Agendas, reports and minutes

Minutes of Meeting of the Highland Council held in the Council Chamber, Council Headquarters, Glenurquhart Road, Inverness on Thursday, 14 December 2017 at 10.35am.

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

Present:
Mr G Adam, Mr R Balfour, Mrs J Barclay, Mr A Baxter, Mr B Boyd, Mr R Bremner, Mr I Brown, Mr J Bruce, Mrs C Caddick, Miss J Campbell, Mrs I Campbell, Mrs G Campbell-Sinclair , Mrs H Carmichael, Mr A Christie, Dr I Cockburn, Mrs M Cockburn, Mr G Cruickshank, Mrs M Davidson, Mr J Finlayson, Mr M Finlayson, Mr C Fraser, Mr L Fraser, Mr R Gale, Mr J Gordon, Mr K Gowans, Mr A Graham, Mr J Gray, Mr T Heggie, Mr A Henderson, Mr A Jarvie, Ms E Knox, Mr R Laird, Mr B Lobban, Mr D Louden, Mrs L MacDonald , Mr R MacDonald, Mrs D Mackay, Mr D Mackay, Mr W MacKay, Mr G MacKenzie, Mrs I MacKenzie, Mr S Mackie, Mr A Mackinnon, Ms A MacLean, Mr C MacLeod, Mr D MacLeod, Mr D Macpherson, Mr R MacWilliam, Mrs B McAllister, Mr H Morrison, Ms L Munro, Ms P Munro, Mrs M Paterson, Mr M Reiss, Mr A Rhind, Mrs F Robertson, Mrs T Robertson, Mr K Rosie, Mr G Ross, Mr P Saggers, Mr A Sinclair, Ms N Sinclair, Mr C Smith, Ms M Smith, Mrs K Stephen, Mr B Thompson

In Attendance:    
Chief Executive
Director of Development & Infrastructure
Director of Care & Learning
Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Resources 
Director of Community Services

Mr B Lobban in the Chair

Apologies for absence were intimated on behalf of Mr B Allan, Ms K Currie, Ms P Hadley, Mr W MacLachlan, Mr J McGillivray, Mr N McLean, Mr I Ramon and Mrs C Wilson. 

2. Declarations of Interest
Foillseachaidhean Com-pàirt

The Council NOTED the following declarations of interest:-

Item 10(vi) – Mr A Baxter and Mr A Graham (both non-financial)
Item 15 – Mrs A MacLean (non- financial)  

3. Confirmation of Minutes     
Daingneachadh a’ Gheàrr-chunntais

There had been submitted for confirmation as a correct record the Minutes of Meeting of the Council held on 26 October 2017 as contained in the Volume which had been circulated separately – which were APPROVED.

4. 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:-

Ross & Cromarty Committee, 31 October 
Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee, 8 November
Badenoch & Strathspey Area Committee, 14 November
Corporate Resources Committee, 15 November
Caithness Committee, 21 November
Audit & Scrutiny Committee, 23 November
Sutherland County Committee, 29 November
City of Inverness Area Committee, 30 November
People Committee, 6 December
Nairnshire Committee, 7 December
Isle of Skye & Raasay Committee, 11 December 

The Minutes, having been moved and seconded were, except as undernoted,  APPROVED – matters arising having been dealt with as follows:-

Ross & Cromarty Committee, 31 October

*Starred Item: Item 5: PP. 339-341: Housing Performance Report

It was AGREED that the Policy Development Group of the People Committee should consider the recommendation that the Scheme of Delegation be reviewed to give Local Committees the power to review the Housing Policy, particularly in relation to inspection regimes, garages and fences, taking into account the impact any proposals would have on resources.

Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee, 8 November

*Starred Item: Item 3ai: P. 348: Urgent Additional Item: Establishment and/or Appointment of Working Groups, Boards and Outside Bodies – Harbours Management Board

It was AGREED that Ms K Currie should be appointed to the Harbours Management Board in place of Mr C MacLeod.

Sutherland County Committee, 29 November

*Starred Item: Item 8: PP. 397-398: Dornoch Common Good Quarterly Monitoring Report - 1 April 2017 to 30 September 2017

In regard to the Dornoch Common Good Quarterly Monitoring Report, and specifically Project CAL15131: Dornoch Sports Centre, it had been agreed to recommend that the Council should proceed with urgency to legally commit to this project for the reasons stated within the Minutes of the Meeting.

At this point in the meeting, the Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Resources advised that in order to make an informed decision on this matter, the Council would require to have sight of a full Business Case which set out the justification for the project and outlined the full financial implications (in terms of both capital and ongoing revenue). Also, there was currently no funding allocated within the Capital Programme for this particular project. It was the intention of the Administration that a review of the Capital Programme would be undertaken at the Special Meeting of the Council on 15 February 2018 and that would be the appropriate time for detailed consideration of priorities in this regard. 

Thereafter, Mrs L Munro, seconded by Mr H Morrison, MOVED the recommendation from the Sutherland County Committee as detailed.

As an AMENDMENT, the Convener, seconded by Mr A MacKinnon, moved that no action should be taken on this recommendation following the advice which had been received from the Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Resources.

On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 4 votes and the AMENDMENT received 36 votes, with 16 abstentions, and the AMENDMENT was therefore CARRIED, the votes cast having been as follows:-

For the Motion:
Mrs L Munro; Mr H Morrison: Mrs I Campbell and Mr R Gale. 

