minutes of meeting of stirling council held in the council...

STIRLING COUNCIL

MINUTES of MEETING of STIRLING COUNCIL held in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS, OLD VIEWFORTH, STIRLING on THURSDAY 24 JUNE 2010 at 6.30pm

Present: Provost Fergus WOOD (in the Chair)

Councillor Neil BENNY

Councillor Alistair BERRILL Councillor Margaret BRISLEY Councillor Ian BROWN Councillor Callum CAMPBELL Councillor Scott FARMER Councillor Tony FFINCH Councillor Colin FINLAY Councillor David GOSS Councillor Graham HOUSTON

Councillor Graham LAMBIE Councillor Alasdair MacPHERSON Councillor Corrie McCHORD Councillor Colin O’BRIEN Councillor Paul OWENS Councillor Steven PATERSON Councillor Graham REED Councillor Andrew SIMPSON Depute Convenor Jim THOMSON Councillor Violet WEIR

In Attendance: Jim Boyle, Chief Accountant Michael Boyle, Interim Education Business Manager, Education Tony Cain, Head of Housing Liz Duncan, Acting Solicitor to the Council Bill Eadie, Head of Social Care Des Friel, Head of Economy, Employment & Youth Fiona Fulton, Communications Officer, Chief Executive’s Office Bob Gil, Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management Margaret Gilmour, Facilities Manager, Assets, Property & Facilities Management Belinda Greer, Head of Education Janice Hewitt, Assistant Chief Executive (Care, Health & Wellbeing) Bob Jack, Chief Executive Kristine Johnson, Corporate HR Manager Linda Kinney, Assistant Chief Executive (Learning, Empowerment & Citizenship) Sheila McLean, Committee Officer, Governance Hazel McMorrow, Head of Governance (Clerk) Rebecca Maxwell, Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) Peter Morgan, Chief Planning Officer Katy Oliver, Team Leader, Marketing & Communications, Chief Executive’s Office John Risk, Head of Improvement & Customer Service Kevin Robertson, Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste Kathleen Taylor, Head of Communities & Culture Willie Watson, Head of Finance & Procurement

Apologies Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillor John Hendry. Agenda The Provost intimated his intention to alter the order of the Agenda. The items were taken in the order minuted below. SC550 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest.

SC551 URGENT BUSINESS The Provost advised that a report by the Chief Executive, entitled ‘Balfron School Campus – PFI Agreement’ would be taken as urgent business.

As the report was exempt, it would be taken as the first item of exempt business.

SC552 MINUTES

The following Minutes were submitted for approval:-

a. Stirling Council – 13 May 2010

Decision The Council approved the Minutes of Meeting of Stirling Council held on 13 May 2010 as a correct record of the proceedings.

b. Local Review Body – 20 May 2010 Decision The Council approved the Minutes of the Local Review Body held on 20 May 2010 as a correct record of the proceedings.

SC553 WRITTEN QUESTIONS Two written questions had been received in terms of Standing Order 36. The questions and answers are attached at Appendix 1 to these Minutes. Each Member who had put a written question was allowed one supplementary question and the supplementary questions and answers to these are also included in the Appendix.

SC554 QUESTION TIME In terms of Standing Order 43, Members had the opportunity to put questions to the Provost, the Leader of the Council, any Executive Member with relevant responsibility or Scrutiny Committee Chair or Chair of any other Committee or Panel as appropriate regarding any business included in the Volume of Minutes circulated with the agenda for the meeting. The following questions were put:- Volume Page 17370 Minutes of Meeting of the Executive held on 20 May 2010 (Item EX326) Councillor Brown asked for an update in relation to the location of a train stabling facility in the Stirling Council area. The Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste advised that discussions with Network Rail were being taken forward with a view to identifying potential sites. Volume Page 17335 Minutes of Meeting of Stirling Council held on 13 May 2010 (Item SC548(a) Councillor Reed questioned the reference in the Minutes to no consultation having taken place with the people of Gargunnock as to the desirability of houses being built on the site referred to. He further asked if funding was still available from the Scottish Government for the project. The Portfolio Holder for Housing advised it was also his understanding that consultation had taken place. He advised that funding had not been lost, but must be used before the end of the current year. The Head of Housing confirmed that community representatives had been involved in discussions relating to the transfer of the site and the use of the community hall. Following the decision, further discussions had been held to discuss how to implement the decision.

SC555 MURRAYSHALL QUARRY, GILLIES HILL, CAMBUSBARRON

A Joint Report by the Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste, Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) and Head of Governance advised that, in January 2008, the Council considered a report on Murrayshall Quarry, Gillies Hill, Cambusbarron. Planning permission for the Quarry had previously been granted by Stirling District Council in 1982. Quarrying operations ceased in 1996. In 2002, under the Environment Act 1995, Stirling Council reviewed the planning permission for the Quarry and issued a new set of conditions.

The Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste advised that, following legal advice, in January 2008 the Council had accepted that an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) was required by the relevant European Directive as part of the 2002 review process and this had not been carried out. It was agreed that discussions should be entered into with the owner and operators of the Quarry seeking agreement for a joint approach to the Court of Session to quash the 2002 Council notice and an extension to the time limit for an EIA to be undertaken.

Two companies, Tarmac and Hanson, had permissions to operate separate parts of Murrayshall Quarry. Discussions had now been held with both operators of the Quarry and the landowner. All parties had confirmed that they were not willing to join with the Council in a voluntary action to the Court of Session. The Council was unable to take this action without their support.

Cambusbarron Community Council had continued its interest in and opposition to the reactivation of Murrayshall Quarry. It had now submitted a petition calling on the Council to offer support (including financial support) to the Community Council to take direct action through the courts, if necessary, to have the 2002 Review set aside. The Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste outlined a number of options available to Council.

He advised that Council had the power, under the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, to provide financial assistance (either by grant or loan) to community councils. Council was asked to note that any financial assistance so provided in this case would be to support the Community Council in taking legal action against the Council in respect of a previous Council decision/action. If the Council wished to provide financial support in this case, such assistance could be by way of an undertaking to underwrite any deficit in funding the expenses of the court action or the Council could indicate the maximum sum it would be prepared to advance. If the Council was minded to grant financial support, it would be prudent to also require the Community Council to seek a protective costs order at the outset of any litigation in an attempt to minimise the expenditure of public funds.

An option remaining to the Council was to do nothing. Neither operator had expressed any firm plans to reactivate Quarrying operations at Murrayshall before 2017. In addition, Hanson, which had the area with the larger reserves, did not currently have clear access to or from its site. Should Hanson wish to restart operations, they would either have to secure agreement from Tarmac for use of its access road or submit a planning application for a new access route. Tarmac had indicated to the Council that they would not be minded to give permission to Hanson for use of the existing access road.

In conclusion, the Head of Service advised that, in the light of the above, and since a further review of conditions would be required in 2017 at which time a full Environmental Impact Assessment would have to be undertaken, the advice from officers was that action to challenge the 2002 decision was unnecessary. No party was currently seeking or indicating an intention to rely on or use their quarrying consent before the 2017 review and any legal action could result in undue significant expenditure of public funds. Council was advised that this position was not supported by Cambusbarron Community Council, who wished to see the matter resolved.

Councillor Benny acknowledged the potential financial risk to the Council, but suggested that the Council had a moral responsibility to rectify its mistake. The Council should seek a binding written commitment from the operators which allowed for legal action to be taken if necessary.

Councillor Farmer paid tribute to the community for its work in highlighting the issue. He highlighted the historical significance and natural beauty of the area in question. Whilst noting that operators had expressed they might not start work, no commitment had been given. He confirmed that all three Local Members had discussed the issue with legal officers and communities and had received an assurance that the Council could fulfil its commitments and retain an option for future legal action. The campaign had local, national and international support.

Councillor Simpson concurred with the views expressed by the other two Local Members.

Members suggested that communities be asked to seek protective costs.

Councillor Owens recorded the interest of Thornhill & Blairdrummond Community Council in the issue and concerns they had in relation to past disturbances caused by quarrying operations at Murrayshall.

Any significant movement in the course of proceedings would be reported back to Council.

Motion

“Council notes the advice of officers indicating the risks associated with supporting the people of Cambusbarron in their petition.

However, Council recognises and shares the significant concerns, both within Cambusbarron and beyond, about a possible resumption of quarrying at Murrayshall Quarry, Gillies Hill, Cambusbarron and, wishing to support the community in preventing this happening before a full consideration of the environmental impact has been carried out, and resolves to instruct officers:

• to work with Cambusbarron Community Council to secure a binding written

commitment from the owners and operators of Murrayshall Quarry that they will not exercise their quarrying consents before the next scheduled review of conditions in 2017;

• and if that fails, to work with and support (including financially if necessary) the

Community Council in identifying and pursuing such appropriate legal action as is necessary to prevent quarrying taking place before the 2017 review, any such action being agreed with the Community Council in consultation with the local Elected Members.”

Moved by Councillor Neil Benny, seconded by Councillors Scott Farmer and Andrew Simpson.

Decision The Motion was unanimously approved, and accordingly the Council agreed:- 1. to note the advice of officers indicating the risks associated with supporting the

people of Cambusbarron in their petition; 2. to recognise and share, however, the significant concerns, both within

Cambusbarron and beyond, about a possible resumption of quarrying at Murrayshall Quarry, Gillies Hill, Cambusbarron and, wishing to support the community in preventing this happening before a full consideration of the environmental impact had been carried out, and to instruct officers:-

(a) to work with Cambusbarron Community Council to secure a binding written

commitment from the owners and operators of Murrayshall Quarry that they would not exercise their quarrying consents before the next scheduled review of conditions in 2017; and

(b) if that failed, to work with and support (including financially if necessary) the

Community Council in identifying and pursuing such appropriate legal action as was necessary to prevent quarrying taking place before the 2017 review, any such action being agreed with the Community Council in consultation with the local Elected Members.

(Reference: Joint Report by the Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste, Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) and the Head of Governance, (undated), submitted).

SC556 HMIE CHILD PROTECTION INSPECTION 2010

Following an inspection of services to protect children in the Stirling Council area, an inspection report by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education (HMIE) had been published on 10 June 2010. Copies of the report had been issued to all Elected Members. A report by the Chief Executive summarised the conclusions of the HMIE inspection report and the actions which had been taken or were being taken to address areas of concern that were identified in the inspection report. Council noted that representatives of Central Scotland Police and NHS Forth Valley were in attendance. The Chief Executive advised that the inspection had looked at services provided by a range of public, voluntary and independent organisations. The overall conclusion of the inspection report was that while there had been improvement in some areas since the previous HMIE Child Protection inspection in 2008, on the whole, improvement had been insufficient and in some cases there had been a reduction in the quality of services to protect and meet the needs of vulnerable children and families.

