C; MacDonald, L; Mackay, D (W5); MacKenzie, G; MacLean, A; MacLeod, K; McAllister, E; Munro, L; Murphy, B; Parr, F; Phillips, G; Prag, T; Renwick, I; Rimell, G; Ross, G (W3); Saxon, R; Slater, J; Smith, M; Stephen, K; Stone, J; Wood, H.

Votes for Ms J Douglas:

Balfour, R; Barclay, J; Baxter, A; Campbell, I; Campbell, J; Carmichael, H; Coghill, G; Crawford, J; Davidson, M; Donald, N; Douglas, J; Fernie, B; Finlayson, M; Fraser, H; Fraser, L; Green, M; Greene, R; Henderson, A; Mackay, D (W2); Mackinnon, A; McCallum, I; McGillivray, J; Millar, D; Paterson, M; Reiss, M; Robertson, F; Ross, G (W14); Sinclair, A; Thompson, B; Wilson, C.

Abstention

Mr T MacLennan

The Council therefore AGREED to appoint Ms A MacLean as Chair of the Community Safety, Public Engagement and Equalities Committee.

9.  Question Time 
Àm Ceiste

The following Questions had been received by the Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Development in terms of Standing Order 42 –

(i) Mr A Baxter

To the Chair of the Planning, Development & Infrastructure Committee

“What discussions, since your appointment, have you or Officers within the Development & Infrastructure Service had with either the Scottish Government or Transport Scotland about the Caol to Fort William Link Road?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Mr Baxter expressed his concern that there had been no contact with Transport Scotland or the Scottish Government over the last six months on this issue, despite reassurances that contact had been regular, and queried whether the Chair of the Planning, Development and Infrastructure Committee would now give this priority.

The Chair of the Planning, Development & Infrastructure Committee confirmed that there were now quarterly meetings scheduled with Transport Scotland specifically to address such road developments and that he would ensure that the Caol to Fort William Link Road would go on the agenda.

(ii) Ms J Douglas

To the Chair of the Resources Committee

“Can I please have a list of all Members with enhanced positions within Highland Council, including details of any increased remuneration for those roles?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Ms Douglas queried, as the Council moved towards deliberations on the budget in December, whether the bill of £153,870 as additional pay to senior Councillors represented good value for money to the Council.

The Chair of the Resources Committee confirmed that, whilst there were efficiencies to be made and all Councils were in the same position in this regard, in her opinion all Councillors holding senior posts in the Administration carried out full-time jobs and she felt that their payments were entirely justified.

(iii) Ms J Douglas

To the Leader of the Council

“Can I please have a list of all the Members who have been nominated by full Council (or its Service Committees) to represent the Council on any external bodies or groups?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Ms Douglas referred to the fact that there were 135 posts of which 96 were held by Administration Members (representing 71%) and currently the Administration comprised 51% of the membership of the Council.  On this basis, she queried whether the Leader of the Council considered that this was appropriate representation on external bodies and groups.

The Leader of the Council confirmed that he did consider this to be an appropriate representation.

Decision

The Council NOTED the position.

10.  Notices of Motion
Brathan Gluasaid

Declarations of Interest

Dr D Alston declared a non-financial interest in this item as a Board Member of NHS Highland but, in terms of the dispensation granted by the Standards Commission, remained to participate in discussion.

Mr I Brown declared a financial interest in this item as an employee of NHS Highland and left the room.

The following Notices of Motion had been received in accordance with Standing Order 10.1 –

(i)“The appropriate level of funding for NHS Highland is determined by a formula developed by the National Resource Allocation Committee (NRAC). NHS Highland funding is currently £11.3m below its NRAC share of Scottish health expenditure, a figure confirmed by the Auditor General.

When the NRAC formula was introduced in 2008, it was intended that underfunded Boards would move towards their ‘fair share’ over a number of years. However, changes to the way the formula is calculated have shown that NHSH was wrongly identified as over-funded and was therefore subject to reductions in its share rather than increases. Although the formula has been corrected, NHS Highland has been uniquely disadvantaged among Scottish Health Boards.

The cumulative impact of this has been a loss of £35m to health services in NHS Highland, with a continuing £11m underfunding in the current year.

Given the impact of this on health services in Highland and its potential impact on integrated health and social care services, the Highland Council calls on the Scottish Government to fund NHS Highland at the level determined by the NRAC formula.”