For the Amendment:
Mr B Lobban; Mr A MacKinnon; Mr G Adam; Mrs J Barclay; Mr R Bremner; Mr J Bruce; Mrs C Caddick; Miss J Campbell; Mr A Christie; Mr G Cruickshank; Mrs M Davidson; Mr J Finlayson; Mr M Finlayson; Mr L Fraser; Mr J Gordon; Mr K Gowans; Mr A Graham; Mr J Gray; Mr T Heggie; Mr A Henderson; Mr W MacKay; Mr S Mackie; Mrs A MacLean; Mr D MacLeod; Mr D Macpherson; Mrs B McAllister; Mr M Reiss; Mr A Rhind; Mrs T Robertson; Mr G Ross; Mr P Saggers; Mr A Sinclair; Ms N Sinclair; Mr C Smith; Mrs K Stephen and Mr B Thompson.       

Abstentions:
Mr B Boyd; Mr I Brown; Mrs G Campbell-Sinclair; Dr I Cockburn; Mrs M Cockburn; Mr C Fraser; Ms E Knox; Mr D Louden; Mrs L MacDonald; Mr G MacKenzie; Mrs I MacKenzie; Mr C MacLeod; Mr R MacWilliam; Mrs P Munro; Mrs F Robertson and Mr K Rosie.          

It was therefore AGREED that no action should be taken in relation to the recommendation from the Sutherland County Committee in respect of Project CAL15131: Dornoch Sports Centre.  
 
City of Inverness Area Committee, 30 November

*Starred Item: Item 4: PP. 401-402: Inverness Business Improvement District Ballot for New Term from March 2018

It was AGREED that support be given to the new 5 year term for the Inverness Business Improvement District.

People Committee, 6 December

*Starred Item: Item 13: PP.10-11 of Supplementary Paper: Corporate Parenting

It was AGREED that there should be an exemption from Contract Standing Orders to enable the continued use of spot-purchased placements for Looked After Children. 

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

There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Valuation Joint Board held on 22 September 2017 (approved by the Board on 24 November 2017) which were NOTED.

6. Community Planning Board 
Bòrd Dealbhadh Coimhearsnachd

There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Community Planning Board held on 28 June 2017 (approved by the Board on 4 October 2017) which were NOTED.

7. Recruitment Panel – Depute Chief Executive 
Pannal Fastaidh – Iar-Ard-Oifigear

There had been circulated Minutes of Meeting of the Recruitment Panel (Depute Chief Executive) held on Wednesday, 1 November 2017 which were NOTED.  

8. Membership of Committees, etc
Ballrachd na Comhairle

It was NOTED that Mr C MacLeod had confirmed that he was now non-aligned. 

On that basis, the political make-up of the Council was now as follows:-

Independent – 30/SNP – 20/Scottish Conservatives – 10/Liberal Democrat – 9/Labour – 3/Green Party – 1/Non-Aligned – 1

It was also NOTED that the formula in respect of the number of places on Strategic Committee remained as 10/7/4/3/1. 

The Council also AGREED the following – 

Corporate Resources Committee – Mrs L MacDonald to replace Mr C MacLeod
Corporate Resources Committee – Mrs M Paterson to replace Mr A Baxter
Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee – Ms K Currie to replace Mr C MacLeod
Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee – Mr R Laird to replace Mr N McLean
Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee – Mr A Rhind to replace Mr M Finlayson
Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee – Mr K Gowans to replace Mr J McGillivray 
People Committee – Mr A Baxter to replace Mrs M Paterson
Audit & Scrutiny Committee – Mr T Heggie to replace Mr A Baxter
Audit & Scrutiny Committee – Mrs J Barclay to replace Mr J McGillivray
Pensions Committee – Mrs C Caddick to replace Ms L Munro
Pensions Board – Ms L Munro to replace Mrs C Caddick 
Commercial Board – Mr L Fraser to replace Mr A Baxter
Redesign Board – Mr K Gowans to replace Mr A Baxter
Valuation Joint Board – Substitute Member – Mr D MacKay
North Planning Applications Committee – Substitute Member – Mrs P Munro (Ward 6)
South Planning Applications Committee – Substitute Members – Mr J Bruce (Ward 20) and Mr B Allan (Ward 21)

Chair of the People Committee

It was NOTED that Mr A Christie had tendered his resignation as Chair of the People Committee with effect from 15 December 2017.

On that basis, it was AGREED that Mr A Baxter should now be appointed as Chair.

Vice Chair of Corporate Resources Committee

It was AGREED that Mr M Reiss should replace Mr A Baxter as Vice Chair.   

CoSLA Executive Board – AGREED as follows -  

Health & Social Care – Ms K Stephen to replace Ms N Sinclair
Children & Young People – Mr A Baxter to replace Mr A Christie
Environment & Economy – Mr K Gowans to replace Mr R MacDonald

9. Question Time    
Am Ceiste

The following Questions had been received by the Head of Corporate Governance in terms of Standing Order 42 –

(i)  Mr C Smith

To the Leader of the Council 

“What engagements have you and your Administration had with Her Majesty’s Government and the Devolved Scottish Administration since the last full Council?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, and in regard to the Leader’s meeting with Damien Green MP on 9 November 2017, Mr Smith queried as to whether this meeting had contributed to the decision of the UK Government to invest directly in Local Authorities to implement broadband in rural areas and also if there would be any further developments for the area. Also, in respect of the list of meetings on the website, he queried as to whether more detail could be provided of the meetings being held. 

In response, the Leader confirmed that the outcomes of meetings were sometimes difficult to define. However, her diary on the website had been reviewed and consideration would be given to including the purpose of meetings where possible.

(ii)  Mr G Cruickshank

To the Chair of the Corporate Resources Committee

“It was recently highlighted that this Council is being charged £55,000 to upgrade Internet Explorer on its computers. That amount of money is equivalent to two full time salaries for a whole year. 

Can I ask how such an extortionate charge for free software has arisen so early in the new IT contract and how many more scenarios like this can we expect to see for the remainder of this contract?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Mr Cruickshank queried as to why the cost of installing free software was so high.