The report balanced a number of very positive comments about services with more challenging comments about inconsistencies in practice giving rise to concerns about inadequate services in some cases and the possibility of risks in these cases not being addressed satisfactorily. Of particular concern was the apparent failure of internal quality assurance and self evaluation processes to have identified these inconsistencies in practice and resulted in action being taken to close these gaps at an earlier stage.

The inspection report noted the wide range of services available to help and support children and families and recorded the prompt and effective action taken by staff to protect most children when there were concerns about their safety. Across services, senior managers were committed to reviewing their work to improve outcomes for children and a number of significant improvements had been made to services to protect children in Stirling and across Forth Valley.

The inspection report also concluded, however, that some children and families were not getting the help they needed early enough, or for as long as they needed it. The quality of assessments of children at risk of harm and abuse continued to be highly variable within and across services and the quality of plans to reduce risk to children and to meet their needs was still very variable. More could be done to strengthen inter-agency working to protect children. There needed to be greater focus on providing better outcomes to children and to progressing improvement actions to address areas of concern.

In terms of leadership and direction, the inspection report noted the work undertaken at Chief Officer level across the Forth Valley (Council Chief Executives, Chief Executive of NHS Forth Valley and Chief Constable of Central Scotland Police) to strengthen leadership and make the responsibility for child protection clearer to staff. However, it raised some concerns about the leadership and direction of the Stirling Child Protection Committee which had the responsibility for overseeing inter-agency child protection work in the Stirling Council area.

Initial feedback on the inspection was given to Stirling Chief Officers and Operational Lead Officers on 19 March 2010 and Chief Officers immediately instructed a full multi-agency review of all current cases. This was conducted over the following week and provided assurance that no children were at risk as a result of any of the failings identified in the inspection.

The review also confirmed HMIE’s findings as regards limited improvements since the 2008 HMIE inspection, current inconsistencies in practice and inadequate quality assurance and self evaluation. In light of this, Chief Officers instructed the preparation of a multi-agency improvement action plan, which now required to be agreed with the HMIE Link Inspector for Stirling to ensure that it addressed the areas of concern raised in the inspection report before it was finally signed off by Chief Officers for implementation.

The Chief Executive stressed the commitment of Chief Officers to ensure that all necessary action was taken to strengthen child protection both in Stirling and across Forth Valley. The leadership and direction of the Stirling Child Protection Committee was being strengthened by the appointment of a highly experienced independent Chair.

The Chief Executive advised that he had asked the Assistant Chief Executive for Care, Health and Wellbeing to lead change and improvement across the whole of Social Care on his behalf and ensure that the Council’s services implemented their parts of the multi agency improvement action plan for Child Protection. The Head of Social Care had been tasked with implementing the necessary improvement actions within Stirling’s Social Care services. External expertise was being sourced to provide critical support where this was needed. A timescale of six months had been set for implementation of the priority improvement actions.

Members welcomed the assurances given by the Chief Executive that serious action would be taken and that no individual children had been at risk.

In response to a question, the Chief Executive acknowledged that there might be resource issues. A full management review of the Social Care service would be undertaken and this would be reported to Council in the Autumn, when resource issues could be addressed. Opportunities to combine resources with other agencies would continue to be explored.

Councillor Brown, in his role as Vice Chair of the Service, Delivery & Performance Committee, invited the Police and NHS Forth Valley representatives to meet with Members of the Committee.

Motion

“Council notes the HMIE report following the inspection of services to protect children in the Stirling Council area. Council also notes the positive outcomes of the report especially in fields of ensuring children in our care are listened to and respected and the way we positively work together with other agencies to protect children. Council also notes and commends the swift actions of the Chief Executive and other staff in this matter. Council is disappointed in the findings of the report. Council is particularly concerned at the finding that children under its care may be left at risk for too long. Council resolves to make improvements in this area a high priority, specifically that:

1) the Service Delivery & Performance Committee will meet with HMIE and officers

of the Council, Forth Valley Health board and Central Scotland Police to discuss the proposed action plan inviting all Council members to attend;

2) a summary of the agreed action plan, along with the evaluations of the HMIE

report will be printed in the next edition of Focus Magazine to assure the people of Stirling that we are taking action on these issues;

3) the Service Delivery and Performance Committee will receive reports on the

progress of the action plan from the Portfolio Holder and the relevant officers at each meeting until it is completed.”

Moved by Councillor Alistair Berrill, seconded by Councillor Callum Campbell.

Decision The Motion was unanimously approved, and accordingly the Council agreed:- 1. to note the HMIE report following the inspection of services to protect children in

the Stirling Council area; 2. to note the positive outcomes of the report, especially in fields of ensuring

children in its care were listened to and respected and the way the Council positively worked together with other agencies to protect children;

3. to note and commend the swift actions of the Chief Executive and other staff in

this matter; 4. to record disappointment in the findings of the report and express particular

concern at the finding that children under its care may have been left at risk for too long;

5. to resolve to make improvements in this area a high priority, specifically:-

(a) that the Service Delivery & Performance Committee would meet with HMIE and officers of the Council, Forth Valley Health Board and Central Scotland Police to discuss the proposed action plan, inviting all Council members to attend;

(b) that a summary of the agreed action plan, along with the evaluations of the HMIE report, would be printed in the next edition of Focus Magazine to assure the people of Stirling that the Council was taking action on these issues;

(c) that the Service Delivery & Performance Committee would receive reports on the progress of the action plan from the Portfolio Holder and the relevant officers at each meeting until it was completed.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 17 June 2010, submitted).

SC557 CITIZENSHIP APPOINTMENTS PANEL – APPOINTMENTS TO POOL In March 2004, the Council established a Citizenship Appointments Panel to undertake interviews and recommend to Council suitable citizens for appointment to a pool for various Committees and Panels as and when vacancies arose. The Citizenship Appointments Panel met on 27 May 2010 to recruit suitable citizens to pools for future appointments to the Glenochil Prison Visiting Committee. The Panel interviewed one applicant and the Council was asked to note the appointment. Decision The Council agreed:- 1. to note the appointment of Grete Birtwistle to the Citizenship Appointments Panel

Pool, subject to satisfactory Disclosure Scotland checks;

2. to appoint Grete Birtwistle to the Glenochil Prison Visiting Committee, with effect from the date of receipt of satisfactory Disclosure Scotland check.

(Reference: Report by Head of Governance dated 2 June 2010, submitted).

SC558 THE LOCH LOMOND AND THE TROSSACHS NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY BOARD – APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS A report by the Head of Governance set out the changes anticipated as a consequence of the Scottish Government’s proposal to modify The Loch Lomond and The Trossachs National Park Designation, Transitional and Consequential Provisions (Scotland) Order 2002. Stirling Council would be invited to nominate two of the six local authority nominees to the Board and to designate one of these as ‘Local Member’. Council was accordingly invited to nominate two Members to the Park Authority Board. Councillor Berrill, seconded by Councillor Benny, nominated Councillor Tony Ffinch. Councillor McChord, seconded by Councillor Finlay, nominated Councillor Colin O’Brien. Councillor Farmer, seconded by Councillor Houston, nominated Councillor Fergus Wood. Councillor Brown, seconded by Councillor Reed, nominated Councillor David Goss. Motion In terms of Standing Order 60(c), Councillor Ian Brown, seconded by Councillor Graham Houston, moved that the vote be taken by secret ballot. The Motion was unanimously approved, and accordingly Council moved to a secret ballot. First Vote Voting was as follows:- Councillor Tony Ffinch 11 votes Councillor Colin O’Brien 10 votes Councillor Fergus Wood 11 votes Councillor David Goss 3 votes No one Member having an absolute majority of the votes, the Member with the lowest number of votes, Councillor David Goss, was eliminated and a fresh vote taken in accordance with Standing Order 70.

Second Vote Councillor Tony Ffinch 14 votes Councillor Colin O’Brien 10 votes Councillor Fergus Wood 11 votes There being an absolute majority, Councillor Tony Ffinch was nominated to the Park Authority Board. A fresh vote for the second nomination was taken in accordance with Standing Order 70. Third Vote Councillor Colin O’Brien 10 votes Councillor Fergus Wood 11 votes Accordingly, Councillor Fergus Wood was nominated to the Park Authority Board. Council further agreed that Councillor Tony Ffinch be designated as the Local Member. Decision The Council agreed:- 1. to nominate Councillor Tony Ffinch and Councillor Fergus Wood to the Loch

Lomond and The Trossachs National Park Authority Board;

2. that Councillor Tony Ffinch be designated as the Local Member.

(Reference: Report by Head of Governance dated 17 June 2010, submitted). SC559 SCOTLAND EXCEL – APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER

A report by the Head of Finance & Procurement advised that Scotland Excel was a joint committee constituted under Section 57 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1993 and had been established for the purpose of regulating the joint discharge of the functions by the Member Authorities. At its meeting on 20 May 2010, the Executive had agreed that the Council should join Scotland Excel and remitted it to the Council to appoint a Member to represent the Council. Decision The Council agreed to appoint Councillor Scott Farmer to represent Stirling Council on the Scotland Excel Joint Committee. (Reference: Report by Head of Finance & Procurement (undated), submitted).

SC560 RECYCLING AND WASTE COLLECTION – ROAD END COLLECTION POLICY

The Council successfully operated a road end recycling and refuse collection service for 5,000 households who were accessed via private roads and tracks. The Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste introduced his report, which advised that there remained 1,500 households, mainly in the Council’s rural areas, which received a service where recycling and refuse collection vehicles travelled along private roads and tracks in poor condition, where access was often difficult and potentially hazardous. The proposed Recycling and Waste Collection – Road End Collection Policy described the types of roads suitable for access by recycling and waste collection vehicles. Where access was unsuitable, refuse and recycling collection points would be established at road ends on adopted public roads, (where appropriate) for affected households. The Head of Service suggested that implementation of this policy would achieve consistency in service delivery and result in significant efficiencies, in terms of vehicles, staff and time taken on routes, and reduced vehicle damage, with associated financial savings. The proposed implementation programme would be phased over two years. At its meeting on 20 May 2010, the Executive had referred this matter to Council for consideration. Supplementary information had been provided to Members. Members expressed a number of reservations at the terms of the proposed policy. Members questioned whether Community Councils would be consulted. The Head of Service advised that Community Councils could be included. The main issue, however, was to discuss with residents; where they qualified for assistance, this would continue. Concerns were raised over safety at collection points and flexibility and information on costs was sought. The Head of Service explained that the illustrative maps provided were examples and all sites would be assessed in terms of accessibility and road safety. Decisions on each site would be taken on an individual basis in full consultation with residents and landowners. Members questioned the rationale behind the ad-hoc process being taken out. It was advised that this was historical and had been carried out this way over several decades. It was now aimed to provide a uniform service. Health and safety was the principal driver behind the proposal. Further concerns were raised that the proposals were unfairly penalised those living in the rural area. They questioned how decisions would be taken on the suitability of access roads for refuse vehicles. Councillor Thomson, Portfolio Holder for Environment & Sustainability, stressed the health and safety issues, opportunity for savings and improvement in service, and highlighted the success of the existing operation to 5000 households. He confirmed that the collection service would be protected for those most vulnerable.

