Council and democracy

Agenda and minutes

Venue: Committee Room 4, Civic Offices, New Road, Grays, Essex RM17 6SL

Contact: Steve Jones, Democratic Services Manager  Email: Direct.Democracy@thurrock.gov.uk

Items
No. Item

5.

Minutes pdf icon PDF 55 KB

To approve as a correct record the minutes of General Services Committee meeting held on 26 June 2014.

 

Minutes:

The Minutes of the General Services Committee, held on 26 June 2014, were approved as a correct record.

6.

Items of Urgent Business

To receive additional items that the Chair is of the opinion should be considered as a matter of urgency, in accordance with Section 100B (4) (b) of the Local Government Act 1972.

Minutes:

The Chair informed the Committee that he had not agreed to the consideration of any items of urgent business.

7.

Declarations of Interests

Minutes:

There were no declarations made.

8.

Frost Estate Community Governance Review pdf icon PDF 81 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Democratic Services Manager introduced the report, which set out the various duties the Council had to comply with when undertaking a Community Governance Review, together with the results of the first consultation exercise with registered electors of the Frost Estate.

 

Members were informed that additional legal advice from James Findlay QC had been received. A copy of this was circulated at the meeting for Members’ consideration.

 

The Committee then took some time to read the document that had been circulated at the meeting.

 

Members were informed that from the initial consultation, a total of 357 responses had been received, which represented 49.93% of the total electorate, and that:

 

·         299 respondents had indicated a preference for a new parish council for the area to be created, which represented 83.75% of all respondents to the questionnaire and 41.81% of the registered electors in the area surveyed;

·         50 respondents (14.01%) had indicated a preference for no change to the current arrangements; and

·         6 respondents (1.68%) had indicated a preference for alternative arrangements, although what was included could not be considered as being alternative forms of governance.

 

The Committee were informed that each of the possible services a new parish council could provide had been ranked in order of the importance that had been placed on them by the local electors and that this was set out in the table at paragraph 3.11 of the report. Members were further informed that appendices 2 to 5 set out the responses to the questionnaire in greater detail, and also included comments made by respondents in respect of the benefits and disadvantages of a parish council, together with other comments and observations they wished the Committee to take into consideration.

 

Members were advised that it was clear that a major factor in both the request for a parish council to be established and the responses to the questionnaire that were submitted was the repair and maintenance of the roads on the Frost Estate and that the additional legal advice that was circulated addressed the issue of the maintenance of private roads by a parish council.

 

Members were further advised that in order to recommend the creation of a parish council for the Frost Estate, the Committee should:

 

·         Take into account the results of the survey;

·         Consider the advice from James Findlay QC that has been circulated;

·         Be satisfied that such a body would reflect the identities and interests of the community in that area, and would be effective and convenient.

 

The Committee were informed that on the final point, assistance had been provided by James Findlay QC, with this being set out at paragraphs 12 to 19 of the written advice that had been circulated. It was reported that this was a matter for Members to consider and that it related to issues of judgement rather than law.

 

When considering the report and the recommendations that could be made, a number of Members spoke and raised the following points:

 

·         Clarification was sought in respect of the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Arrangements for the Recruitment of the Director of Public Health pdf icon PDF 42 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The Director of Adults, Health and Commissioning introduced the report, which requested the Committee to consider and agree to the proposed arrangements for the recruitment to the post of Director of Public Health.

 

Members were informed that the appointment panel did not need the full General Services Committee, as it had to involve a number of others from the CCG and the Public Health Faculty.

 

When considering the report and the recommendations, a number of Members spoke and raised the following points:

 

·         The Council should have a full-time Director of Public Health because from 2016, additional responsibilities for children from 0 to 5 would be taken on and work with the CCG was require to ensure that the Better Care Fund would work for Thurrock.

·         Concern was expressed that a full-time role would be an additional drain on the tax payer.

·         From reading the report, some Members could not see why a full-time role was needed and had not been aware of the additional duties that would be taken on, until advised of these at the meeting.

·         A Member asked about the position of Southend if the current shared arrangement was coming to an end in March 2015.

 

The Director of Adults, Health and Commissioning advised Members that the current post holder did not wish to continue in the shared role from 1 April 2015 and so there was no option to share with Southend. It was reported that Thurrock would not have a Director of Public Health, unless an alternative arrangement was put in place.

 

Members were informed that the Council had looked at alternatives to a full-time post but that there did not appear to be a viable alternative.

 

In respect of the extra costs of a full-time Director of Public Health, Members were informed that a consultant post was currently vacant and if a clinician was appointed as Director of Public Health, the Council may not need as many consultant hours.

 

A Member queried whether the Council had not appointed to the consultant post because it was unable to recruit to a full-time post and asked whether, once a full-time Director of Public Health had been appointed, the Council would also look to appoint a full-time consultant and so have less money in the public health budget. The Director of Adults, Health and Commissioning advised Members that, nationally, it was difficult to appoint full-time consultants as most had chosen to work for Public Health England and continued to work in the clinical world of the NHS. It was reported that if the Council was lucky, it would appoint a clinician as its new Director of Public Health.

 

When considering recommendation 1.3, a Member suggested that this could be amended to include the words “or nominees” to reflect the issue raised by the Director of Adults, Health and Commissioning regarding the potential size of the interview panel.

 

The Committee indicated their agreement to the recommendations in the report, as amended at the meeting.

 

RESOLVED:

 

1.         That the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.