In response, the Chair of the Corporate Resources Committee confirmed that a meeting could be arranged with Mr Cruickshank following the meeting to discuss this issue more fully.

(iii)  Mrs I MacKenzie

To the Chair of the People Committee 

“Between the 2015/16 and 2016/17 years, the number of FTE equivalent of ASN teachers declined from 293.6 to 198.6. I have been told there was a change in the recording that year to exclude the approximately 40 teachers working in special schools, now only to count the ASN teachers in mainstream schools, however, this is still a significant reduction. Can you tell me the reasons for staff leaving and the number of staff recorded within each category?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Mrs MacKenzie queried as to whether a detailed breakdown of the reasons why ASN Teachers had left the Council during the last year could be provided.

In response, the Chair of the People Committee confirmed that advice would be sought on whether or not this information could be provided on the basis of confidentiality.

(iv)  Mr S Mackie

To the Leader of the Council 

“Following the announcement by Visit Scotland to close over a third of their staffed locations within two years, can you outline what your Administration is doing to provide resilience in the Highland's tourism economy and provide certainty for those working in the sector in Thurso, Durness, Drumnadrochit and Fort Augustus whose offices are earmarked for closure?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Mr Mackie welcomed the roll-out of Wi-Fi enabled towns and villages and praised the Council for doing so. However, bearing in mind that tourism was becoming increasingly vital as the community became less reliant on nuclear industry and offshore opportunities, he queried as to whether the Leader agreed that no digitally enabled application or website could provide the quality of local knowledge which would be lost following the closure of the Visitor Information Centres.

In response, the Leader agreed and recommended that communities begin a dialogue with building owners about potential future opportunities.

(v)  Ms M Smith

To the Leader of the Council   

“What has been done to review and strengthen the Council’s internal procedures in respect of Sexual Harassment in the Workplace, ensuring that people can raise concerns directly and in confidence to an appointed person or person(s), who will be available and approachable by anyone wishing to make a confidential complaint?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, and in terms of the importance of having more than one appointed person (both male and female) on a geographic basis to make it easier for staff to raise concerns, Ms Smith queried as to whether (as part of the review) consideration could be given to having appointed persons for Highland. 

In response, the Leader agreed and confirmed that an update would be provided in due course.

(vi)  Ms K Currie

To the Chair of the Environment, Development & Infrastructure Committee

“What involvement have you had in the working map for the UNESCO designation in Sutherland?”

The response had been circulated.

There was no supplementary question.

(vii)  Mrs G Campbell-Sinclair

To the Chair of the Corporate Resources Committee

“Could you please provide me with a list of posts, noting grades and department, of where the Council engages Agency workers?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Mrs Campbell-Sinclair queried as to whether the transactions listing from 1 April to 14 December 2017 relating to the supply of agency staff could be provided.

In response, the Chair of the Corporate Resources Committee confirmed that the Administration Budget Team continued to challenge the use of agency staff and reiterated the offer previously made to meet Mrs Campbell-Sinclair or arrange a confidential briefing with Heads of Service.

(viii)  Mr R MacWilliam

To the Leader of the Council 

“What guidance or training has specifically been given to Highland Council employees to ensure that they deal efficiently and sensitively with citizens who engage with the Council’s services as a result of bereavement?”

The response had been circulated.

In terms of a supplementary question, Mr MacWilliam requested that the Leader meet with him and the Chief Executive to consider an improvement plan across a range of affected services to ensure those suffering bereavement were provided with the respect and dignity they deserved.

In response, the Leader agreed to this request.

10. Notices of Motion  
Brathan Gluasaid

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

(i)“There is continuing interest in the investment in and construction of small scale Hydro schemes yet many never get past the planning stage. Thousands of pounds are spent only to find that access to the grid is denied or what is offered is insufficient for the idea to become a viable reality.

Innovative projects could be connected to the scheme to directly address issues of employment or alleviate fuel poverty.

The Council is asked to encourage these enterprises to find ways to use the power generated by local schemes in their local communities.”

Signed: Mrs T Robertson   Mr J Gray   Mr B Lobban   Mrs M Davidson

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• hydro schemes and windfarms, together with emerging technologies such as wave and tidal power energy, were helping the country to meet its commitment to provide increased amounts of energy from renewable sources;
• however, it was felt that many small scale hydro schemes were not able to go ahead because access to the grid was insufficient;
• it was important that encouragement was given to hydro schemes as once in place, they were sustainable for the long term;
• in terms of the localism agenda, it had to be possible to have energy produced and used in ways which benefitted local areas;
• locally produced power could be used to heat schools, homes and businesses and lead to the production of goods and services;
• it was imperative that action was taken to make the Highlands a stronger and more resilient region in future;
• utilisation of local knowledge and expertise was essential to take projects forward;
• it would also be important to work with energy companies to understand the possibilities and limitations of using power generated by local schemes;
• lessons could be learned from other successful local models in place elsewhere in the country; and
• consideration should be given to setting up a Working Group to allow this issue to be taken forward by Members.            

Decision

The Council AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed. 

(ii)This Council expresses its concern at the proposed merger of the British Transport Police (BTP) with Police Scotland. Since its inception, the new force has been fraught with difficulties, it is clear there are an abundance of issues at the core which still need addressed, the very last event it needs to handle right now is further expansion of its remit by absorbing the BTP. 

A report from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary in Scotland (HMICS) criticised the plans for showing no ‘due diligence’ and that the ambitions are ‘wholly political’. A recent case of a vulnerable woman boarding a train in Preston, subsequently being met by BTP officers in Glasgow only stresses the need for a single, specialist and cross border force.

The Highland Council resolves that the Leader of the Council will write to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice to express these concerns and to urge a rethink.