Signed: Dr D Alston Mr A Christie Ms K Stephen

Speaking in support of the Notice of Motion, Members raised the following issues:-  

• the NHS funding formula had been highlighted in the recently produced Audit Scotland report “NHS in Scotland 2013/14". On the specific issue of NHS Highland, it was clear that the NRAC formula did not take into account the pressures of providing health services in rural areas. Because of historical misinterpretations, the application of the formula had uniquely disadvantaged NHS Highland since 2008 with it currently being £11.3m (2.2%) below its appropriate funding level. It was hoped that the Council could unanimously agree to express this view to Scottish Government;
• Audit Scotland’s report had revealed an alarming level of short-term financial planning and had detailed the barriers to financial management within the context of the Health Service. It would be essential to work together in partnership with NHS Highland to address these issues and to get the best outcomes for the Highlands;
• it appeared that the NHS Highland Health and Social Care Committee was constrained in being able to devote its attention to forward planning because of the more immediate demands of meeting financial and performance targets. Despite NHS Highland’s dedication, there had been an 83% increase in employment of agency staff, delays in diagnoses and discharge and cancelled operations – these measures could have been avoided if NHS Highland been funded appropriately;
• the wording within the Motion should include recognition that progress was being made towards achieving a funding position for NHS Highland at the level determined by the NRAC formula by 2016/17. The wider issue of management of the NHS Highland budget was a more fundamental problem and the Scottish Government had in fact recognised this issue; 
• the issue of the NRAC formula had come to light during the financial year 2009/10 and very little had been heard since that time. It was a concern that NHS Highland Board briefings on financial matters were held in private and that financial affairs could not be scrutinised in a more open or robust way. The Auditor General had stressed the need for more effective financial management and had identified a range of weaknesses. The Council should ask for early sight of the NHS Highland Financial Improvement Plan as it worked towards more effective financial planning and management;
• this issue raised financial governance concerns as the Council was accountable for almost £100m of the NHS Highland budget for adult social care services. It was felt that not enough progress had been made since the integration of services and it was feared that the funding provided by the Council to NHS Highland was being absorbed into their overall budget rather than being directed specifically to adult social care. Local democracy offered a solution to these financial issues and a suggestion was made that the Scottish Government should consider separating the NHS budget to facilitate locally delivered services;
• meeting treatment time targets for routine procedures had a crippling financial effect on NHS Highland as this involved sending patients to other areas for treatment and paying for locum staff and extra clinics. These national standards had not taken into account local demographics and needs and required now to be reviewed;
• the Technical Advisory Group on Resource Allocation (TAGRA) had been established as an independent specialist group to carry on the work of overseeing the maintenance and development of the NRAC formula. TAGRA had stressed the need for an incremental approach to avoid financial turbulence and the Council should support the Scottish Government’s commitment over time to work towards a 1% variance on budgets;
• in terms of NHS spending on procurement, it was queried whether there might be economies of scale to be achieved by pooling financial resources. This might be particularly helpful in relation to adult services; and
• health aspirations and challenges were universal across Scotland.  Recognising that no financial allocation formula would be perfect, financial management, however, had significant implications for services and for patients. It was hoped that increased funding to NHS Highland would be spent in the localities where it was required so as to improve services throughout the Highlands.

Decision

The Council AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion to call on the Scottish Government to fund NHS Highland at the level determined by the NRAC formula whilst NOTING the planned progress towards achieving this.

It was also AGREED to urge NHS Highland to produce its Financial Implementation Plan as soon as possible.

(ii)“That the Highland Council reviews its policy on the display of election posters and to ask for Officers to bring a report to the next Council meeting to include information on the practices of other Councils in Scotland.”

Signed: Mrs M Davidson Mrs I McCallum

Speaking in support of the Notice of Motion, Members raised the following issues:-  

• it would be helpful to include input from the Police and information on what expenditure the Council might have incurred in relation to election posters at the recent Referendum; and
• it was clarified that this would specifically be a review of Council bye-laws rather than on other legislative provisions.

Decision

Members AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion on the basis that a report would be submitted to the next Council meeting to include information on the practices of other Councils in Scotland and that this report should also include input from the Police Service and indicate what expenditure had been incurred by the Council during the course of the Referendum with regard to the display of election posters.