Motion “That the Council agrees:-

1. to note the resources and costs expended in the collection of recyclables and waste from rural households accessed via private roads and tracks.

2. to note the benefits, efficiencies and financial savings that can be achieved from collecting recyclables and waste from suitable locations.

3. to adopt the Recycling and Waste Collection – Road End Collection Policy, thereby achieving uniformity of service delivery.

4. to the phased implementation of the Policy during 2010/11 and 2011/12.”

Moved by Councillor Jim Thomson, seconded by Councillor Steven Paterson.

Direct Negative

Councillor Neil Benny, seconded by Councillor Colin O’Brien moved the Direct Negative.

On the roll being called the Members present voted as follows:- For the Motion (9) Councillor Ian Brown Councillor Scott Farmer Councillor Graham Houston Councillor Graham Lambie Councillor Alasdair MacPherson Councillor Steven Paterson Councillor Graham Reed Depute Convener Jim Thomson Provost Fergus Wood Against the Motion (12) Councillor Neil Benny Councillor Alistair Berrill Councillor Margaret Brisley Councillor Callum Campbell Councillor Tony Ffinch Councillor Colin Finlay Councillor David Goss Councillor Corrie McChord Councillor Colin O’Brien Councillor Paul Owens Councillor Andrew Simpson Councillor Violet Weir

Decision The Motion fell by 9 votes to 12.

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste dated 24 May 2010, submitted).

SC561 SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK FOR KILDEAN, STIRLING The Executive on 20 May 2010 referred this matter to Council for consideration. Decision The Council agreed to defer this Item to the next meeting of Council on 7 October 2010. (Reference: Report by Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste, dated 14 June 2010, submitted).

SC562 SUMMER RECESS – URGENT BUSINESS In previous years, the Council had approved arrangements for dealing with urgent business during the Summer recess. A report by the Head of Governance sought Council’s agreement that the same arrangements would operate during this year’s recess. Councillor O’Brien suggested that, as the Council had a minority Administration, the process should include a member of the Opposition. Councillor Berrill supported this proposal. In response to a question, the Chief Executive confirmed that, in terms of the Council’s Scheme of Delegation, one of the Assistant Chief Executives would be appointed to deal with issues in his absence. Decision The Council agreed:- 1. that, for urgent matters where a policy decision had already been taken by

Council and where budget or other financial provision existed, officers would consult the Chief Executive, Provost/Depute Convenor of Council, relevant Portfolio Holder, or Chair of the appropriate Committee, a relevant Opposition member and, as appropriate, the Leader of the Council, before a decision was taken;

2. that details of decisions taken be submitted to Council/Committees following the

recess.

3. that, where an urgent decision was required which involved new policy or a change to existing policy, or incurring expenditure not already provided for, the officer would consult the Chief Executive and Clerk to the Council and, if required, the Provost/Depute Convenor of Council or Chair of the appropriate Committee and a relevant Opposition Member would agree a special meeting of Council or the Committee concerned.

(Reference: Report by Head of Governance/Clerk to the Council dated 8 June 2010, submitted).

SC563 CHIEF EXECUTIVE’S ANNUAL REPORT 2009/2010 & SENIOR MANAGEMENT TEAM OBJECTIVES 2010/2011 A report by the Chief Executive updated Council on progress made on a range of key corporate and service issues during 2009/10 and on the objectives that had been set for the Council’s senior management in 2010/11. Appendix 1 to the submitted report set out the key achievements of the Chief Executive, Assistant Chief Executives and Heads of Service in 2009/10. A separate document copied to all Elected Members detailed the objectives for the Chief Executive, Assistant Chief Executives and Heads of Service for 2010/11. A revised version of Appendix 1 had been circulated. The Chief Executive advised Council that objectives for 2010/11 had been derived from a number of sources, including the Single Outcome Agreement, the Council’s Strategic Plan, the Council’s Annual Improvement Statement, the Council’s Performance Management Information, specific Council decisions relative to specific projects, initiatives and services and ongoing discussions with the Administration and Opposition Groups. He highlighted that the document was very much a work in progress, but that it represented a significant advance in terms of objective setting for the Council’s senior management.

Overall, it was considered that very good progress had been made during 2009/10. The objectives set for the Chief Executive, Assistant Chief Executives and Heads of Service represented the current view of what was most important to progress during the year ahead. Work would continue to refine these objectives in response to further political direction on priorities for the organisation over the medium term. Progress against objectives would be reviewed in October 2010 and the next round of performance appraisal for senior management would take place in March 2011.

Decision The Council agreed to note the submitted report and the 2010/11 objectives for senior management as circulated. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive, dated 18 June 2010, submitted).

SC564 INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATIONS (ICT) STRATEGY A report by the Head of Improvement & Customer Service highlighted the crucial role of ICT in supporting the Council’s strategic and service delivery functions, as well as enabling change and improvement.

The Head of Service advised that in 2005 the Council developed a five year ICT Strategy running to 2010. Appendix 1 to the submitted report proposed a draft Strategy for the next three years and described how ICT would be adaptable to changing needs, and provide value for money.

The Strategy was wide ranging, but focussed on three key areas:-

• Technology that supported the needs of the Council; • Governance that prioritised the right things and delivered benefit; • Service delivery that was effective and efficient.

The progress of the Strategy would be monitored as part of the Council’s Change Programme and would be reviewed by the Council Management Team.

The report proposed an ICT Strategy which set out Stirling Council’s approach to the development and delivery of ICT services to support the Council over the next three years, to 2013. Members sought information on the capacity of the Council’s ICT system and the Head of Service undertook to provide a response outwith the meeting. In response to a question on information security, the Head of Service referred Members to a detailed version of the Strategy which was available on the Source. This contained details of the Council’s information security policies which had been endorsed by the Management Team. Information was sought on progress of roll-out of the Members Enquiry Portal as part of the Lagan Customer Relationship Management system. The Head of Service advised that that the system was being implemented on a phased basis and development of the Members Portal was not yet complete. Members asked if accounting systems were included. The Head of Finance & Procurement advised that the strategy covered all systems. Systems were periodically updated at times when best value could be achieved. Decision The Council agreed to approve the draft ICT Strategy detailed in Appendix 2 to these minutes. (Reference: Report by Head of Improvement & Customer Service undated, submitted).

SC565 REVIEW OF GENDER EQUALITY SCHEME 2007-10 - GENDER EQUALITY SCHEME 2010-13

The Equality Act 2006 placed a general statutory duty on the Council to promote gender equality and to prevent unlawful discrimination on the grounds of an individual’s gender, gender identity or sexual orientation. It also imposed a specific duty to publish a Gender Equality Scheme. Progress in delivering the Scheme must be reported annually and the scheme must be reviewed, revised and updated every three years.

The Council’s current Gender Equality Scheme (GES) covered the period June December 2007 – June 2010 and a new Scheme was required to demonstrate the Council’s continued commitment to gender equality as a community leader, service provider and employer. The Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) introduced her report, which confirmed progress achieved in delivering the current Scheme and sought approval for an updated Gender Equality Scheme for 2010 –13. The Assistant Chief Executive confirmed that diversity training sessions would be arranged before the target date to ensure that all staff were adequately trained. Elected Members had the opportunity to receive Diversity training. Members questioned the number of actions and terminology used in the document, however, the importance of the issues contained within the document was stressed.

Decision The Council agreed:-

1. to note the review of progress achieved in delivering the Gender Equality Scheme for 2007-10 as detailed in Appendix 1 to the submitted report;

2. to approve the Council’s updated Gender Equality Scheme for 2010-13 and

associated Action Plans, including a separate Education Action Plan as required under the specific duty, attached as Appendix 3 to these minutes;

3. to publish the report and appendices on the Council’s website.

(Reference: Report by Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) dated 11 June 2010, submitted).

SC566 SHARED RISK ASSESSMENT/ASSURANCE AND IMPROVEMENT PLAN: 2010 -

2013

The Crerar Review of Audit, Inspection and Regulation recommended streamlining the external scrutiny of public bodies, including local government, with a view to reducing administrative burdens. The Best Value 2 regime had been developed to achieve this, whilst at the same time continuing to hold Councils to account for how well they were performing and improving. A core component of the new arrangements was the Shared Risk Assessment collated for each Council by a Local Area Network of the main scrutiny bodies, and leading to a co-ordinated statement of planned scrutiny activity. A report by the Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) presented the Assurance and Improvement Plan for Stirling Council, which set out the planned external scrutiny activity for the Council for 2010 to 2013. The Assistant Chief Executive advised that the report also provided comment from Council Management Team on work already in progress that addressed a number of the risk areas identified by the Local Area Network.

Members sought assurance that a noted increase in domestic abuse was being addressed. The Assistant Chief Executive advised that the Community Safety Partnership was working on plans to address this issue.


1. to note the Assurance and Improvement Plan for Stirling Council and proposed scrutiny activity for 2010 – 2013, and in particular the intention of Audit Scotland to carry out an Audit of Best Value and Community Planning in late 2010/11;

2. to note the comments made regarding work already in progress within the

Council that addressed a number of the key risk areas identified by the Local Area Network, and give guidance to Council Management Team on any areas where Council believed further work was required.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 8 June 2010, submitted).