Signed: Mr A Jarvie   Mr A Sinclair

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• it had to be highlighted that HMICS had criticised the plans for this merger and believed that a detailed Business Case was required as a matter of priority, not least to examine the potential advantages/disadvantages together with an analysis of cost;
• it had to be questioned as to whether Police Scotland currently had sufficient capacity to take on this extra responsibility;
• the unique structure of the British Transport Police made it a very different organisation from Police Scotland and as such the scope and scale of the complexity of this merger could not be underestimated;
• the statistics across a range of issues proved that British Transport Police had moved forward very positively in recent years and it was vitally important that this was continued;
• it did not appear that account had been fully taken of the specialist and complex work undertaken by the British Transport Police and this was a major concern for the future, not least in regard to safety issues in particular in the Highland area;
• it was imperative that a full and detailed risk assessment was undertaken as a matter of priority and for the Scottish Government to be asked to pause and reconsider this proposal;
• it was understood that the merger had in fact already taken place so the proposal to write to the Cabinet Secretary for Justice at this stage was questioned; and
• if this merger went ahead, it had to be appreciated that the current specialism and knowledge of the British Transport Police could be lost and this would be counterproductive and detrimental for all concerned.

Thereafter, Mr A Jarvie, seconded by Mr A Sinclair, MOVED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed.

Mr D Louden, seconded by Ms M Smith, moved as an AMENDMENT, that no action should be taken on this matter.

On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 37 votes and the AMENDMENT received 18 votes, with 4 abstentions, and the MOTION was therefore CARRIED, the votes having been cast as follows:-

For the Motion:
Mr A Jarvie; Mr A Sinclair; Mr D Macpherson; Mrs M Paterson; Miss J Campbell; Mr G Ross; Ms K Stephen; Mr G Cruickshank; Mr J Gordon; Mr H Morrison; Mrs J Barclay; Mr H Fraser; Mr M Finlayson; Mrs T Robertson; Mr R Gale; Mr G Adam; Mrs L Munro; Mr P Saggers; Mr J Bruce; Mr D MacLeod; Mr M Reiss; Mrs F Robertson; Mrs I Campbell; Mrs A MacLean; Mrs C Caddick; Mr A Graham; Mr C Smith; Mr S Mackie; Mrs I MacKenzie; Mr B Lobban; Mrs M Davidson; Mr A MacKinnon; Mr A Christie; Mr J Gray; Mrs N Sinclair; Mr A Henderson and Mr B Thompson.     

For the Amendment:
Mr D Louden; Ms M Smith; Mr K Rosie; Mrs P Munro; Ms E Knox; Mr C MacLeod; Mr K Gowans; Mr I Brown; Mr R MacWilliam; Mr C Fraser; Mr B Boyd; Mrs L MacDonald; Mr J Finlayson; Mrs G Campbell-Sinclair; Mrs M Cockburn; Dr I Cockburn; Mr G MacKenzie and Mr R Laird.  

Abstentions:
Mr R MacDonald; Mrs H Carmichael; Mr A Baxter and Mr R Bremner.               

Decision

The Council AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed. 

(iii)‘The Highland Council welcomes the proposal by the Scottish Government to establish a national not-for-profit energy company; believes that Highland customers do not always experience the benefits of the energy produced in our communities; and therefore agrees to make the case for the proposed company to be based in the Highlands.’

Signed: Mr R Laird    Dr I Cockburn

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• whilst welcoming the establishment of the national not-for-profit energy company, and on the basis that the Highland area was the home of UK energy (including renewable energy), it was hoped that early discussion could be undertaken with the Scottish Government in a bid to ensure that this new company was based in the Highlands;
• in agreeing with the terms of the Notice of Motion, it was hoped that the following additional sentence could be included – ‘To this end, the Council calls upon all Highland MSPs to publicly state they will support the case to locate the proposed company in the Highlands’; and
• the mover and seconder of the original Notice of Motion confirmed that they would accept this additional sentence with the proviso that the Council recognised that MSPs within the Scottish Government are bound by Cabinet collective responsibility.    

Decision

The Council AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed – subject to inclusion of the following additional sentence as suggested and agreed at the meeting – ‘To this end, the Council calls upon all Highland MSPs to publicly state they will support the case to locate the proposed company in the Highlands’.

(iv)‘The Highland Council believes that loans from offshore trusts should be treated as income in the hands of any and all UK recipients and therefore calls upon the UK Government to change the law to enable this.’

Signed: Mr D Louden    Dr I Cockburn

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• loans from offshore trusts could not be classed as ‘loans’ as in effect they were not paid back. In this regard, they had to be viewed as ‘income’ and taxed accordingly;
• currently, there were plans to address this issue and there was therefore a need to call on the UK Government to implement them as a matter of urgency;
• this was a loophole in the current tax system which was often exploited by the highest earners and as such it had to be closed as soon as possible;
• on the basis that it was understood that HMRC had published policy papers on this matter (with new rules coming into force on 6 April 2018), it was suggested that no further action should be taken on this Notice of Motion; and
• there was an alternative understanding that any new rules would not be brought in until 2019 and therefore there was a need to proceed with the terms of the Notice of Motion.

Thereafter, Mr D Louden, seconded by Dr I Cockburn, MOVED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed.

As an AMENDMENT, Mr P Saggers, seconded by Mr A Jarvie, moved that no further action should be taken on the terms of the Notice of Motion.