11.  Emergency Towing Vessels (ETVs) – Update Report
Bàtaichean-slaodaidh Èiginn – Aithisg Ùrachaidh

Declarations of Interest

The undernoted Members all declared non-financial interests in this item but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that their interests did not preclude their involvement in the discussion –

Mr G Farlow – Member of KIMO UK and Dounreay Stakeholders Group
Mr R Greene – Member of KIMO UK
Mr M Reiss - Member of Dounreay Stakeholders Group
Mr R Saxon – Member of Dounreay Stakeholders Group and a former employee of Dounreay

There had been circulated Report No. HC/25/14 dated 16 October 2014 by the Chief Executive which provided background to the Council’s campaign for the UK Government to reinstate adequate coastal protection measures for the Highlands and Islands.

The report also provided an update on the actions undertaken by the Council since the incident at the beginning of October when a fire on the MV Parida had resulted in the vessel losing power whilst carrying a shipment of nuclear material from Scrabster to Antwerp.

During a summary of the report, it was explained that, as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review in 2010, the UK Government had announced that the four vessels making up the UK ETV (Emergency Towing Vessel) fleet would cease to receive funding from September 2011. Resulting from a lobbying campaign led by the Highlands and Islands Local Authorities, an alternative model for provision had been identified and by the end of 2012 it had agreed to reintroduce a single Government funded ETV based in Kirkwall.  The Minches, previously covered by an ETV based in Stornoway, had been left without any dedicated protection.

An update was also provided on the actions undertaken by the Leader of the Council in writing to the UK Secretary of State for Transport and the Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Rural Affairs to stress the importance of the UK Government reinstating the level of protection previously provided by two ETVs, one stationed in the Minch and one in the Northern Isles. In this regard, lobbying would be continued on this front and Members would be informed of any further developments.

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-  

• referring to the case of the MV Parida, it was clear that the West Coast did not benefit from appropriate protection and it was acknowledged that the other Council Group Leaders had supported the Leader of the Council in writing to the UK and Scottish Governments to ask for the reinstatement of the two ETVs. It had also been the settled position within the Convention of Highlands and Islands that this matter should be taken forward to resolution;
• it was essential that pressure was maintained on the Scottish and UK Governments to find an effective system which could be put in place;
• there were fewer ETVs in the Highlands than in any other EU country;
• the Highland coastline was a pristine natural environment which should be protected by ETVs. This was particularly crucial in terms of the movement of nuclear materials from Dounreay to Sellafield and it was suggested that no nuclear materials should be allowed to be transported through the Minch without an ETV in place;
• the MV Parida had become a high profile issue because the vessel had been transporting a cargo of radioactive waste and this raised concerns that cargo was given a higher value than the safety of personnel.  It was requested that assurances be sought from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency that manning levels at the Maritime Rescue Co-ordination Centres were fit for purpose and reaching consensus on maritime traffic should be considered by the Community Services Committee at the next opportunity;
• it was unclear why the MV Parida had been allowed to sail when storm conditions had been forecast;
• the imminent installation of tidal turbines in the Pentland Firth might also have implications for maritime safety;
• it would be important to maintain the profile of this issue without waiting for another disaster to occur as the costs of an ETV could not be out-weighed against any catastrophe that could occur if a vessel ran into distress; and
• the recommendation was the settled position of the Highland and Islands Local Authorities and it was the intention to publicise this course of action to ensure that the MPs and MSPs who represented the area would be part of the message.

Decision

The Council NOTED the terms of the report and AGREED to continue to press the UK Government to reinstate an Emergency Towing Vessel in the Minches without further delay and to commit to extending the lease for the Emergency Towing Vessel based in Kirkwall beyond the current cut-off date of March 2016.

It was NOTED that this represented the settled position of the Highlands and Islands Local Authorities and that joint work was on-going on this issue. In this regard, it was AGREED to publicise this course of action and ensure that MPs and MSPs representing the Highlands and Islands were also included in this message.

It was further AGREED that a report be submitted to the next available meeting of the Community Services Committee addressing maritime traffic and arrangements.

The Council adjourned for lunch at 1.05 p.m. and resumed at 1.50 p.m.