SC567 MEDIUM TERM FINANCIAL PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK:

FIRST QUARTER UPDATE 2010/11

On 10 December 2009, Council received a report on the Medium Term Financial Outlook. In response to the significant financial challenges outlined, the Council approved a medium term financial planning and management framework and set a budget reduction target of £25M over the period until 2013/14. It was agreed that regular progress reports would be brought to Council and a submitted report by the Chief Executive on behalf of the Council Management Team was the first of these. At its meeting of 11 February 2010, the Council approved the General Fund Revenue Budget for 2010/11, a budget that provided for a Band D Council Tax of £1,209, no increase from the previous financial year. The approved budget also contained management efficiencies of £2.5M and policy growth of £2.006M. The Administration’s resolution also approved the setting up of an all-party Finance Review Group, to manage and oversee the task of meeting the challenging budget reduction targets that would be necessary over the next few years, as central government strove to manage back the national budget deficit. The Chief Executive advised that, since that budget was approved, the Council Management Team and the Finance Review Group had been working on a programme of budget workstreams that were geared towards meeting the challenging reduction targets, and the report provided an update on that programme. Although the target previously approved was £25M, the Management Team subsequently raised this to a target of £30M to cover any likely gap or shortfall against the assumptions of grant and/or spending pressures. There had also been revised projections produced nationally on the outlook for public sector expenditure in the UK and Scotland, particularly since the election of the new Government at Westminster in May. The report also provided an update on these projections, and the possible implications for Stirling Council.

The Chief Executive confirmed that progress reports would be presented to each meeting of Council. Members of all political groups were urged to fully engage with the Finance Review Group. The Group would explore all options for savings, while maintaining front line services. In response to a question, the Chief Executive advised that the transport workstream had only recently been established and the target saving had yet to be identified.


1. to note the contents of the submitted report, as part of a regular series of reports to the Council in terms of the Medium Term Financial Planning and Management Framework, and progress of the budget workstreams that were being managed by the Finance Review Group and the Management Team;

2. to approve a revised budget reduction target of £30M over the three years

2011/12 to 2013/14. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive on behalf of the Council Management Team dated 17 June 2010, submitted).


INCOME, FEES & CHARGES - A FRAMEWORK APPROACH

The Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) introduced a report by the Council’s Management Team which advised that, over the next four years it was anticipated that the Council would require to save £25 - £30M from its revenue budget. The Council had identified Income, Fees and Charges as an area in which there was an opportunity to address some of the Council’s current financial pressures. A target of £2M had been set. The assumption was that the Council could increase the amount of income it generated by a combination of:-

• increasing the level of charges for existing charged services; • identifying new services for which a charge could be introduced; and • developing new (commercial) services which were able to generate an income in

excess of the costs of service delivery. There was also the potential to make savings, without necessarily increasing charges, by reducing costs to bring them closer to existing levels of charge.

Council was advised that the budget workstream fell into three main areas:-

• making explicit the connection between cost of service delivery and charge levied;

• identifying additional services for which a charge could be introduced; and • developing income generation opportunities.

The submitted report focused on the first element of work and proposed a cost based framework approach to the application of charges to services. Future papers would bring forward proposals for savings where new or increased charges were possible, including opportunities for income generation.

The Assistant Chief Executive confirmed that the Working Group would consider retention of some discretionary powers to waive fees in cases of severe hardship as part of the concessionary framework and would bring back recommendations to Council.

Members welcomed the framework approach but noted the need to remain mindful of potential consequences of raising charges, such as reduction in use of some services.

Decision The Council agreed:- 1. to endorse the proposal to develop a cost based framework approach to setting

Council Fees and Charges in future; 2. to receive further reports as work progressed. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive on behalf of the Council Management Team dated 28 May 2010, submitted).


PUBLIC CONVENIENCES – SERVICE REVIEW A report by the Chief Executive, on behalf of the Council’s Management Team, provided an overview of the public convenience service as currently provided by the Council and made recommendations to change service provision to match the needs of local communities, improving overall service provision and reducing costs. The Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management highlighted that the method of service, particularly in the rural areas, required significant change and that failure to change would mean that a poor standard of service was all that could be achieved within the resources available now and likely to be available in the future, recognising the need to reduce costs as available budget reduced. The report formed part of a wider review of the utilisation of assets by the Council, which was being undertaken as one of the major budget workstreams. The report recommended that a number of the Council owned public conveniences should be closed and replaced by Comfort Partnership Schemes where there was sufficient demand and where opportunities existed. A reduction in the number of public conveniences owned and operated would then allow the budgets available for cleaning and maintenance to be used more effectively. It was noted that there were no public toilets in Stirling Road, Drymen as stated in Appendix A to the submitted report.

Members noted the level of goodwill in the community to support the Comfort Partnership Schemes. It was also noted that account should be taken of opening hours of the Council’s own buildings, which might not be accessible on a seven day basis. The need for careful consideration was stressed where facilities were likely to be used by children. Members highlighted the need for facilities in tourist areas and that it was important for these to be in a good condition.


1. that the public convenience at Station Road, Stirling be closed at the end of the current tourist season (October 2010) due to lack of demand/already existing suitable alternative;

2. that the Assets, Property & Facilities Management Service seek to introduce

Comfort Partnership Schemes to replace the public conveniences listed in Appendix A to the submitted report, thus allowing for their closure from the end of October 2010 onwards;

3. that the Assets, Property & Facilities Management Service engage with

communities where Council owned public conveniences would still operate with a view to encouraging local keyholding where a desire for extended opening hours existed;

4. to instruct Assets, Property & Facilities Management Services to consult with

local communities on proposed changes to service provision as detailed in decisions (1) to (3) above;

5. to agree to a four week closure of public conveniences (non heated), during the

mid December to mid January period, to alleviate the possibility of bursts; 6. that a further report be brought back to Council in early 2011 updating on

progress made against decisions (1) to (3) above. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive on behalf of the Council Management Team dated 15 June 2010, submitted).

SC570 GENERAL SERVICES CAPITAL PROGRAMME REVIEW

At its meeting on 11 February 2010, Council agreed to undertake a review of the General Services Capital Programme during 2010/11, with a report being made back to Council in June 2010. Council agreed that the Finance Review Group should oversee the review. The Finance Review Group discussed the Capital Programme review in outline at its meeting on 1 April 2010 and in more detail on 20 May 2010. The Finance Review Group acknowledged that the work involved in undertaking a comprehensive review of the General Services Capital Programme was extensive, and that a final report recommending a revised programme would not be possible by June 2010.

A report by the Chief Executive on behalf of the Council’s Management Team set out the process for undertaking the review agreed with the Finance Review Group and the timescale for its completion. The report also set out the criteria against which it was recommended capital investment proposals were prioritised. The Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) expressed the commitment of the Council’s Management Team to review the priorities as set out in the report. The Head of Finance & Procurement acknowledged that over-programming had been an issue in the past and it was important for programming of resources to be tightened. Discussions would be progressed with Portfolio Holders and Working Groups to the Finance Review Group, on which all parties were represented. Final decisions would be taken by full Council.


1. to approve the process recommended by the Finance Review Group for undertaking the review of the General Services Capital Programme;

2. the prioritisation criteria set out in Paragraph 3.19 of the submitted report; 3. to receive a report setting out a prioritised long list of capital investment

requirements at its meeting on 7 October 2010, and thereafter confirm the details of the 5 year General Services Capital Programme from 2011/12 at its meeting in February 2011.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive on behalf of the Council Management Team dated 8 June 2010, submitted).

SC571 GENERAL SERVICES CAPITAL PROGRAMME – FINAL OUTTURN 2009/10

The Head of Finance & Procurement introduced his report which set out the final outturn for the General Services Capital Programme for 2009/10.

For the total programme overall, expenditure was £21.962m, representing an underspend of £2.992m against a full year programme of £24.954m. This represented a £1.299m increase in the underspend reported in February 2010, details of which were outlined in Appendices 1 and 2 to the submitted report.

For the core programme, expenditure was £13.296m, representing an underspend of £1.627m against a full year programme of £14.923m.

For the non-core programme – ringfenced funded projects and projects funded via approved additional borrowing – expenditure was £8.666m, representing an underspend of £1.365m against a full year programme of £10.031m.

Appendices 1 to 3 to the report set out the programme expenditure and resources and the main variances were commented on further in the report. Appendices 2 and 4 also detailed the proposed carry forward of Capital Programme budgets to 2010/11 based on a review of the project overspends, underspends and slippages.

Decision The Council agreed:- 1. to note the General Services Capital Programme outturn position for 2009/10; 2. to approve the proposed carry forward of project slippages into 2010/11. (Reference: Report by Head of Finance & Procurement dated 1 June 2010, submitted).

SC572 GENERAL FUND REVENUE BUDGET – FINAL OUTTURN 2009/10

A report by the Head of Finance & Procurement provided details of the 2009/10 General Fund Revenue Budget final outturn position. Near Final Outturn figures were provided to the Finance Review Group meeting on 20 May 2010. The Head of Service advised that balances at the end of the financial year would be £6.452m, being 3% of total General Fund budget for 2010/11, and after taking account of £2.9m to be released from balances to fund the first year costs of implementing budget savings from the Diagnostics project. Services were reporting an aggregate net underspend of £0.57m against budget with corporate areas of the budget also showing net savings. All four reported STO activities achieved a statutory surplus in 2009/10. The reported outturn was expected to represent the final position for 2009/10, although the figures remained subject to audit. All Services were either within or close to budget with the exception of Education, Roads and Social Care. Education had made provision for certain bad debts arising from the Balfron High School operator (Jarvis) going into administration. Roads incurred significant additional costs from the impact of the severe Winter weather conditions, and Social Care had managed to significantly pull back previously reported overspends in a number of areas. The Council agreed at its meeting on 10 December 2009 to suspend Service budget carry forwards under the Scheme of Devolved Budget Management for 2009/10. A sum of £3.94m had been provided for in the accounts to meet estimated remaining settlement costs arising from equal pay claims. During 2009/10, final settlement payments of £2m were made to female manual workers. The remaining equal pay provision allowed for 100% of the estimated claims liability from male manual workers, together with potential claims arising from the Redcar & Cleveland Borough Council v Bainbridge case which examined the issue of employee cash conservation arrangements.


1. to note the outturn position and that balances available at 31 March 2010 would be £6.452m (3% of 2010/11 budget) after taking account of a sum of £2.9m to fund the first year costs of implementing budget savings from the Diagnostics project.

2. to note the previous decision to suspend Service budget carry forwards under the

Scheme of Devolved Budget Management for 2009/10. (Reference: Report by Head of Finance & Procurement dated 15 June 2010, submitted).