On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 30 votes and the AMENDMENT received 13 votes, with 15 abstentions, and the MOTION was therefore CARRIED, the votes having been cast as follows:-

For the Motion:
Mr D Louden; Dr I Cockburn; Mr K Rosie; Mrs P Munro; Ms E Knox; Mr C MacLeod; Mr K Gowans; Mrs M Paterson; Miss J Campbell; Mr G Ross; Mr I Brown; Mr R MacWilliam; Mr C Fraser; Mr B Boyd; Mrs L MacDonald; Mr H Morrison; Mr J Finlayson; Mrs J Barclay; Mr L Fraser; Mr M Finlayson; Mrs G Campbell-Sinclair; Mrs M Cockburn; Mr G MacKenzie; Mr B Lobban; Ms M Smith; Mr R Laird; Mr A Christie; Mr J Gray; Mr R Bremner and Mrs N Sinclair.     

For the Amendment:
Mr P Saggers; Mr A Jarvie; Mr G Cruickshank; Mr J Gordon; Mr G Adam; Mrs L Munro; Mr A Sinclair; Mr J Bruce; Mr D MacLeod; Mr C Smith; Mr S Mackie; Mrs I MacKenzie and Mrs H Carmichael; 

Abstentions:
Mr D Macpherson; Ms K Stephen; Mr R MacDonald; Mrs T Robertson; Mr R Gale; Mr M Reiss; Mrs F Robertson; Mrs A MacLean; Mrs C Caddick; Mr A Graham; Mrs M Davidson; Mr A MacKinnon; Mr A Baxter; Mr A Henderson and Mr B Thompson.          

Decision

The Council AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed. 

(v)The Highland Council recognises the global interest in Universal Basic Income as an alternative to complex systems of benefit support and will approach the Scottish Government with a proposal to pilot a UBI scheme in the Highlands. 

Signed: Mr R MacWilliam   Mrs M Cockburn 

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• it had to be highlighted that there was interest in a number of countries on this issue and that trials were currently being undertaken;
• as such, the Highlands could offer a unique perspective and, whilst there were many variations on the same theme, it was important to begin consideration at an early date;
• it was considered that Universal Credit was currently causing considerable difficulties for many people on a number of levels and that if Universal Basic Income was successful, the social effects could be revolutionary;
• at the very least, there was a need to discuss and allow debate on this ambitious international project of research;
• the disproportional impact that Universal Credit was having in the Highland area had to be included in any future discussion;
• whilst accepting the sentiment of the Notice of Motion, there was a need for more detail and in this regard it was suggested that the wording should be amended to read as follows – ‘The Highland Council recognises the global interest in Universal Basic Income as an alternative to complex systems of benefit support and will submit a report to the next meeting of the Corporate Resources Committee to allow an investigation of the proposals and a review of the impact that this may have on individuals, Councils and other organisations. The finding of this exercise will then inform any future decisions that the Council may wish to make on this matter’;
• specifically, there was a need for more detail on the potential associated costs of any future UBI scheme in the Highlands;
• the timescale for taking this forward was particularly important as a number of other Councils had already shown interest and it was important that Highland Council did not delay and therefore rule itself out of any future proposals from the Scottish Government; and
• the proposal to include this on the agenda for the next meeting of the Corporate Resources at the end of February was welcomed.                    

Decision

The Council AGREED an amended Notice of Motion as follows – ‘The Highland Council recognises the global interest in Universal Basic Income as an alternative to complex systems of benefit support and will submit a report to the next meeting of the Corporate Resources Committee to allow an investigation of the proposals and a review of the impact that this may have on individuals, Councils and other organisations. The finding of this exercise will then inform any future decisions that the Council may wish to make on this matter.

Declarations of Interest - Mr A Baxter and Mr A Graham declared non-financial interests in the following additional urgent item (vi) on the grounds of owning a Village Post Office and having a family member employed by Royal Bank of Scotland respectively 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 them from taking part in the discussion.   
 
(vi)‘The Highland Council expresses its deep disappointment at the news of further branch closures by the Royal Bank of Scotland. This will cause real difficulties for many customers and small businesses.

While acknowledging the changing nature of banking and the rapid growth of digital banking services, there are many for whom this is neither a practical option nor one they are comfortable with. So it is vital that they have access to physical face-to-face banking services.

The Council therefore calls on the UK Government to ensure communities, particularly vulnerable customers and small businesses, have access to day to day banking services by establishing and enforcing a guaranteed minimum level of service provision for essential banking services.’

Signed:   Mrs M Davidson      Mr C Smith       Mr R Laird        Mr B Lobban

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• it was noted that the Leader of the Council was to meet with the Northern Manager, Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS), on the following day and would raise all local issues which had been identified;
• there was serious concern about the scale of what was being proposed and the lack of consultation, not least in terms of the events connected to RBS in recent years;
• if these proposals went ahead, RBS would have closed almost half of all their branches in Scotland;
• the Council had called on the UK Government to intervene and it was a matter of regret that this had been refused;
• the Northern Manager of RBS had already had some local meetings and it was clear that there was no real understanding of local arrangements and how this would impact on smaller Highland areas in particular;
• mobile banking had been proposed as an alternative by RBS but they had failed to recognise that many mobile banks did not have disabled access or waiting rooms and were often only available once a week at best and dependent on people being able to travel to their locations;
• these proposals would have the most detrimental effect on vulnerable and elderly members of the Highland population, as well as many small businesses;
• RBS had also failed to realise that many people in the Highlands were still not able to receive broadband connections;
• RBS had also suggested that use could be made of Post Offices but again this was not possible as RBS currently had no agreements in place to allow this to happen;
• there was general agreement that contact should now be made with Post Office Limited at a national level to discuss this situation and any possible arrangements which could perhaps be put in place for the future;
• it was clear from these proposals that RBS did not have the interests of Scotland at heart and as such it was hoped that people would now seek alternative banking arrangements in future;
• it was regrettable that in many cases these decisions had been taken to close branches with no consideration of local circumstances;
• one of the branches which had been listed for closure was located in Tain where internet banking was not available and there were no viable alternative premises which could be used for banking by local residents;
• it had to be recognised that previous branch closures by RBS had had extremely detrimental effects on the areas concerned;
• there was real concern about the false information currently being provided by RBS to their customers in terms of future use of Post Offices as an alternative as this was simply not true;
• removal of the last remaining cash machines from local areas would cause serious difficulties for not just local residents but also tourists in the area;
• there had previously been calls for the UK Government to make the Post Office a Universal Bank and it was regretted that this opportunity had been missed;
• there was a serious risk that businesses could be lost to the Highlands as a result of this programme of closures;
• no detailed statistics had been made available by RBS to back-up claims of under-use of local branches;
• there was a need to petition the remaining banks in smaller areas across the Highlands to stay open and not to consider future closures; and
• in relation to the concerns of the current RBS employees in the areas identified for branch closures, it was imperative that Union representatives entered into discussion with RBS at a national level, not least to ensure that their current programme of recruitment in the UK and elsewhere (which was ongoing) would take account of their current employees in the first instance in order to redistribute work (thereby keeping branches open) and avoid and/or minimise redundancies in all cases.                     