12.  Community Empowerment Bill – Update, Implications and Opportunities
Bile Ùghdarrachadh Choimhearsnachdann

There had been circulated Report No. HC/26/14 dated 14 October 2014 by the Head of Policy and Reform which summarised the provisions contained within the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Bill, how Officers had recently responded to a call for evidence from the Local Government and Regeneration Committee and the implications of, and opportunities from, the Bill for the Council. 

During a summary of the report, it was explained that the Bill, introduced to the Scottish Parliament in June 2014, provided a framework for empowering communities, including through the community control of land and buildings, meaningful community participation in the decisions affecting people and communities and improving community planning. Whilst recognising that empowerment could mean different things to different communities, it was clear that it was not the same as consultation or engagement as empowerment was about communities leading change for themselves. As such, the Bill supported the preventative agenda and reinforced the view that public bodies should focus on assets within communities and on the potential which individuals had to improve the quality of their lives.

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-  

• in regard to the Bill and its various provisions, the proposal to expand the community Right to Buy to urban areas was particularly welcomed as it ended an anomaly which had existed in the legislation since it had been originally drafted;
• the updates on the statutory framework regarding the Common Good were also welcomed and the statutory duty placed on local authorities to compile a comprehensive Register of all Common Good assets was supported as the need for this had been well demonstrated over previous years;
• in regard to Common Good property, it was confirmed that the current proposal within the Bill would require the Council to consult with all 156 Community Councils in the Highland area on the establishment of a Register and each disposal of property across any of the funds. In light of the fact that the Council currently administered ten different Common Good funds, it was suggested that a change should be sought to allow consultation only with Community Councils which represented the inhabitants of the areas to which the Common Good related prior to 16 May 1975 and other community groups;
• in relation to Non-Domestic Rates, the proposal that Councils would have the power to create localised business rate relief schemes to encourage businesses was welcomed. However, the further proposal that this would need to be fully funded by Councils had the potential to be extremely problematic in the current financial climate and it was hoped that this could be re-considered and an alternative model of funding identified to provide rates relief;
• it was imperative that current legislation was amended to allow Community Councils to have incorporated status;
• the proposal that Councils would be able to acquire neglected land through Compulsory Purchase Order was welcomed;
• the opportunity should be taken to raise awareness of the recent flooding in the Fort William area and the withdrawal of major economic investments from the area;
• in terms of community control of land and buildings, and specifically asset transfer requests, consideration should be given to how the Council could better support communities and it was suggested that the Community Challenge Fund could perhaps be used to fund short term posts in this regard;
• assurances had to obtained from community organisations who submitted requests for ownership, lease or management of publicly owned buildings or land that they would not be allowed to fall into derelict status or remain untended or undeveloped;
• the proposals in the Bill in regard to future use of land for allotments appeared to be overly bureaucratic and there was a danger that this would have a detrimental effect in terms of encouraging participation from within communities;
• it was a missed opportunity to not have Community Councils involved at this stage of the process;
• there was a need for more consistency throughout the Council area in terms of community planning;
• asset transfers could be very frustrating processes for communities and there was a need for the Council to take a more pro-active approach in terms of clarifying and explaining the potential time and costs involved from the outset and encouraging community involvement;
• there was a need for a transformation in culture in regard to how the Council empowered Community Councils to take on specific areas of work so that they were recognised as real partners and did not feel that they were being asked to take on work which it was the responsibility of the Council to carry out;
• an update and briefing was required for Members on the Business Rates Improvement Scheme in order to clarify the current position in this regard;
• there was a need to become an ‘enabling’ Council with a focus on community wellbeing;
• there had been significant work undertaken through the Community Planning Partnership and this should be highlighted;
• the Development and Infrastructure Service had taken significant steps to make communication with Community Councils easier and this was welcomed;
• Parish Councils in England and Wales had been allocated small money raising powers and the same opportunity should be offered to Community Councils in Scotland;
• this should be about building active communities and encouraging them to be inclusive and creative and in this regard there was a need for clear vision of organisation, inputs, co-operative working, implementing best practice and learning from experience; and
• there had been some very positive examples of asset transfer and these should be shared if possible with Members and other communities wherever possible.