SC573 STIRLING COUNCIL DRAFT ACCOUNTS 2009/10

Stirling Council’s Draft Accounts for the year to 31 March 2010 had been prepared for audit. Presentation of the Draft Accounts to the Council was in accordance with the Local Authority Accounts (Scotland) Regulations 1985 which required them to be laid before the Council and submitted to the Controller of Audit by the statutory deadline of 30 June 2010. Copies of the Draft Accounts had been placed in the Members Lounge for any Member wishing to inspect them. A report by the Head of Finance & Procurement outlined the key features of the financial position displayed in the 2009/10 Draft Accounts, incorporating a brief overview of the final outturns for General Fund, Significant Trading Operations (STOs) and the General Services Capital Programme. The Head of Service advised that more detailed reports on General Fund and Housing Revenue Account (HRA) outturns were included elsewhere on the Council agenda. The draft accounts showed the Council ending the year with General Fund balances of £6.452m, representing 3% of the 2010/11 budget. Although the reported outturn was expected to represent the final position for 2009/10, the figures remained subject to audit. Members congratulated the Council’s Management Team on the significant increase in the balance position.


1. to note the Draft Accounts for 2009/10 which had been prepared in accordance with the Local Authority Accounts (Scotland) Regulations 1985, and that these would be submitted to the Controller of Audit by the statutory deadline of 30 June 2010;

2. to note that balances available at 31 March 2010 would be £6.452m (3% of

2010/11 budget); 3. to note the position in terms of the Council’s share of the net pension liability of

the Local Government Pension Scheme;

4. to note that the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) transition had

already begun in the 2009/10 financial statements, with local authorities being required to comply with IFRS requirements for PFI/PPP schemes;

5. to note the requirement for the Council to fully convert to financial reporting under

International Financial Reporting Standards from 2010/11 and beyond. (Reference: Report by Head of Finance & Procurement dated 15 June 2010, submitted).

SC574 TREASURY MANAGEMENT PERFORMANCE 2009/10 AND STRATEGY 2010/11

A report by the Head of Finance & Procurement provided details of the 2009/10 Treasury Management performance and presented the actual Prudential Indicators for this period, which were detailed in Appendix 1 to the report. The Head of Service advised that, in accordance with the approved Strategy for 2009/10, Treasury Management activity during the year maintained the Council’s loan portfolio on a strong, low-risk, long-term basis with due consideration of budget requirements to reduce the cost of debt. Prudent cash flow management with ongoing short-term investment of cash surpluses, together with no requirement to undertake new long term borrowing, resulted in a loans fund pooled rate of interest of 5.740% (6.365% in 2008/09) and savings against loan charges budgets of £0.997m for General Services and £0.461m for the Housing Revenue Account. The Local Government Investments (Scotland) Regulations 2010 came into force on 1 April 2010. As a result, elements of the Treasury Management Strategy for 2010/11 previously approved by the Council would need to be revised to take into account the new requirements of these regulations.


1. to note the Treasury Management Performance, including Prudential Indicators, for 2009/10, as detailed in Appendix 1 to the submitted report;

2. to note the implementation of the new Local Government Investments (Scotland) Regulations 2010 and approve the revisions to the Council’s Annual Investment Strategy, as detailed in the report and appendices;

3. to note the intention to provide training for Elected Members on Treasury Management given the advent of the new Investment Regulations;

4. to note the existing contract with the Council’s external Treasury Advisors expired at the end of March 2010.

(Reference: Report by Head of Finance & Procurement dated 11 June 2010, submitted).

SC575 HOUSING REVENUE ACCOUNT AND HOUSING INVESTMENT PROGRAMME FINAL OUTTURN 2009/10

A report by the Head of Housing advised that the final outturn of the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) for 2009/10 showed expenditure of £16.487M against the original budget of £17.638M. This was largely due to the decision to move the Homeless service on to a full cost recovery model and remove these costs from the HRA account. The net position of the HRA was a balanced outturn as had been budgeted. The level of balances retained on the HRA had remained at the opening position of £0.424M. This was lower than had been set in the budget but was now more in line with the recommended 2.5% of gross spend. The Head of Service asked Council to note that these figures were the final outturn of the account although they were still subject to audit confirmation. The 2009/10 Housing Investment Programme budget was set at £8.954M. The actual outturn was £8.950M. This budget was provided through capital receipts from Right to Buy (RTB) house sales, revenue (CFCR), grants and Prudential Borrowing. The programme was made up of elements funded from both capital and revenue income streams. The Investment Programme included some works which did not qualify as capital under the relevant accounting rules. These were included in the Investment Programme but would not be treated as capital expenditure on the ledger. Additional funds became available during the year from increases in capital financed from current revenue (CFCR), house sales, government grants and recharges to owners for work to their homes. The Council also made a number of specific spending decisions during the year relating in particular to the purchase of property to provide homeless temporary accommodation. Some significant areas of expenditure did not progress as planned. These variations were explained throughout the report. The result of these changes had resulted in the level of new borrowing being £1.052M below budget. However, the outcomes from the Investment Programme in respect of improving the housing stock and meeting the Scottish Housing Quality Standard was as planned.


1. to note that the out-turn position of the Housing Revenue Account was a balanced spend as per the budget;

2. to note that year end retained balances were £0.424 million, equating to 2.57% of net expenditure;

3. to note that the Investment Programme objectives for improving the stock were achieved and was £0.004 million below budget;

4. to note that the resulting borrowing requirement was £2.553 million, which was

£1.052 million under budget. (Reference: Report by Head of Housing dated 24 June 2010, submitted).

SC576 REVIEW OF SCHOOL TRANSPORT ARRANGEMENTS

At its meeting on 25 June 2009, Council instructed officers to undertake a comprehensive review of school transport. This had been raised in relation to the impact of the decision to change the distance entitlements in June 2006. The Head of Education introduced her report, which advised that a survey of parents’ views on school transport had been undertaken, and approximately 400 responses were received. The majority wished the current distance criteria to be reduced from three miles to two miles. Since St Modan’s High School moved to its current site in August 2008, there had been transitional arrangements in place to enable children living more than two miles from the school to access free transport. The report recommended changing the policy for children in all schools to give them the same access to free transport as children attending St Modan’s High School. In response to a question, the Interim Education Business Manager outlined the predicted savings. A question was raised as to whether consideration had been given to the implications of retaining the current policy for younger children. The Manager advised that the majority would be eligible for transport if the policy was changed to less than two miles and this could not be sustained within budgets. Councillor Lambie, Portfolio Holder for Education, commended the Service on the report.


1. to approve the recommendation to reduce home to school distance criteria from 3 miles to 2 miles for all pupils aged 8 and above, attending either a primary or secondary school in the Stirling Council area;

2. to note ongoing work to utilise the public transport network where this was

possible to meet school transport demands. (Reference: Report by Head of Education dated 4 June 2010, submitted).

SC577 NHS FORTH VALLEY COMMUNITY HEALTH PARTNERSHIPS REVISED

MANAGEMENT ARRANGEMENTS

The three Forth Valley Community Health Partnerships (CHPs) were established on 1 April 2005 under the NHS Reform (Scotland) Act 2004 and had been responsible for the planning, development and provision of services within the area they served. New arrangements had been agreed with each Local Authority to improve delivery of the objectives of the CHPs, improve integration across organisational boundaries and between primary and secondary care for all client groups, and enhance opportunities to improve health.

The Assistant Chief Executive (Care, Health & Wellbeing) introduced a report by the Chief Executive which sought approval, in principle, to revise the existing Community Health Partnership (CHP) Committee and management arrangements, as set out in an Appendix to the submitted report. The Membership of the CHP Committee would be an Elected Member or officer from the local authority. Stirling Council currently had two political representatives and two officers in attendance. Each CHP had the right to accept local amendments to the arrangements. Council was requested to consider whether the current representation should remain, or whether Stirling should be represented by one Elected Member and one officer.

It was agreed that one of the representatives be the political representative sitting on the Health Board, namely Councillor Scott Farmer. It was further agreed that the second member be an Opposition Member with the Health, Care and Wellbeing portfolio. Councillor McChord, seconded by Councillor O’Brien, nominated Councillor John Hendry. Councillor Benny, seconded by Councillor Campbell, nominated Councillor Tony Ffinch. Council agreed that the vote would be by show of hands. Voting was as follows:- Councillor John Hendry 8 votes Councillor Tony Ffinch 12 votes Decision The Council agreed:-

1. to approve the changes to the Community Health Partnership (CHP) sub committee arrangements;

2. to approve the political and management arrangements for Stirling Council as noted in Appendix A of the NHS Forth Valley report attached as Appendix 1 to the submitted report;

3. that the representatives from Stirling Council on the CHP be the political representative sitting on the Health Board, namely Councillor Scott Farmer; one opposition Member with the Health, Care and Wellbeing portfolio, namely Councillor Tony Ffinch; the Head of Social Care and the Assistant Chief Executive for Health, Care and Wellbeing when appropriate.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 27 April 2010, submitted).

SC578 CARBON REDUCTION COMMITMENT – REGISTRATION FOR STIRLING

COUNCIL

A report by the Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management provided background on the Carbon Reduction Commitment Scheme, its workings and timescales, along with implications for the Council. The Head of Service advised that the Carbon Reduction Commitment Energy Efficiency Scheme was a new mandatory emissions trading scheme for the UK that aimed to reduce CO2 emissions through energy efficiency.

Carbon Reduction Commitment was a UK wide scheme and the Environment Agency would undertake the role of scheme administration and selling allowances. In Scotland, the Scheme would be audited by the Regulator, the Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) which was also responsible for taking enforcement action.

The Scheme applied to organisations that were larger users of electricity (more than 6,000MWh per year), supplied by half hourly meters (HHM) and aimed to encourage participating organisations to monitor their energy use and purchase allowances from the Government for each CO2 they emitted. The more CO2 an organisation emitted, the more allowances it had to purchase. This effectively provided a direct incentive for organisations to reduce their energy use emissions.

Each year, the Carbon Reduction Commitment Scheme would require participating organisations to purchase and submit sufficient allowances to meet their annual emissions covered by the scheme. From April 2013, allowances would be auctioned by the Government, with fewer available each year in an attempt to ensure that organisations reduced their emissions.

At the end of 2010/11, the Council must purchase and surrender allowances equivalent to its emissions during the past year. The Government would publish a performance league table showing the comparative performance of all organisations reducing emissions. The position on the table would affect the level of bonus or penalty received.

The Council made an information disclosure on its energy consumption during 2009 and it had been confirmed that the Council qualified for the Scheme. The next step for the Council was to register for Carbon Reduction Commitment, which effectively started in April 2010.