Decision

The Council AGREED the terms of the Notice of Motion as detailed.   

11. Local Fire & Rescue Plan for Highland
Plana Smalaidh & Teasairginn Ionadail

There had been circulated Report No. HC/46/17 dated 5 December 2017 by the Deputy Assistant Chief Officer John MacDonald.

In this regard, the Plan had been circulated separately.

As part of a presentation at the meeting by Mr R Middlemiss (Local Senior Officer), it was confirmed that the Plan, which had a focus on local outcomes, set out six local priorities which had been informed by a review of the current Local Fire and Rescue Plan, the opinions of the public and partners which had been collected from a series of engagement events across the Highland area and feedback from an online survey.

In this regard, detailed and specific information was also provided on the methodology used in development of the Plan and included a list of consultation outcomes, including comments made by Members at the full Council meeting on 7 September.

During discussion, Members welcomed the significant progress which had been made over recent years, with particular reference to improved travel times, recruitment, new vehicles, the adoption of a more flexible approach and measures taken to ensure the retention of rural stations.

Reference was also made to the current joint working arrangements with NHS Highland and the programme of home visits – both of which were considered to be working well.           

Decision

The Council APPROVED the new Local Fire & Rescue Plan for Highland as circulated.
                                                       
12. Budget Update
Cunntas as Ur mun Bhuidseat
 
There had been circulated Report No. HC/47/17 dated 4 December 2017 by the Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Resources.

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• thanks should be conveyed to Officers for submission of this report in what were extremely challenging circumstances;
• it would be important for Members to prioritise services as part of the forthcoming budget discussions but it was recognised that this would be very difficult;
• both the Leader and Councillor MacKinnon were to travel to London in early January to discuss with Ministers the possibility of write-off of the historical housing debt and a report back on this would follow in due course;
• there was a need for further clarity on the Capital allocation from the Scottish Government;
• confirmation from the Scottish Government that a recommendation from the Barclay Review of Business Rates (for the proposed end to charity relief for Arms-Length External Organisations) was not to be implemented was welcomed;
• further clarification of undeliverable prior year savings was required and it was disappointing that they could now become budget additions in the coming year;
• it would be important for any changes/reductions in the Capital Programme to be phased in wherever possible in order to minimise the impact on communities across the Highlands who were expecting current projects to be delivered;
• it would be helpful if future opportunities identified through the new Commercial Board could be implemented in as quick a timescale as possible;
• it was noted that nearly 200 ideas had been generated by staff in relation to the budget gap and as such further information in this regard was required from a financial perspective;
• stark advice had been received from the Depute Chief Executive/Director of Corporate Resources in relation to the affordability of the current Capital Programme and very difficult decisions therefore lay ahead for Members in terms of future priorities to be identified;
• in regard to the Capital Programme, it was noted that current priorities for the Administration included schools, roads, bridges and flood schemes;  
• in terms of the review of the Capital Programme, it was recognised that the Council would have to spend less and in this regard there would have to be a greater focus on obtaining value for money through procurement and building processes in relation to capital projects;
• whilst the current communication with staff was welcomed, it had to be about more than just asking for budget saving ideas and as such it was imperative that all staff were fully briefed on the current budget situation so that they could be fully informed prior to decisions being made in February;
• it would be important for all Members of the Council to agree the final budget and also to agree the priorities to be taken forward;
• in terms of future discussion on the Capital Programme, it was vital that there was a clear rationale for the projects to be maintained and also for those which might have to be removed;
• the input to date from the Opposition Groups was welcomed and it was hoped that this consensus could be continued with the final budget proposals in February;
• in terms of future borrowing, it was important to highlight that currently low interest rates were not likely to continue in the long term and this would have implications for the Council;
• there was concern in relation to how budgets were built and specifically vacancy monitoring (which often led to vacancies being frozen with a resultant negative effect on services) and it was hoped that consideration could be given to changing this approach if possible in the future;
• it was of major concern that, using a flexible approached based on a number of key assumptions and the scenario of a 3.5% reduction in Scottish Government funding, a budget gap of £159.2m was forecast over the next five years;
• it also had to be highlighted that areas where there was limited or no scope to reduce budgets included teachers’ salaries, adult social care, key contractual commitments, loans charges, direct ring-fencing of budgets and council tax;
• communication of the current position was vital as it was recognised that the most vulnerable people across the Highlands would be affected most by any withdrawal of current services; and
• representations should be made to the Scottish Government whenever possible for the allocation of funding to allow the production of multi-year budgets which would greatly help with future planning of vital services across the Highland area.

Decision

The Council NOTED that there were no changes to the anticipated budget gap at this time.

The Council also NOTED the progress to date in tackling the budget gap. 

