Agenda and minutes

The Chair referred to issues arising from the SMC calling-in meeting on 8 January 2007, convened to discuss the York West Swimming Facilities.  She read out the following statement:

“I received a representation regarding the issues arising out of the SMC calling-in meeting on Monday, 8 January – which was to discuss the Executive decision on the York West swimming facilities.

After consultation with the officers I stated that the Council had received no complaints about the consultation process.  At the time I understood that statement to be true, but it has since transpired that a complaint had been received by an elected Member, by e-mail, which was passed to officers.  To that extent I wish to formally withdraw that statement as it now appears it may have been inaccurate.

I have also been asked to reconsider my ruling in respect of the representations presented orally by Cllr Merrett to the Committee.  I have spoken to the Head of Legal Services and understand that although my comments were a legitimate response to those representations the provisions in Standing Orders which allow a member of a Committee to be ruled out of order are limited to those matters set out in paragraphs 14 & 16 of Standing Orders.

Having reflected on this information, I accept that Cllr Merrett’s conduct was not in breach of either of these Standing Orders and therefore was not out of order and I withdraw that ruling.”

Cllr Merrett expressed his appreciation that the ruling had been withdrawn.

At this point in the meeting, Members will be invited to declare any personal or prejudicial interests they may have in the business on the agenda.

The Chair invited Members to declare any interests they might have in the business of the meeting.  Councillors  D’Agorne and Merrett declared  personal but non-prejudicial interests in any cycling related issues raised as part of debate under Minute No.  below (Update on Implementation of Recommendations of Previous Scrutiny Reviews – Cycling Policy & Provision of Facilities).

At this point in the meeting members of the public who have registered their wish to speak regarding an item on the agenda or an issue within the Committee’s remit can do so. Anyone who wishes to register or requires further information is requested to contact the Democracy Officer on the contact details listed at the foot of this agenda. The deadline for registering is Friday 26 January 2007 at 5.00pm.

The Chair reported that no registrations to speak at the meeting had been received under the Council’s Public Participation Scheme.

To receive and consider an update report on progress relating to the above review in view of the timescale set by this Committee for completion of Part A of its remit.

Members considered a report which provided an update on progress relating to the above review, in view of the timescale set by Scrutiny Management Committee (SMC) for completion of Part A of the Sub-Committee’s remit.

In November 2006, the SMC had agreed that Part A should be completed by the end of January 2007, to enable the findings to be used in considering the Council’s next steps following the outcome of the PFI Expression of Interest (EOI), which was expected at that time.  Subsequently, the DfT had indicated that the outcome of the EOI was not likely to be known until early/mid February.  Furthermore, the Sub-Committee had recognised that they would not be able to give due consideration to all the objectives within the timescale set by SMC.  They had therefore requested that the timeframe be extended and that a final draft report be brought to SMC on 26 February 2007.

The Sub-Committee had already met twice informally to consider the first three objectives of Part A of the remit.  Their findings to date were set out in Annex B to the report.  The recommendation was to extend the timeframe until 26 February.  Members agreed that an extension to March would be preferable, to enable the Sub-Committee to hold a further three meetings during February before reporting back to SMC in March.

RESOLVED: That the timeframe for completion of the review of Part A of the remit for the review of Highways Maintenance Procurement be extended to 26 March 2007.

REASON:      In order to allow full consideration to be given to the objectives of Part A of the remit.

To receive and consider an update report on outstanding actions arising from agreed recommendations and actions resulting from completed scrutiny reviews since 2004/5.

Note: information on progress to date with agreed actions or recommendations will be provided at the meeting.

Members received a report which was intended to provide an update on the implementation of recommendations from Scrutiny reviews completed since 2004.

A list of the recommendations had been circulated to all relevant Officers within Directorates, with a request that they submit their updates no later than 26 January 2007. However, not all updates had been received and Members felt that it would be better to allow more time for responses to be received.

RESOLVED: That this item be deferred to the next meeting of the Committee.

REASON:      To allow sufficient time for the submission and consideration of Officers’ responses.

To consider a report setting a proposed remit for the above new scrutiny topic, further to the decision taken at the additional meeting of this Committee on 22 January 2007. [Report to follow]

Members considered a report which presented a suggested remit for the Scrutiny review topic entitled Reducing Traffic Congestion in York (topic no. 120). A full discussion took place on the proposed remit.

RESOLVED: That the following be agreed as the remit for this topic:

“Aim

To identify ways including LTP1 & LTP2 and other evidence, of reducing present levels of traffic congestion in York, and ways of minimising the impact of the forecast traffic increase.

Objectives

Having regard to the impact of traffic congestion (based on external evidence and those measures already implemented in LTP1 or proposed in LTP2), recommend and prioritise specific improvements to:

·          CO² Emissions

·          Air Quality, in particular looking at the five hotspots identified in the LTP2

·          Economic Performance

·          Quality of Life

·          Accessibility to services, employment, education and health

·          Road Safety

·          Journey times and reliability of public transport

·          Alternative environmentally viable and financially practical methods of transport”

REASON:      To enable the agreed review on ‘traffic congestion’ to commence as soon as possible.