Decision

The Council NOTED:-

(i) the key provisions contained within the eight parts of the Community Empowerment (Scotland) Bill as introduced, with enactment expected by Summer 2015;
(ii) that most Bill provisions could be seen as a continuation of current practice, with implications mainly about the pace of change and the design of new processes. Some of these would have resource implications. Some implications would not become clear until guidance and regulations were published;  
(iii) the opportunity to provide oral evidence on 24th November in Fort William as set out in Paragraph 4.2 of the report;
(iv) the Officer evidence submitted during the pre-Referendum period to the Local Government and Regeneration Committee and AGREED that the issues highlighted by Members during discussion should be raised as the Bill progressed through Parliament;
(v) the Council’s role in leading, promoting and supporting community empowerment could be enhanced by the Bill, building on the Council’s values, Programme, voter participation action plan, CPP priorities and feedback from the Citizens’ Panel on the appetite for democratic participation; and
(vi) that the timing of the publication from the Commission on Strengthening Local Democracy and the Smith Commission was supportive of the Bill (item 13 refers).

13.  Report of the Commission on Strengthening Local Democracy 
Coimisean air Deamocrasaidh Ionadail

Declaration of Interest - Mr D Hendry declared a non-financial interest in this item as a member of the Commission for Strengthening Local Democracy but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that his interest did not preclude his involvement in the discussion.

There had been circulated Report No. HC/27/14 dated 19 October 2014 by the Chief Executive which confirmed that the Commission on Strengthening Local Democracy had brought together local government, civic society and a range of experts to consider what it would take to put local democracy at the heart of Scotland’s future.

The Commission’s final report entitled ‘Effective Democracy: Reconnecting with Communities’ was also circulated and set out key principles for stronger democracy in Scotland, namely sovereignty, subsidiarity, transparency, participation, spheres (and not tiers) of governance, interdependency and wellbeing. In addition, recommendations had been made under the headings of Making Local Democracy Local, Creating Local Tax and Spending Choices, Securing Local Democracy and Making Participation Work.

In this regard, it was confirmed that the final report set out ideas for a very different democracy in the future and the ideas presented had been described as ‘intending to begin the transformation’ and had been pitched as a catalyst for debate and change. How the debate would progress was not currently clear but the Commission had offered a belief that a dedicated ‘democratic alliance’ should drive the change and as such it would seek to establish such a network.

It was also highlighted that the final report sat within the context of the Smith Commission on Scottish devolution which had been set up following the Scottish Independence Referendum/

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-  

• the final report had been based on the considerable amount of evidence which had been obtained from across a very broad spectrum which represented a wide range of sources and this was welcomed in that it demonstrated what could be created for and with communities across Scotland;   
• the principle of interdependency was especially important in that every sphere of governance had to support the others and none could be or should seek to be self-contained and self-sufficient. As such, it was imperative that this process had to be a multi-layered approach going forward;
• it was important that the Council provided support and governance where appropriate to allow communities to take responsibility and examples of good practice should be shared wherever possible;
• whilst continuing to be active and supportive, the Council had to ensure that it was not too directive going forward;
• the establishment of a network by the Commission  was welcomed and it was imperative that the Council was part of this network;
• in terms of enabling power to be devolved to communities, it would be important to recognise the different needs across the Highlands and that ‘top down’ solutions were not always the answer;
• some specific challenges were best met by local people and this had to be acknowledged in any future transfer of powers;
• there was a need for robust discussion on the future of local government finance, including proposals in regard to Council Tax;
• in terms of moving from centralised local government to devolving power to local people to enable communities to have a budget to deliver local services according to local needs, it was imperative that an in depth piece of work (following the seven key principles in the final report) was undertaken with communities to explore how they saw change being realised, perhaps through the formation of a group comprising Councillors and civic representatives (with a remunerated independent Chair) with guidance being provided by the Head of Policy and Reform;
• in regard to breaking down barriers at all government levels, the Council needed to demonstrate that it was listening (which could be demonstrated through changes being made) and give consideration as to how it could become more approachable in terms of allowing people within all sectors to become involved to a greater extent in decision making;
• the engagement of many more people within the budget consultation process was welcomed and this could be viewed as open and transparent consultation which could be replicated in other areas in future;
• the proposals within the report represented huge change for local government and this should be viewed positively in terms of addressing potential future challenges;
• there was a need to recognise that a large degree of capacity building would be needed within communities and this would take time;
• a very high level of genuine public debate had now arisen into how Scotland would be governed in future and this final report represented a valuable contribution to that debate;
• powers had been taken away from direct democratic government over a period of time and transferred into a system of national and regional quangos and departmental bodies and what now needed to be considered was what should happen to those powers and specifically whether they would be better used in local government or community government;
• there was a need to also look at what powers and duties could be exercised by Community Councils, perhaps in comparison with the current arrangements in place for Parish Councils in England;
• in terms of creating local tax and spending choices, recognition that the most singular limitation on local democratic choice was the lack of fiscal powers at a local level was welcomed and it was acknowledged that this seriously limited the tax and spending choices available to local citizens and held back the participation of communities;
• it had been highlighted in the report that local tax revenue as a percentage of total revenue equated to 18% in Scotland (as compared to the European average of 40%) and it was suggested that this should be increased to 50%;
• the principle that an organisation which spent money should also be responsible for raising that money should be supported;
• local authorities should be able to levy their own taxes and have responsibility for other taxes, such as property taxes;    
• it was important to look at how local government was structured across Scotland as there were many inconsistencies in terms of geography and the corresponding number of Councils;
• in terms of radical change, perhaps through another re-organisation of local government by communities and for communities, detailed consideration should be given to the previous District Councils and how they operated across Scotland;
• the principle of subsidiarity was welcomed in terms of decisions being taken as close to communities as possible, with the shape and form of local governance being right for the people and places it served;
• all political groups within the Council should now come together in relation to taking forward further discussion of the issues identified within the final report;
• consideration should be given to delegating more powers to Area Committees through the Scheme of Delegation in order to allow increased local debate on local issues;
• there was a need to make the process of accessing funds for local projects easier for communities in order to encourage increased future involvement and participation; and
• as part of further discussion amongst the political groups within the Council, specific consideration should be given to the proposals to ‘immediately put in place deliberative arrangements that would allow communities to engage in the development of policies and strategies that would affect their area and their wellbeing over time’ and ‘implementing arrangements for participatory budgeting which went beyond a consultation on predetermined options for budget cuts and instead focused on local tax and spending priorities’.