In order for the Council to register by 30 September 2010, a £950 registration fee and £1290 per annum annual subsistence charge must be paid. At registration, the Council was required to:-

• nominate a number of individuals to act as key points of contact – the registrant, a senior officer contact, a primary contact and a secondary contact;

• a list of its HHM and the amount of electricity supplied to the Council; • detailed information about the Council

Thereafter anti money laundering checks would carried out and a compliance account opened where the Council could trade allowances. Members suggested that development of a woodland strategy would make a significant contribution towards carbon catch-up.

In response to a question, the Head of Service undertook to clarify whether the Council’s two electrical generating units were counted. The report recommended that the registrant, primary and secondary contacts were officers from Strategic Asset Management, who would oversee the day to day running of the Scheme and that the Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) should fulfil the role of senior officer contact as she was also responsible for the Council’s Carbon Management Plan.

Following registration, data would require to be prepared in order to produce an action plan.

A further report would be brought back to Council on the Council’s performance, highlighting details of the initial footprint submission and action plan and thereafter in terms of the annual reports on the Scheme. The Executive would receive future reports at key stages in the process. Further details of timescales were provided in Appendix 1 to the submitted report. Appendix 2 summarised the roles and responsibilities of various carbon reduction commitment contacts.


1. to note the contents of the submitted report; 2. that the registrant, primary and secondary contacts be officers from Strategic

Asset Management and that the Assistant Chief Executive (Sustainability, Economy & Environment) fulfil the role of senior officer contact;

3. to note that a further report would be submitted to Council on performance; 4. that future reports be made to the Executive at key stages in the process. (Reference: Report by Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management dated 28 May 2010, submitted).

SC579 WASTE SERVICES - SINGLE INTEGRATED OPERATIONAL FACILITY AT

LOWER POLMAISE

The Council continued to work towards more sustainable, efficient and cost effective waste management practices, with a focus on meeting demanding future recycling and landfill diversion targets, as set by the Scottish Government's 'Zero Waste' Management Plan, and the Council's Single Outcome Agreement. A report by the Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste advised that Waste Services currently operated from five separate locations, which was inefficient and expensive. The current depot infrastructure was aging and not fit-for-purpose, and there were significant health and safety risks associated with vehicle congestion at Springkerse Depot Complex.

On 4 February 2010, the Executive agreed in principle to the development of an integrated operating centre for Waste Services at Lower Polmaise, subject to the preparation of a satisfactory business case and financial model. The Head of Service advised that this would enable the co-location of all Waste Services' recycling and waste collection, treatment and disposal operations at a single, modern and purpose built facility, thus enabling essential management, operational and financial benefits in addition to greater efficiency, flexibility and future capacity building. The Household Waste Recycling Centres at Balfron, Callander and Lower Polmaise and local ‘bring sites’ throughout the Council area would be unaffected, and remain for use by the public. The report and accompanying appendices provided the project business case illustrating the financial viability of the proposal through a cost-benefit analysis with estimated costs, funding arrangements and timescales. In response to a question from Councillor Brown, the Head of Service confirmed that land purchase was included in the overall cost of the facility as set out in the business plan.


1. to note the operational difficulties, constraints and inefficiencies of operating recycling and waste collection and transfer services from five separate locations;

2. to note the justification and operational, managerial and financial benefits of a

single integrated operational facility for Waste Services; 3. to approve the business case and financial model for the development of the

operational facility at Lower Polmaise, which showed a net saving of £1.147M to the Council over 30 years (as summarised at Paragraph 4.11 and illustrated at Appendix 2 of the submitted report);

4. to approve funding of £3.9M for the operational facility through the use of new

Prudential Borrowing of £3.07M over 30 years, plus committing £0.83M of accumulated Zero Waste funding;

5. to authorise the progression of the project to detailed design, tendering, and

construction, in accordance with the programme outlined at Paragraph 3.28 of the submitted report.

(Reference: Report by Head of Planning, Regulation & Waste dated 15 June 2010, submitted).

SC580 RENT ARREARS INDEPENDENT ADVICE PILOT- OUTCOMES

On 11 March 2010, the Council agreed a set of detailed criteria for the use of evictions as a last resort for tenants who were clearly and wilfully refusing to pay rent. A report by the Head of Housing advised that the introduction of this new policy had been suspended pending the outcome of a pilot initiative with Shelter (Scotland) to contact ten tenants with high levels of arrears who had withdrawn from contact and co-operation with housing staff.

The Head of Service advised that the purpose of the pilot was to attempt to draw these tenants back into discussion with the Council about their arrears and to ensure that they had access to independent advice on their housing circumstances and debt issues. It had been proposed that the results be reported to the Housing Advisory Group on 20 April and to the Executive on 20 May 2010. The results of the pilot were not, however, available to meet this timetable. As a result, details were submitted to the Housing Advisory Group on 18 June 2010 and were being reported directly to Council. The pilot ran from late March to mid April 2010 and was reported back to Stirling Council in early May. The pilot involved a small number of Advisors from Shelter (Scotland) making contact with the tenants through a number of visits. As a result of contact from Shelter three of the tenants had now made some payment, however only two had actually reduced their overall level of arrears. One of the ten made no contact with Shelter at all. The debt owed by eight of those involved had continued to rise. Whilst Shelter’s work had not resulted in any significant change in the attitude or behaviour of most of the tenants, one of those contacted had re-engaged and had paid regularly over the past two months. It was clear that providing independent advice and support could work for some tenants. In the light of this it was proposed to continue the pilot for a further year pending a fuller evaluation and formal tendering of the project from April 2011. The Council was asked to note the outcome of the pilot and agree that the revised approach to evictions agreed on 11 March 2010 should now be introduced. Councillor MacPherson, Portfolio Holder for Housing, recorded thanks to Shelter for its work. He paid tribute to the Service for actioning the new policy and reiterated that eviction was a last resort, to be taken only when all other avenues had been exhausted. Work was continuing to develop dialogue with the voluntary sector to provide advice to tenants. The Head of Housing responded to a number of questions put by Members, as follows. Members asked whether there were any data protection implications. It was advised that Shelter had raised a similar question and this would be included as part of the contractual arrangement and through a registration process. In response to a further question, it was confirmed that a fee of £8.5K would be paid to Shelter, covering around 30 cases and including collection rates. Members considered why Shelter had achieved a higher success in contacting tenants. It was suggested that Council Housing Officers were more visible and Shelter had carried out visits at varied times throughout the day/early evening. The Head of Housing responded to a number of questions in relation to the level of arrears and the need to consider the issue in context of the value of early intervention and a review of Advice Services.


1. to note the outcomes from the pilot project run with Shelter (Scotland) to support tenants with high arrears;

2. that the pilot be extended for a further year pending a fuller assessment and

tendering of the service;

3. to note that the changes to the Rent Arrears Policy agreed by Council on 11 March 2010 would now be implemented.

(Reference: Report by Head of Housing dated 24 June 2010, submitted).

SC581 NEW COUNCIL HOUSE BUILDING PROGRAMME - PROPERTY ACQUISITION

At its meeting on 29 October 2009 the Council approved the acquisition of 16 homes, off the shelf, from Freedom Homes (Stirling) Ltd at the former St. Modan’s School site at a price to be agreed by the Head of Finance & Procurement and the Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management. A report by the Head of Housing advised that negotiations to conclude this deal were now at an advanced stage, however the number of homes now being considered was 18. In addition, the site was previously owned by the Council and was sold subject to a number of conditions. In light of this, some further authorisation from Council was now sought in order that the acquisition could be progressed in a manner which ensured that the Council’s position in respect of the original land sale (the Surplus Sites Agreement) was fully protected. In response to a question from a Member, the Head of Housing gave an assurance that the necessary legalities would be in place to safeguard the Council’s position.


1. to the acquisition of two additional properties to make a total of 18 homes, off the shelf, from Freedom Homes (Stirling) Ltd at the former St. Modan’s School site at a price to be agreed by the Head of Finance & Procurement and the Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management;

2. to the departure from the terms of the Surplus Sites Agreement on this occasion

only and to instruct the Head of Housing to ensure that this departure be made without prejudice to the Council's rights under that Agreement in respect of all other sales from all sites covered by it.

(Reference: Report by Head of Housing dated 15 June 2010, submitted).

SC582 MOTIONS IN TERMS OF STANDING ORDER 16 a) Community Payback Orders

“Council notes the implementation of the new Community Payback Orders by the Scottish Government. Council notes that there is no national scheme for enhancing the visibility of community payback orders, although some work has been undertaken by the Criminal Justice Authority in this regard. Council notes the successful publicity for the Council’s criminal justice team during the winter when offenders were put to work supplementing the winter maintenance teams. Council believes that in order for community sentencing to work it is vital that it achieves public support. Without visible identification of offenders during their sentence it is unlikely that this will be achieved. Council resolves that where offenders are working outside on environmental works they will wear clothing that clearly identifies them as offenders undertaking community work.” Moved by Councillor Neil Benny, seconded by Councillor Alistair Berrill Prior to the Meeting, Elected Members had received supplementary information from officers on the subject of the Motion. This is attached at Appendix 4 to these Minutes. Councillor McChord questioned the competency of the Motion, given that it referred to services provided by another Authority. The Head of Governance confirmed that the Motion was competent. Councillor Houston, seconded by Councillor Farmer, moved that the question be put to the vote. On a show of hands, 12 Members voted in favour and Council moved to the vote. On the roll being called, the Members present voted as follows:- For the Motion (3) Councillor Neil Benny Councillor Alistair Berrill Councillor Tony Ffinch Against the Motion (17) Councillor Margaret Brisley Councillor Ian Brown Councillor Scott Farmer Councillor Colin Finlay Councillor David Goss Councillor Graham Houston Councillor Graham Lambie Councillor Alasdair MacPherson

Councillor Corrie McChord Councillor Colin O’Brien Councillor Paul Owens Councillor Steven Paterson Councillor Graham Reed Councillor Andrew Simpson Depute Convener Jim Thomson Councillor Violet Weir Provost Fergus Wood

Not Voting (1) Councillor Callum Campbell Decision The Motion fell by 3 votes to 17, with 1 Member Not Voting.

b) Council Events

“Currently, Portfolio Holders of the Council Administration are frequently involved with publicising various actions by the Council. However, as a Minority Administration, this Council should include other Party representatives at such events. Therefore, this Council resolves to extend the Invitation List to include the appropriate spokesperson from each of the non-administration Political Groups for all events and photo-shoots held to publicise the work and actions of the Council.” Moved by Councillor Graham Reed, seconded by Councillor Tony Ffinch. Prior to the Meeting, Elected Members had received supplementary information from officers on the subject of the Motion. This is attached at Appendix 4 to these Minutes. Decision The Motion was unanimously approved without the need for a roll call vote and accordingly, Council resolved to extend the Invitation List for Council Events to include the appropriate spokesperson from each of the non-administration Political Groups for all events and photo-shoots held to publicise the work and actions of the Council.

c) Quakerfield

“Council notes that an open day was held in 2008 in Bannockburn as part of a Planning for Real Exercise. The findings from this consultation were that although the community supported housing, in particular housing for the elderly and disabled, they wished to retain the green space at Quakerfield. An open day is planned to put proposals to the community for housing on this site. Alternative sites put forward by the community are to be discussed and all sites to be evaluated against the criteria for housing of this type. The community believe that the SNP Administration is not genuine about meaningful consultation with communities.