13. Redesign of Highland Council – Progress Report
Ath-dhealbhadh Chomhairle na Gaidhealtachd – Aithisg Adhartais

There had been circulated Report No. HC/48/17 dated 5 December 2017 by the Chief Executive.

During discussion, and following a summary of progress to date, Members raised the following issues:-

• in response to a query as to the timescale for completion of the various strands of work currently being undertaken, it was confirmed that it was envisaged that the work of the Board would continue infinitum;
• in this regard, the work being undertaken represented a change of culture across the Council and this would take time;
• it was noted that links would be made between the Redesign and Commercial Boards of the Council in terms of outcomes;
• there were concerns about non-payment of invoices in certain areas, including music tuition and school meals, and in this respect it was noted that a report on music tuition was to be presented to the Redesign Board in the following week;
• in relation to car parking, it was stressed that any proposals for future charging arrangements had to be submitted to Local Committees in the first instance for initial consideration;
• the work and involvement of staff in the Redesign Board had been exemplary and this had to be acknowledged; and
• future actions included work to support more community run services (linked to developing localism) and all Members of the Council were therefore invited to participate in this work as it was recognised that it would vary across different areas of the Highlands.          

Decision

The Council NOTED:-

(i)    the Board’s growing programme of reviews, with five peer reviews underway, a new peer review to be undertaken and new areas for Lean reviews. Recommendations from current peer reviews would be made by early 2018 and in time to feed into the budget process;
(ii)   that Board workshops were open to all Members to attend and that Members could propose areas for review to the Board;
(iii)  the positive engagement with staff in the 16 local briefings carried out between October and December. Nine Board members including trade union representatives and two further members participated. Over 500 staff took part in the briefings and generated nearly 200 ideas and issues to explore. These were being considered in the relevant budget theme groups as well as the Redesign Board. Feedback to staff was being arranged; and
(iv)   the Board had begun to develop its communication plan and this would continue over the next few months.

14. Corporate Plan 2017-22
Plana Corporra 2017-22

There had been circulated Report No. HC/49/17 dated 4 December 2017 by the Chief Executive.

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• thanks should be conveyed to Senior Staff, and in particular the Corporate Audit & Performance Manager, for compilation of the report and the terms of the Corporate Plan;
• it should be noted that, although this was a 5 year Plan, this was just the start of a process and there were some very short dates (1 year to 18 months) for bringing issues back for discussion;
• it had to be highlighted that this was the beginning of a true programme of change as it was anticipated that the Council would evolve very quickly over the next five year period;
• a Seminar would be arranged for March 2018 in order to allow full consideration of a range of issues, including localism proposals, area boundaries, future budgeting (including the raising and retention of funds in local areas where possible), etc and also the final outcomes from the Commission on Highland Democracy report;
• it was imperative that steps were taken across the Council to fully understand and work more closely with local communities in future;
• further more detailed information/clarification was required in terms of the themes/priorities (and associated measures/actions) which had been listed in the report, most particularly in terms of improvements which could be implemented in each case;
• it would be important for detailed consideration to be given to the relationship between Area Committees and budgets in order to resolve issues related to how and where charges were raised and whether funds received could be retained within specific areas;     
• it would be important to refine some of the measures highlighted in the report in order to ensure that lives were being improved across the Highland area wherever possible;
• the stated theme of partnership working in order to deliver future services was welcomed;
• whilst welcoming the proposals to regenerate town centres, it had to be accepted that this would be extremely challenging;
• high standards had to be maintained as a priority;
• the provision of superfast broadband across the Highland area was imperative;
• this had to be viewed as a ‘living document’ which was capable of being changed and reviewed over time as necessary; and 
• it would be important to maintain a focus on the work being undertaken through the Gaelic Strategy Implementation Group.          

Decision
 
The Council:-

(i)    APPROVED the Corporate Plan for 2017-22 as circulated;
(ii)   NOTED that the Plan would support the delivery of the Highland Outcome Improvement Plan;
(iii)  NOTED that the Plan would be the subject of an Annual Performance Report in September of each year; and
(iv)  NOTED that the Plan was normally reviewed following the Annual Performance Report to Council and any changes would be submitted to the Council for approval.    

15. Proposals for Changes to the Governance of Education
Ath-sgrudadh Riaghladh Foghlaim                                             

Declaration of Interest – Mrs A MacLean declared a non-financial interest in this item on the grounds of a family member being a Head Teacher but, having applied the test outlined in Paragraphs 5.2 and 5.3 of the Councillors’ Code of Conduct, concluded that her interest did not preclude her from taking part in the discussion.  

There had been circulated Report No. HC/50/17 dated 4 December 2017 by the Chief Executive. 

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• the priority had to be a focus on what was best for children in terms of the provision of education and as such there was no evidence that a change in governance led to improvements in attainment levels;
• there had to be an increase in resources in classrooms before any significant improvements could be achieved;
• the Cabinet Secretary had already stated that he was satisfied with the arrangements in the Highland area and it was therefore questioned as to why the area should have to follow the proposals for change;
• it had to be highlighted that the Highland area was different from the rest of Scotland and it was definitely not the case that ‘one size fits all’;
• future inspection arrangements should be undertaken by a separate independent body;
• the proposals represented a further increase in responsibilities for Head Teachers and a lessening of the role of Local Authorities in the education system in Scotland and this was regretted;
• the creation of an additional layer of bureaucracy was causing concern amongst teachers and this could only worsen the current recruitment difficulties in the area;
• there was concern about the costs of setting up any new arrangements at a time of severe budget constraints in the Highland area;
• further detailed information was required in regard to the setting up of Regional Improvement Collaboratives, particularly in the Highlands;
• in contrast to the issues which had already been raised, it was felt that the tone of the report was unduly negative and that it lacked balance in terms of the presentation of the new proposals;
• it had to be appreciated that this was a consultation period which allowed concerns to be discussed and debated before publication of a final report;
• there was much to be welcomed in the Cabinet Secretary’s proposals, including a shared ambition to improve education and the life chances of all children and young people;
• it was felt that Regional Improvement Collaboratives would allow more direct access to professional educational support when needed;
• it had been stated in the report that Head Teachers had not expressed support for the proposals and had raised a number of concerns but this had to be viewed under the management of change and issues addressed in that regard;
• it was a concern that the People Committee had not yet had a chance to consider the terms of this report;
• this was a consultation period and as part of that there was a need for a request to be made to the Scottish Government to pause and reconsider issues such as the potential removal of local accountability and scrutiny;
• as had been stated earlier, there was a need to submit responses in the first instance and wait until the consultation period had finished before taking a stance on the final proposals;
• the provision of additional powers for Head Teachers and Schools had been sought in the past and this was what was now being proposed by the Scottish Government;
• in considering the detail of the proposals, it had to be acknowledged that the Highland Council had a poor track record to date in relation to children in care; and
• as part of the consideration of the proposals, there was a need to recognise the outstanding work currently being undertaken by Teachers across the Highlands.