Decision

In welcoming the findings and recommendations of the Commission’s final report, Members AGREED that, in addition to the discussion undertaken at the meeting, the various Groups within the Council should now get together, with support from the Head of Policy and Reform, to agree how this discussion should be taken forward, including further consideration of the recommendations within the report and specifically focusing on the proposals to ‘immediately put in place deliberative arrangements that would allow communities to engage in the development of polices and strategies that would affect their area and their wellbeing over time’ and ‘implementing arrangements for participatory budgeting which went beyond a consultation on predetermined options for budget cuts and instead focused on local tax and spending priorities’.

It was also AGREED that this discussion should include reference to issues in relation to the Smith Commission on Scottish devolution.

14.  Annual Treasury Management Report – 2013/14
Aithisg Bhliadhnail Rianachd Ionmhais – 2013/14

There had been circulated Report No. HC/28/14 dated 20 October 2014 by the Director of Finance which highlighted the Council’s Treasury Management activities undertaken, provided a commentary on the year and compared activity to the expected activities contained in the annual Treasury Strategy Statement and Investment Statement which had been approved on 7 March 2013.

In compliance with the Code, the annual Treasury Management Report 2013/14 had been submitted to the Resources Committee on 27 August 2014 for scrutiny and was now submitted to the Council for approval.  In addition, the Prudential Code required the Council to report the actual prudential indicators after the financial year end and these were contained in the report.

During discussion, it was suggested that consideration should be given to the current policy of only investing with UK Banks and a report submitted to a future meeting of the Resources Committee in this regard.

It was also suggested that, as part of the current budget deliberations which would be the subject of a report to the Council in December, further consideration should be given to targeting £2m of savings in Treasury Management through reductions in the Treasury investment account, to targeting £1m of savings in Treasury Management through more short term borrowing and to savings being made from the very substantial decrease in counter-party risk achieved through reducing the investment balance.

Decision

The Council APPROVED the Annual Treasury Report for 2013/14 as presented and in compliance with the Code of Practice on Treasury Management in Local Authorities.

It was also AGREED that consideration should be given to the current policy regarding investment with only UK Banks and a report submitted to a future meeting of the Resources Committee in this regard.

It was further AGREED that the Chief Executive and the Director of Finance would discuss the suggestions put forward at the meeting in regard to the feasibility of budgetary savings being realised from a review of Treasury Management as detailed.