Council therefore resolves to support the community on this issue. If the results of this open day are that the community wish to retain this area as green space, an alternative site will be pursued in the Bannockburn area as a matter of urgency to ensure the investment is not lost to the Bannockburn area – the results to be presented to the Housing Advisory Group and to the Council Executive at the earliest opportunity to allow the scheme to be progressed.” Moved by Councillor Margaret Brisley, seconded by Councillor Violet Weir. Prior to the Meeting, Elected Members had received supplementary information from officers on the subject of the Motion. This is attached at Appendix 4 to these Minutes. On the roll being called, the Members present voted as follows:- For the Motion (14) Councillor Neil Benny Councillor Alistair Berrill Councillor Margaret Brisley Councillor Ian Brown Councillor Callum Campbell Councillor Tony Ffinch Councillor Colin Finlay Councillor David Goss Councillor Corrie McChord Councillor Colin O’Brien Councillor Paul Owens Councillor Graham Reed Councillor Andrew Simpson Councillor Violet Weir Against the Motion (7) Councillor Scott Farmer Councillor Graham Houston Councillor Graham Lambie Councillor Alasdair MacPherson Councillor Steven Paterson Councillor Jim Thomson Provost Fergus Wood Decision The Motion was carried by 14 votes to 7 and accordingly:- Council noted that an open day was held in 2008 in Bannockburn as part of a Planning for Real Exercise. The findings from this consultation were that although the community supported housing, in particular housing for the elderly and disabled, they wished to retain the green space at Quakerfield. An open day was planned to put proposals to the community for housing on

this site. Alternative sites put forward by the community were to be discussed and all sites to be evaluated against the criteria for housing of this type. The community believed that the SNP Administration was not genuine about meaningful consultation with communities. Council therefore resolved to support the community on this issue. If the results of this open day were that the community wish to retain this area as green space, an alternative site would be pursued in the Bannockburn area as a matter of urgency to ensure the investment is not lost to the Bannockburn area – the results to be presented to the Housing Advisory Group and to the Council Executive at the earliest opportunity to allow the scheme to be progressed.

Councillor Colin O’Brien left the Meeting at this point.

The Council resolved under Section 50A(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 that the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involved the disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraphs 9, 8 and 6 & 9 of Part 1 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973.

SC583 URGENT ITEM BALFRON SCHOOL CAMPUS – PFI AGREEMENT

At the end of March 2010 Jarvis plc, the parent company of Balfron School Services, the company with whom the Council had entered into the Balfron PFI Agreement, went into administration. The administrator quickly approached the Council regarding an offer from a new company to take over both the PFI contract and the facilities management (FM) sub contract.

A report by the Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management advised that over the last three months the Council had been considering its options. Some reservations had yet to be fully resolved regarding the new proposal, concerning the standard of service being offered, and the ability of the company to provide some of the contractual protections to which the Council was entitled under the original PFI Agreement.

The Head of Service outlined the Council’s contractual position as a result of Jarvis plc going into administration. The Council was continuing to explore options with the Scottish Government.

The Administrators were indicating a desire to wind down their active involvement with the project from the end of June, which could mean a reduction in the standard of service provided. Urgent discussions were therefore ongoing with the Scottish Government and with Jarvis’s Administrators and the proposed new provider regarding the Council’s options.

The Head of Service provided clarification on a number of points raised by Members relating to the process, options available to the Council, reservations, any implications in terms of local playing support and discussions with the Scottish Government.

/forms/request.htm

The report proposed that authority be delegated to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader and Depute Leader, to progress negotiations with the various parties.

Councillor Reed suggested that an Opposition Member be included in the consultations. Councillor Houston confirmed he had no objection to this.

Decision

The Council agreed:-

1. to note the complex issues involved in resolving the contractual arrangements for Balfron Schools Campus and that urgent action might be required during the summer recess;

2. to delegate authority to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Leader and Depute Leader and a relevant Member of the Opposition, to progress negotiations with the various parties to a conclusion based on the following key parameters:-

(a) that the standard of services provided to the schools on the Balfron Campus be fully protected;

(b) that full cognisance be taken of the financial impact of the outcome of negotiations, with the aim of ensuring that the Council protected and preserved existing Level Playing Field Support, while at the same time ensuring that the solution provided the best value possible to the Council.

(Reference: Report by Chief Executive dated 24 June 2010, submitted). SC584 PROPOSED REFURBISHMENT OF COWIE PRIMARY SCHOOL (FINAL PHASE)

CONTRACT NO CAM01962 - REQUEST FOR DELEGATED AUTHORITY The School Estate Management Plan 2004, identified a number of “priority primary schools” within the school estate that required capital funding to primarily address issues of condition, sufficiency and suitability. The priority primary school list was updated and approved by Council in 2007. Cowie Primary School was one of the remaining priority primary schools identified and a second and final phase of refurbishment works to this school were planned for 2010/11. A report by the Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management advised that tenders for the works would be issued in August 2010 and in order for work to commence on site in Autumn 2010 the contract would require to be accepted by early October 2010. The Head of Service outlined the estimated overall project cost, including an enabling contract (boiler replacement) which was currently part of a separate Request for Quotation procurement process. Part of the cost would be accommodated within the Assets, Property & Facilities Management Capital Programme for Education in 2010/11 with the balance funded from the 2011/12 programme.

/forms/request.htm

As timescales for tender acceptance might not fit within the Committee consideration process, delegated powers to accept the main Phase 2 contract were now required. Decision The Council agreed to delegate powers to the Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management and the Head of Education, in consultation with the Executive Member with responsibility for the Education Portfolio and the Local Members, to consider the tender report and thereafter accept the contract. (Reference: Report by Head of Assets, Property & Facilities Management dated 10 June 2010, submitted).


ASSET UTILISATION – OFFICE ACCOMMODATION REVIEW

Over the next four years it was anticipated that the Council would require to save £30M from its revenue budget. One of the key budget workstreams identified was asset utilisation, with a savings target of £1M. A report by the Chief Executive, on behalf of the Council Management Team, updated Council on the review of office accommodation, which formed a core element of this workstream. The report identified a number of efficiency options and estimated savings. The Council currently had a significant over-capacity of core office space, across its main sites. A number of opportunities to reduce capacity, and therefore cost, were set out in the report. Decision The Council agreed:-

1. to note the contents of the submitted report; 2. to instruct officers to pursue possible partnering opportunities and to bring back a

progress report to the next Council meeting. (Reference: Report by Chief Executive on behalf of the Council Management Team dated 2 June 2010, submitted).

The Provost declared the meeting closed at 11.10 pm

/forms/request.htm

APPENDIX 1 QUESTION 1 QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR IAN BROWN FOR ANSWER BY THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR EMPOWERMENT & CITIZENSHIP AT THE FULL COUNCIL MEETING TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 24 JUNE 2010. Question “Can the Portfolio Holder for Empowerment & Citizenship please advise Council of the time taken to complete community sentences in the Stirling Council Area?”

Answer With regards to the above query in relation to the time taken to complete community sentences in the Stirling Council Area it should initially be noted that the data recorded for such a question is somewhat limited. The range of community sentences being referenced to is also somewhat limited, as it primarily relates to only Community Service and Probation, and as far as timings are concerned, the time taken to commence onto such orders have been a focus of both local CJA, and national Scottish Government, performance measures, rather than the time taken to complete them. Therefore, with these caveats in mind it should be noted that the performance of Stirling Council Criminal Justice Service is as follows:- Speed and Immediacy – Time taken to commence onto Probation as measured by percentage of initial probation interviews completed within one week of the order being made:- 2009/2010 - 94.91% (figure for 2008/2009 was 82.3%). The percentage figure for the Stirling area in 2009/2010 is the highest within the FFV CJA. 2009/2010 – 164 Probation Orders imposed, average length of Order – was between 16/17 months. The number of successfully completed Probation Orders in 2009/2010 was 65% (figure for 2008/2009 was 58%). The percentage figure for the Stirling area in 2009/2010 is the highest within the FFV CJA. 2009/2010 – 164 Community Service Orders imposed, average length of Order – 143 hours. The number of successfully completed Community Service Orders in 2009/2010 was 69% (figure for 2008/2009 was 66%).

The percentage figure for the Stirling area in 2009/2010 is the second highest within the FFV CJA. In relation to the average hours per week to complete a Community Service Order, in the Stirling area this was 4.33, (figure for 2008/2009 was 4.10). These figures are significantly higher than the average figure within the FFV CJA (3.25). It should also be noted that the figures ordinarily collected to show the length of time etc. of the time taken to complete Community Service Orders is not collected. However, a recent audit undertaken by the Scottish Government showed the following results for the month of November 2009:- Across the FFV CJA 54% of offenders had their post sentence review on the same working day as the order was issued. In Stirling the figure was 81%. Across the FFV CJA 74% of offenders commenced their work placement within 7 working days. In Stirling the figure was 81%. With regards to the average time taken to complete a Community Service Order, for Orders less than 150 hours it took 164 days, a decrease from the previous year’s figure of 231 days. (Stirling was the only area within the FFV CJA to show a decrease in the length of time taken to complete their Order within area of the audit.) It is felt that these figures show that Stirling Criminal Justice Service is responding to the challenge of increasing demands being made in the delivery of community sentences. These figures on the whole give a guide to average times taken etc., but they do not take into account the particular geographical issues that an area like Stirling presents. For example one of our offenders on community service lives 10 miles from the nearest public transport link, therefore, the response times involved in delivering a service to this individual will actually negatively impact on the figures highlighted above. Added to this, it should also be noted that approximately 30% of offenders on community service in the Stirling Area are either in full time education or employment, therefore placements and activities have to be arranged around these other commitments. Finally, it should be noted that in a response given in the Scottish Parliament in May 2010 in relation to Community Service, Stirling Area was highlighted as one of the ‘biggest improvers’ when it came to getting offenders commencing on Community Service within 7 working days. Supplementary Question In the supervision of offenders carrying out work in the community, are you satisfied that we do enough, as well as custodial, in terms of rehabilitation, retraining and passing on of skills? Answer Although this is not within my Portfolio, I have spoken to the Service and wish to thank them for the detailed information provided. As a Councillor, however, I confirm I am satisfied. This type of activity is monitored by the Criminal Justice Authority, of which Councillors

Benny and Owens are members, and I would ask them to forward their reports to Councillor Brown. Councillor Houston, Portfolio Holder for Policy, Strategy & Social Care, reassured Council that rehabilitation formed part of the process. Getting individuals into a regular commitment was beneficial.

QUESTION 2 QUESTION FROM COUNCILLOR COLIN FINLAY FOR ANSWER BY THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR EDUCATION AT THE FULL COUNCIL MEETING TO BE HELD ON THURSDAY 24 JUNE 2010.

Question

"Given the fact, that there are still and even growing feelings of discontent and apprehension surrounding resources for the implementation of the curriculum for excellence in Secondary schools in August., and that these feelings are strongly being voiced by both Parents and Educationalists in schools, as well as Trade Union at national and local levels. With these fears resulting in an imminent ballot of EIS members on industrial action. Does the Portfolio Holder agree with the Education Secretary when he states, that he does not believe strike action would be in the best interests of teachers. How will he tonight, dispel the ever growing mood of dissatisfaction, apprehension and fear to all involved in the education of our children in Stirling?"

Answer A statement from a Scottish Government spokesman regarding this issue is as follows:- "Mr Russell [the Cabinet Secretary for Education] has reiterated that he does not believe strike action would be in the best interests of teachers. "While funding available to the Scottish government - and therefore to local authorities - is under severe pressure, we are providing councils with increasing levels of funding, £35bn for the period 2008-11. "This support comes despite the Scottish budget being cut by Westminster and has enabled councils to continue to increase education budgets during a difficult economic climate." I agree with the position of the Cabinet Secretary. As to the second part of the question, I do not accept the premise. The only ‘dissatisfaction, apprehension and fear’ I would point out is my own over the appalling grammar displayed in the question posed by a teacher currently in employment. Parents should expect teachers to demonstrate a reasonable understanding and application of correct grammar, and I will ask the Head of Education for assurances that the standard of grammar from teachers in Stirling’s schools is higher than that displayed in the question put here. Supplementary Question I would ask the Head of Education to aim higher. I have a genuine concern regarding the switch to the Curriculum for Excellence. Are schools ready?

Answer The Service is on schedule to deliver the Curriculum for Excellence. The Education Service is pleased to report that all schools are confident they are ready to deliver. It is already happening in all schools.

N:\DEMSUPP\NEWDECISIONS\SCOUNCIL\MINUTES\SC20100624.DOC

APPENDIX 2

Stirling Council

Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Strategy 2010-2013 1 Introduction

1.1 The ICT Strategy sets out Stirling Councils approach to the development and delivery of ICT services to support the Council over the next three years. ICT plays a crucial role in ensuring sufficient support is available to the strategic and operational/service delivery functions of the Council as well as enabling change and improvement. The strategy describes how ICT will be adaptable to changing business needs, respond to the changing size of the organisation, be stable and reliable, provide value for money and integrate both within the Council and between Partners.

2 Key Areas of the Strategy

2.1 The strategy is wide-ranging and focuses on three key areas:

• Technology that supports the needs of the Council • Governance that prioritises the right things and delivers benefit • Service delivery that is effective and efficient

3 Technology that supports the needs of the Council

3.1 We will ensure everyone understands the importance of good information in enabling and improving the delivery of service by developing clear links between the management of information and the ICT that supports it using policy where appropriate. This will ensure that information in treated as a key asset and is protected.

3.2 We aim to provide a high quality, consistent customer experience regardless of the channel that is used. We will encourage self-service both by providing up-to-date information that is easy to access and increasing opportunities for interaction. We will achieve this through the continued implementation of the Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system and the expansion of the myStirling portal on the web site and making use of the Scottish National Infrastructure.

3.3 Core information systems are critical to the Councils service delivery. We will ensure that we make the best use of all major applications by raising awareness of the available functionality, keeping systems up to date and ensuring that management information is easily accessible. We will continue to implement key service systems in Social Care, Education and Housing as well as systems used across the Council such as eProcurement and HR that enable improved business processes. We will ensure that systems are effectively integrated and provide tools that enable management information to be readily available and up-to-date.


3.4 We will evaluate the sustainability of the current office suite of software to address the issues of old software versions, cost of upgrades and new functional areas such as collaboration.

3.5 Systems require to be supported by an effective, secure and resilient infrastructure. We will ensure that users of systems only get access to the resources they need by using single sign-on, we will protect data on portable devices (laptops) through encryption software and we will comply with standards where they are required in relation to confidential and sensitive information (GSX).

3.6 We will produce an ICT Asset Management plan that ensures ICT software and hardware is fit-for-purpose and aligns to our Carbon Management initiatives. We will make best use of our hardware assets through the use of virtualisation technologies, which share capacity.

3.7 We will examine how best technology can support mobile and home working, through expanding secure remote access to the Councils information and identifying appropriate devices for connection (e.g. Blackberries).

4 Governance that prioritises the right things and delivers benefit

4.1 We will create clear investment plans for ICT projects and infrastructure. These are essential to achieve consistency and value in the delivery of benefits.

4.2 We will develop a benefits management approach that is used consistently across all ICT projects including the production of business cases that clearly articulate the scope and objectives.

4.3 In order to make best use of ICT within the Council we will develop ICT learning approaches including training, mentoring, project and knowledge sharing.

5 Service delivery that is effective and efficient

5.1 We will adopt standards for the delivery of ICT service (ITIL) to ensure problems are fixed, changes are made effectively, systems are available when needed, there is sufficient capacity and support is provided for business continuity.

5.2 We will create and implement a Supplier management strategy and investigate the further use of national agreements and consortia. All maintenance agreements will be scrutinised using a risk-based approach to ensure best value.

5.3 We will identify opportunities for sharing services with partners and other providers, particularly in relation to specialist services or infrastructure (e.g. Scottish National Infrastructure) where this demonstrates best value.

6 Monitoring

6.1 The progress of the strategy and the prioritisation of developments within the strategy will be monitored as part of the Council’s change programme and be reviewed by the Council Management Team.


7 Lead

7.1 The ICT Strategy’s lead officer is the Business Transformation & Technology Manager.

Mark Tye Business Transformation & Technology Manager - 18 May 2010


APPENDIX 4

MEETING of the STIRLING COUNCIL to be held in the COUNCIL CHAMBERS, OLD VIEWFORTH, STIRLING on THURSDAY 24 JUNE 2010

Motions in terms of Standing Order 16

Information/advice from Officers

a) Community Payback Orders

With regards to this motion a number of points need to be highlighted. Firstly, it should be noted that the new Community Payback Orders will actually only come into effect with the implementation of the Criminal Justice & Licensing Bill, which as it is currently still making its way through the legislative process, will probably mean that Community Payback Orders will not be available as a court disposal in Scotland until mid-December 2010 at the earliest. Added to this, offenders will then have to be sentenced for an offence committed after this date, so then in all likelihood we may not see the introduction of these new Community Payback Orders in any great volume until the first quarter of 2011. However, this should not detract from the issue of the 'visibility' of offenders undertaking community service (unpaid work) in the community, and, as such, work is being undertaken both locally, and nationally, to raise the profile of this work. Locally, efforts have been made by the Stirling Council’s Criminal Justice Service to link in with the council’s own press office, and as a result we have seen a recent increase in our profile within the local press, and has included an item within the Stirling Observer highlighting the work undertaken by offenders in Plean Country Park. As well as engaging with the local press, Stirling Council Criminal Justice Service have also commenced a process of linking in with community councils, and in recent weeks have met with Braehead Community Council in order to not only raise the profile of the work undertaken by offenders, but also to ascertain from the community council what type of work that they would like to see offenders undertake within their own local community. It is proposed that there is now a rolling programme of visits to other community councils with the two-fold intention of increasing the profile of the work undertaken by offenders, as well as to get feedback from these local communities as to the nature of the work they wish to see undertaken by offenders.


Stirling Council Criminal Justice Service agrees with the comment that “ for community sentencing to work it is vital that it achieves public support “, but it is felt that at this time various strategies are already being implemented to raise the profile of the work undertaken by offenders in the community, and when Community Payback Orders become legally established in Scotland other forms of highlighting the work offenders in the community may wish to be re-considered. Bill Eadie Head of Social Care/Chief Social Work Officer 23 June 2010


b) Council Events

It has been normal practice for the Administration of the Council to take the lead role in publicity and promotional events. However, the Council currently operates a system whereby the Provost and four Bailies share responsibility for civic events and this cross party approach could be extended to other publicity and promotional events, if the Council was so minded. A protocol would be required to set out how such an approach would work in practice.


c) Quakerfield

The Council has been working with the local community for a number of months to consider what, if any scope there is to develop a part of the open space at Quakerfield, Bannockburn for up to six bungalows for older people and those with mobility difficulties. When the issue was originally raised with the Community Council it was in the context of a wider proposal to improve the area in front of the Quakerfield shops and the open space around the Empire Bar. Over the past 18 months the Community’s aspirations for the area have developed and now include the option of retaining an element of green space and providing interpretive material relating to the history of Bannockburn and other amenity improvements. These were reflected in a recent unsuccessful bid for Town Centre Development funds to improve the area. The Community have also suggested a number of alternative housing sites to meet the needs of older people in the area. A review of the alternative sites is underway but it is not certain that any of them will be suitable for the particular needs of the intended client group. The initial assessment has already established that none of the alternative sites match the location criteria set out in the published design guidance for social rented housing as fully as Quakerfield. The result of this review and design proposals for the Quakerfield area as a whole will be presented to the community at an open day. A postal survey of local residents will also be carried out to ensure that the whole community has an opportunity to have a say on the matter. It was always the intention that the results of this process would be presented to the Housing Advisory Group along with design details for the bungalows. The Council should, however, be aware of the risks of committing to the development of housing for older people or those with mobility difficulties in the Bannockburn area if no appropriate site can be identified. A second best site will result in second best outcome for tenants.

minutes of meeting of stirling council held in the council...

Documents