Thereafter, Mr G MacKenzie, seconded by Mr R Laird, MOVED that the Council should be asked to ‘note’ (as opposed to ‘endorse’) the approach and conclusions set out at the end of the report and that (following consultation with partner authorities in the Northern Alliance and at CoSLA) the response should be finalised at the meeting of the People Committee in January 2018.

As an AMENDMENT, Mr A Christie, seconded by Mr A Baxter, moved the recommendations as detailed in the report.

On a vote being taken, the MOTION received 16 votes and the AMENDMENT received 47 votes, with no abstentions, and the AMENDMENT was therefore CARRIED, the votes having been cast as follows:-

For the Motion:
Mr B Boyd, Mr R Bremner, Mr I Brown, Mrs G Campbell-Sinclair, Dr I Cockburn, Mrs M Cockburn, Mr C Fraser, Ms E Knox, Mr R Laird, Mr D Louden, Mrs L MacDonald, Mr G MacKenzie, Mr R MacWilliam, Mrs P Munro, Mr K Rosie and Ms M Smith.

For the Amendment:
Mr G Adam, Mr R Balfour, Mrs J Barclay, Mr A Baxter, Mr J Bruce, Mrs C Caddick, Mrs I Campbell, Miss J Campbell, Mrs H Carmichael, Mr A Christie, Mr G Cruickshank, Mrs M Davidson, Mr J Finlayson, Mr M Finlayson, Mr L Fraser, Mr R Gale, Mr J Gordon, Mr K Gowans, Mr A Graham, Mr J Gray, Mr T Heggie, Mr A Henderson, Mr A Jarvie, Mr B Lobban, Mr R MacDonald, Mr D MacKay, Mrs I MacKenzie, Mr S Mackie, Mr A MacKinnon, Mrs A MacLean, Mr D MacLeod, Mr D Macpherson, Mrs B McAllister, Mr H Morrison, Ms L Munro, Mrs M Paterson, Mr M Reiss, Mr A Rhind, Mrs F Robertson, Mrs T Robertson, Mr G Ross, Mr P Saggers, Mr A Sinclair, Ms N Sinclair, Mr C Smith, Ms K Stephen and Mr B Thompson.                                 

Decision

The Council:-

(i)     NOTED the proposals within the report;
(ii)    AGREED to endorse the approach and conclusions set out at the end of the report; and
(iii)   AGREED that the Council’s response should take account of further consultations, including with Partner Authorities in the Northern Alliance and at CoSLA, and be finalised by the Strategic Chair in consultation with the Council Leader and the Chief Executive.    

16. Tourism Development
Aithisg Suidheachadh Turasachd

There had been circulated Report No. HC/51/17 dated 4 December 2017 by the Director of Development & Infrastructure.

During discussion, Members raised the following issues:-

• whilst the considerable benefits of tourism in the Highlands were welcomed, it had to be acknowledged that there was a disconnect between tourist spend and the cost of services being provided;
• in light of the above, and in line with other locations (both nationally and internationally), the proposal for the introduction of a Transient Visitor Levy (TVL) based on bed nights to grow revenue for infrastructure investment was welcomed;
• it had to be noted that introduction of a TVL of £1 could represent an additional £10m for the Highlands and this could be spent on infrastructure projects for the benefit of all;
• it was hoped that this issue could be further discussed with the Scottish Government and that the Leader could also raise the matter at CoSLA;
• it was hoped that proposals for a TVL could be taken forward as a matter of urgency as it was imperative that the best possible experience could be provided for tourists;
• the setting up of the proposed Tourism Working Group was also welcomed and it was suggested that Group Leaders should be consulted in the first instance on the composition of this Group;
• there was however concern that the introduction of a TVL might deter tourists, not least if it was increased over time;
• there was a need to reassure communities that a percentage of the TVL would be reinvested locally;
• there was a role for the Federation of Small Businesses in these proposals and it was hoped that they would enter into discussions with the Council and partners in future;
• above all, the additional funding raised from a TVL (which required to be seasonally and locally appropriate) could provide significant improvements to infrastructure in the area and this could only enhance the visitor experience.             

Decision

The Council:-

(i)    NOTED the significance of tourism to the Highland economy and welcomed the levels of growth witnessed in recent years;
(ii)   AGREED to identify Council resources to provide financial support that allowed Event Scotland and their partners to bid for future major international events to be hosted in Highland;
(iii)  APPROVED the setting up of a Tourism Working Group within the Council to take a strategic overview of and set priorities for the Council’s contribution to addressing the issues described in the report; and
(iv)   AGREED that Group Leaders would be consulted on the composition of the Working Group.