Agenda item

Overview & Scrutiny Work Programme and Update

To receive an update from the Scrutiny Officer on progress made with topics on its agreed work programme, training updates and to receive any further information which Members may have requested at a previous meeting.

Minutes:

The DSGOS introduced the item and informed Members that the delays to financial reports previously mentioned would have a significant impact on the Committee’s Work Programme. As a result, the remaining items for July would consist of the Sheringham Leisure Centre Update, the Housing Strategy and potentially an update on the North Walsham Hight Streets and Heritage Action Zone (HAZ) Project. It was noted that Cllr V Holliday had also suggested that she could provide an update on ambulance response times, as Chair of a Parish Working Group monitoring the issue, which would address an additional outstanding Work Programme item. The CE stated that the Customer Services Strategy was also expected to come forward in July.

 

Questions and Discussion

 

       i.          The Chairman noted that whilst NHOSC did monitor ambulance response times, it was done at a county-wide level, whereas as the Coastal Parish Working Group focused specifically on rural areas of the North Norfolk Coast. It was proposed by Cllr A Varley and seconded by Cllr N Housden that an update on ambulance response times be added the Work Programme for the July meeting.

 

      ii.          Cllr S Penfold noted that there was a public consultation taking place in North Walsham regarding the HAZ project, and suggested that a July update would be timely.

 

     iii.          The Chairman referred to limitations placed on remote attendance for Members, and suggested that it appeared to be a disenfranchisement, given that presenting officers were able to attend remotely. The DSGOS replied that the current position following a change in legislation on 7th May, meant that fully hybrid meetings were not yet permitted, and that the legal opinion provided on the current legislation stated that all actively participating Members must attend the meeting in person. It was noted that some flexibility had been granted to allow officers to attend remotely, in order to create more space for Members whilst adhering to social distancing requirements. It was noted that other Councils had interpreted the legislation differently, and if necessary the Committee could ask that the MO reconsider the current position. The CE stated that the current position was in line with the Lawyers in Local Government (LLG) position, and noted that the Council would be responding to the Government consultation on hybrid meetings. It was noted that the current meeting was at capacity adhering to social distancing requirements, and any increase in numbers would be a breach of current legislation. The CE stated that with the extension of social distancing requirements into July, officers were asked to continue working from home where possible.

 

    iv.          Cllr V Gay stated that the current requirements for physical attendance placed unnecessary time constraints on Members that forced some Members to attend remote meetings from the office. The Chairman agreed and raised concerns about why officers could attend remotely, whilst Members were not permitted. The CE stated that if required, he could seek further advice from the MO on whether the legislation could allow further flexibility, but this had to take into account the requirement for legal decisions to be made in person by Members at Committee meetings.

 

      v.          The DSM stated that whilst the current situation was frustrating, the end of the remote meetings legislation had placed significant constraints on the Council’s ability to hold remote Committee meetings. She accepted that in the short term, the legislation would have a negative impact on wider Member engagement. The DSM stated that she would consider the approaches taken by other Councils, but because Overview and Scrutiny was a statutory Committee, legislation required it must meet in person. It was suggested that where possible, running different meetings in varying hybrid formats should be avoided, in order to avoid confusion. The Chairman noted that he was satisfied that officers would seek further legal advice on remote attendance and respond when able.

 

    vi.          Cllr L Withington referred to the current consultation on remote meetings and suggested that the concerns raised should be submitted as part of the Council’s response to the consultation. The DSM replied that she would seek to ensure that the concerns were part of the consultation response, if possible.

 

   vii.          Cllr N Housden referred to the beach huts monitoring and suggested that this should be delayed to allow full summer occupancy levels to be taken into account as part of the report. The DSGOS replied that subsequent to the management restructure, there had been a change in responsibility for the beach huts and chalets, which were now covered by the Estates and Assets Strategy Manager. He added that September had been given as a suggestion as the relevant officer was looking to make changes to the management of the beach huts. The CE noted that the change in management had been aimed to create a more commercial approach to the beach huts and chalets, which had historically been run by the Leisure Service. The DSGOS stated that he would speak to the relevant officer to check whether the report could be delayed, in order to ensure that full summer occupancy figures were included.

 

  viii.          Cllr H Blathwayt noted that physical meetings at another authority had suffered due to social distancing requirements, and stated that strong representations should be made to Government to resolve issues with hybrid meeting limitations, as soon as possible. 

 

RESOLVED

 

1.     To note the Work Programme

 

2.     To request that Cllr V Holliday provides an update on coastal ambulance response times monitoring at the July Committee meeting.

 

ACTIONS

 

1.     Chief Executive and Democratic Services Manager to seek further legal advice on whether non-committee members may attend meetings remotely.

 

 

Supporting documents: