Meeting documents

Apologies for absence were submitted on behalf of Councillors S Bennett, Crook, Foster, Mrs Mary Green, Michael Green, Hanson and Nelson.

Ciouncillor Martin had submitted in advance a personal interest in agenda items 5, 6, 8 and 9, [minute numbers 28, 29, 31 and 32,].as an employee of Lancashire County Council.

?

Councillor K Jones declared a personal interest in item 9? [minute 32] as?an elected governor of the Lancashire Teaching Hospitals Governing Council.

RESOLVED (unanimously) that:

The minutes of the meeting held on 20 May be approved as a correct record and signed by the Mayor subject to the substitution of the word 'against' by the word 'for' in the fourth line of the final paragraph of minute 11 [Report of the Cabinet].

Councillor Martin had submitted in advance a personal interest in this item as an employee of Lancashire County Council.

The Leader commended the report of the meeting of the Cabinet held on 11 June. The report was seconded.

Councillor Titherington enquired whether the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Street Scene could respond to the question he had asked at the Cabinet meeting about whether the successful tenderer for the Worden Park overflow car park paid the Living Wage to its employees and was not involved in employee blacklisting. After some discussion about the current status of the tender and the evaluation criteria used, the cabinet member confirmed that the issues of Living Wage and employee blacklisting were not included in the Council?s tender evaluation criteria.

In response to an observation from Councillor Watts that the Longton Village Improvement Scheme (of which he was in favour) seemed to be pushing back improvements in Bamber Bridge, Councillor P Smith said that this was incorrect and in fact money was in the budget and the area was in the forward plan.

Councillor Clark took the opportunity to thank the Neighbourhoods and Street Scene teams whose sterling work, along with that of local residents, had undoubtedly contributed to Longton having achieved a Best Kept Village award last year.

RESOLVED that:
1) the report be noted (UNANIMOUS)
2) Welfare Reform (UNANIMOUS):
(i) a contract be entered into with the Department of Work and Pensions (to run until the end of March 2015) to provide a Local Support Service designed to assist claimants to access Universal Credit;
(ii) access to Budgeting Services (including pre-Court advice) be provided as part of the agreed contract, and
(iii) all necessary Management Information Data be provided to central government?s Universal Credit Programme Team through the Benefits Service (and other associated services such as Gateway).
3) Worden Park ? Overflow Car Park (YES ? 47) (NO ? 1) (ABSTENTION ? 0):
tender no. 6 in Table 1 be approved for the construction of the overflow car park on Worden Park.
4) Longton Village Improvement Scheme (UNANIMOUS)
(i) the Longton Village Improvement Scheme be approved;
(ii) the allocation of capital funds to create the Longton Village Improvement Scheme described in the report be approved;
(iii) authority be granted under Section 3.4 of the Financial Regulations to incur additional expenditure of ?62,000 to carry out capital works;
(iv) the Director of Regeneration, Leisure and Healthy Communities, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Leisure and Healthy Communities, be authorised to finalise details on the scheme going forward, and
(v) delegated authority be granted to the Director of Regeneration, Leisure and Healthy Communities, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Regeneration, Leisure and Healthy Communities, to award the groundwork contract following the completion of the higher value procurement exercise.

Councillor Martin had submitted in advance a personal interest in this item as an employee of Lancashire County Council.

Councillor Titherington commended the report of the Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 23 June. The report was seconded.

Councillor Titherington took the opportunity to thank Councillor Otter for piloting a dog fouling marking / alert initiative which had proved very successful in reducing the number of dog fouling incidents. He encouraged members to sign up to attend a Health Champions session at the Civic Centre on 17 and 18 September.

Councillor W Bennett commended the report of the Governance Committee meeting held on 25 June. The report was seconded.

Councillor W Bennett thanked the Leader for representing Councillor Robinson at the meeting. He reported that there had been some discussion of the complex new Business Rates Retention Scheme about which more had been explained at a Learning Hour on 8 July and it was hoped that the scheme would bring benefits for this Council in the longer term.

Councillor Martin had submitted in advance a personal interest in this item as an employee of Lancashire County Council.

As vice-chairman of the task group Councillor M Gardner explained that the Scrutiny Committee had reviewed the Planning Service because of the high profile role it played in South Ribble and the impact it had on our local communities, carrying out a rigorous and robust review from the perspective of the customer and individual ward members to assess the level of service and how it could be improved. The task group generally found the planning service to be a good service which worked hard to get the right development in South Ribble. However, there was always room for improvement and the recommendations recognised the importance of engaging more effectively with residents and elected councillors and doing more to make the planning service more user-friendly, formalise some of the key processes and tackle some of the issues with regards Lancashire County Council Highways.

Councillor M Gardner thanked the Cabinet Member, Councillor Cliff Hughes and Chairman of the Planning Committee, Councillor Jon Hesketh for the open way in which they had helped and supported the task group in its review along with the planning team, county council officers and all members of the council who had attended the all-councillor workshop for their valuable contribution. He also thanked all members of the Scrutiny Task Group for all their hard work in conducting the review and coming up with the helpful and forward-looking report.
The report was seconded.

As Cabinet Member for Strategic Planning and Housing, Councillor Hughes thanked the task group for a thorough review. He acknowledged that some of the recommendations were challenging and said that officers were currently assessing their ramifications. As chairman of the Planning Committee, Councillor Hesketh commended the report and said that the outcomes of this assessment would be considered in due course.

Councillor Hughes assured Councillor Harrison that his concern about recommendation 9 would be considered along with any other comments and observations.

Noting the high public profile of the Planning Committee Councillor Pimblett asked for consideration to be given to changing the current political balance to include representation from all parties on the Council.

In summing up, Councillor Titherington thanked members of the task group for the comprehensive review and said that the cabinet member would be happy to receive comments on the report and recommendations. The report was noted.

Councillor Martin had submitted in advance a personal interest in this item as an employee of Lancashire County Council. Councillor K Jones declared a personal interest in this item as an elected governor of the Lancashire Teaching Hospitals Governing Council.

Councillor Titherington presented the report as chairman of the Joint Task Group with Lancashire County Council and thanked all members of the task group and participants for contributing to a report that had been widely supported, including by Public Health England, to which he had had the honour of presenting the report. He concluded by saying that all parties agreed that prevention was better than cure and it was hoped that Healthchecks, where provided, would help to prevent occurrences of the conditions referred to in the report. The report was seconded.

As the member of the Cabinet with responsibility for healthy communities, Councillor P Smith thanked the task group for its review of what was a very complex system with responsibility for provision and commissioning split between different agencies.

In response to a question from Councillor Clark about how the different Clinical Commissioning Group footprints across the borough were taken into account, Councillor Titherington pointed out that the upper tier local authority was responsible for commissioning the Healthcheck service.

The report was noted.

In response to a question from Councillor K Jones about the recent announcement of Chorley Borough Council?s intention to bid for Unitary Authority status and the potential impact on our shared services, the Leader confirmed that as it was such early days detailed discussions had not yet taken place about any potential impact but she did not foresee any. She and the Chorley Borough Council Leader had not discussed the matter. She pointed out that any successful bid would have to have the support of all relevant stakeholders including the county council itself.

Councillor Watts expressed concern about what appeared to be a sub-committee of the Eastern My Neighbourhood Area. The Leader said that she was not aware of such a thing and therefore was not in a position to comment but invited Councillor Watts to speak to her about the matter outside of the meeting. In the meantime she understood that there were some local people who had formed groups but not, as far as she was aware, under the auspices of the My Neighbourhood Area.

In response to a question from Councillor Forrest about the current status of the Council?s twinning arrangements, the Leader confirmed that the borough was twinned with Schleswig Flensburg in Germany. The last official visit there by a group of councillors and officers had been held between 22 and 25 April 2008. In July 2012, Kreispr?sident Mr. Schr?der had visited us for an informal lunch during his private touring holiday. In the course of the discussion over lunch it was agreed that a delegation would be invited to visit to coincide with the Preston Guild celebrations. Unfortunately Kreispr?sident Mr. Schr?der was taken ill around that time and that visit was cancelled at short notice. There were currently no further plans for visits in view of the current economic climate but relations between the two parties remained friendly.

Deputy Leader, Neighbourhoods and Street Scene

In response to a question from Councillor Martin about Hurst Grange Park, Councillor Mullineaux said that the improvement works to paths and drainage were currently out to tender.

Councillor Martin referred to a recent incident when a vehicle had reversed out across a footpath outside the Co-op on Pope Lane in Kingsfold and collided with an elderly lady. He asked if the Cabinet Member could find out who owned the Co-op building and who was responsible for the paved area outside the Co-op and for the parking bay in front of the Co-op. Councillor Mullineaux replied that the parking bay and pavement in question were in private ownership; steps were underway to identify ownership and he would let Councillor Martin know when ownership had been established. Councillor Pimblett said he believed the pavement outside the shop to be owned by the shop and the footway to be owned by the county council.

Councillor Mullineaux welcomed Councillor M Tomlinson?s comment that the wildflower initiative [in 16 stretches of land across the borough] had been very well received by residents and he agreed to pass on congratulations to the relevant teams. Councillor M Tomlinson said he had already spoken to Councillor Ms Bell about the possibility of Leyland My Neighbourhood forum providing some funding for something similar in the future.

Councillor M Tomlinson commended Councillor Otter?s dog fouling monitoring initiative and had been pleased to learn at a Scrutiny Committee meeting that other members could participate. However, he had subsequently been informed that only one member in Leyland could have the spray paint at any one time. Councillor Mullineaux said that he would welcome other members getting involved in this initiative and he would follow this up with the Street Scene team after the meeting.

Councillor Watts thanked the cabinet member for the efforts being made to tidy up the Wesley Street Mill site but raised concerns about mounds of soil which were now pushing back the fence panels of some properties on Stockdale Crescent. He was aware that Mark Gaffney had spoken to the mill owner who had agreed to clean up the site but he urged the Cabinet Member to do what he could to speed things up. Councillor Mullineaux said he fully expected the area to be cleaned up in the next week.

Councillor Heyworth was pleased that an overflow car park was to be constructed on Worden Park and urged the Cabinet Member to write to the football teams to stress that they should use the car parking available in future and not park irresponsibly on-street. Councillor Mullineaux pointed out that the Council had been in regular contact with the football teams about parking issues in the past and would continue to make contact with them as and when necessary.

In response to an observation from Councillor Forrest about resident satisfaction with cleanliness in the borough, Councillor Mullineaux confirmed that he was very proud of the 93% satisfaction rate. Councillor Forrest said that he had been disappointed to find in the course of a recent litter pick that the amount of litter that he had picked appeared to have increased since this time last year.

Finance & Resources

Councillor Patten referred to a discussion at Governance Committee about the amount of slippage on the Capital Programme, including ?400K which had not been spent on the Disabled Facilities Grant scheme (DFG). As the Leader had attended the meeting on Councillor Robinson?s behalf she explained that the slippage on the DFG scheme was due in large part to the parting of ways of Riverside and the Council. New arrangements were now bedding in to deliver the service in house and good progress was being made. The Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources, Councillor Robinson, pointed out that although his portfolio included responsibility for recording, monitoring and reporting of spend, it had no control over the actual spending in other portfolio areas. He said that there were often genuine reasons for slippage and he would continue to keep a close eye on any slippage and report appropriately.

Regeneration, Leisure & Healthy Communities

Councillor Evans referred to the position taken by Councillors P Smith, Rainsbury and Walton at a recent planning committee against a planning application at a location within Site W. He pointed out that they had previously voted in favour of development in Site W by approving the site allocations document at Cabinet and Council in November 2013 and questioned whether they had acted irresponsibly by making statements against the application at the Planning Committee meeting. Councillor Rainsbury pointed out that he had the right as a councillor to speak on behalf of local residents at Planning Committee meetings. Councillor P Smith had spoken of health and well-being issues at the committee as local residents were in great distress about the application in question. As far as he was concerned health and well-being should be a material consideration.

Councillor Prynn asked for an update on plans to regenerate Penwortham South, particularly the Margaret Road Park in Middleforth. Councillor P Smith pointed out that the park did not fall within his portfolio. Works were ongoing in the centre of Penwortham and had been brought forward by 12 months. Councillor Prynn was sorry that the plans were focused on Penwortham North when areas in the south of the area would benefit from regeneration, such as the shop frontages in Kingsfold and Middleforth. Councillor P Smith said that work was concentrated on the Liverpool Road area of Penwortham as this was the district centre. He encouraged Councillor Prynn to make suggestions for improvements to other parts of Penwortham at the Penwortham My Neighbourhood Forum although he did not recall any such suggestions being made there to date.

Councillor S Jones had been saddened to learn of the recent demise of two Leyland businesses and asked if the Cabinet Member could comment on a suggestion that they had had to fold due to ?crippling? business rates. Councillor P Smith said it was always sad when businesses ceased trading but he did not believe that business rates alone would result in a business having to close. He pointed out that the formula for business rates was set by central government in advance and the amount due should never come as a surprise. Government was helping to assist in the guise of the Business Rates Relief scheme. Councillor S Jones urged the Cabinet Member to do what he could to encourage small businesses to come to the town and stay. Councillor P Smith said that the council worked hard to assist and encourage local businesses. Councillor Robinson suggested that the issue of business rates was often a ?red herring?. In his experience businesses did not fail because of business rate obligations but for other reasons such as a lack of business / sales.

Councillor P Smith said he could not comment at this time on a question posed by Councillor Martin about the possible deregulation of taxi licensing but would be happy to follow it up if Councillor Martin put the question in writing after the meeting. Councillor M Tomlinson urged the Cabinet Member to take part in the current consultation as deregulation could put customers at risk.

Shared Services and Corporate Support

Councillor Martin referred to comments he had made at the meeting in March including about access to Councillor Connect. Councillor Hamman replied that the tablets did not allow for certain information to be displayed but access to Councillor Connect was still available via a laptop if Councillor Martin preferred to have use of a laptop.

In response to a question from a member of the public, Councillor Hamman said he would look into whether members of the public could be permitted to access wi-fi in the Council chamber.

Strategic Planning & Housing

Councillor Watts raised a concern about a future planning application by Persimmon Homes to build upwards of 315 houses on land off Brindle Road, Bamber Bridge. As the Ward Councillor, along with Councillor Higgins, he had asked to be kept informed of developments but whilst a Brindle Road Action Group had had two meetings with Planning Officers, he had only been invited to the first one. Councillor Marsh, a member of the Planning Committee but not a ward Councillor for Bamber Bridge East, had attended the second meeting. He asked if the Cabinet Member agreed that the two local councillors should have been informed and said that all members of the Planning Committee should be aware that Cllr. Marsh's actions would prohibit him from commenting at any meeting that involved this Persimmon Application and most certainly would prohibit him from voting on the application when it was presented to the Planning Committee. Councillor Hughes said he was sorry to hear that there may be an issue relating to this future application and he suggested that Councillor Watts should contact the Planning team to discuss it with them.

Councillor Howarth raised a concern about the amount of land that Tesco was currently ?sitting on? (possibly now including the government buildings site at the top of Cop Lane) which in total was rumoured to be sizeable enough to build 15,000 homes on. He asked if the Cabinet Member could arrange for an update to be provided on any discussions that the Council had had with Tesco and whether any business rates were being collected on the buildings currently standing empty, Councillor Hughes said that he shared this concern and agreed to look into the status of the Cop Lane site and feed back to Councillor Howarth.

Responding to a question from Councillor Pimblett about whether planning applicants should be required to outline how they proposed to deal with access across pavements and footways, Councillor Hughes agreed that this might seem logical but he thought that the county council would probably have to issue a bye-law. He agreed to look into this further.

In response to a question from a member of the public, Councillor Hughes was confident that the public would be able to access information from the council about its assets. In terms of ?exempt? items on committee agendas, although advice was provided by officers as to whether they considered that an item should be considered in private it was up to the relevant committee to agree whether this was appropriate or not before discussion of the item commenced.

There were no questions.

In response to an observation from a member of the public, the Leader said that it was up to the Police and Crime Commissioner how he chose to submit his expenses claims.

Notice of the following motion, to be proposed by Councillor M Tomlinson and seconded by Councillor Ms Bell, had been submitted in accordance with Standing Order 9(2).

"This Council commends the work of volunteers in South Ribble who are helping the most vulnerable of our residents by organising Foodbanks. Council notes that the number of Foodbanks in the UK has risen by 400% under this Conservative led Government and that there are now Foodbanks operating in Leyland and Penwortham.

In view of the real hardship being experienced by South Ribble residents, this Council resolves to:
1. engage in a dialogue with both Foodbanks with a view to offering financial support for their future activities
2. ensure that the proposed pilot with the DWP on Welfare Reform includes looking at the timeliness and accuracy of benefit payments, and
3. write to Ian Duncan Smith MP calling for the abolition of the discredited bedroom tax".

In presenting the motion Councillor M Tomlinson said that when he was elected to this Council he had never envisaged a time when significant numbers of South Ribble residents would find themselves in such desperate straits that they would need the very immediate level of support provided by a food bank. Whilst food parcels had always been a fact of life and provided by charities as a one off to individuals undergoing a crisis, people were now using food banks because they simply did not have enough money to feed themselves and their families. Changes to the benefits system, including changes to Council Tax benefit, the ?chaos? of Universal Credit and the move to online claims had had a huge effect on the most vulnerable residents in the borough.

Councillor M Tomlinson said that the Trussel Trust had reported a 400% increase in the number of food banks across the UK and his group had been pleased to see the Mayor recently encouraging shoppers in Tesco to contribute items to a food collection. He presumed, therefore, that there was at least one member of the Conservative group who recognised the need for food banks. In South Ribble there were now at least four regular food banks which included ones run by Leyland Churches Together and The Leyland Project. Although the voluntary sector was doing a wonderful job in South Ribble, they could not do it alone. A recent Scrutiny Committee meeting had heard that the Council had ?14m in the bank and he would urge the Conservative administration to commit now to offering financial support to people who were struggling with the most basic need to eat.

Moving on to the second part of the motion, Councillor M Tomlinson welcomed the pilot project with the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and called upon this Council to ensure the pilot focused on three specific things: that access to benefits advice and support remained available to all; that benefit claims were assisted so that they could be accurate in order that residents got the help they were entitled to, and that claims and payments were submitted and then made in a timely fashion. Many of the users of food banks were reporting that they were receiving benefits late, especially after a change of circumstances, and it was simply not acceptable that someone already struggling to get by was made to suffer by the failings of a computer system or the bureaucracy that surrounded it.

Moving to the third part of the motion, Councillor M Tomlinson referred to the results of the DWP?s own research into the effects of the ?Bedroom Tax? which showed that just 6% of those affected had been able to move into smaller accommodation and therefore not be financially punished for living in a house which was deemed ?too big?. The research also found that 60% of affected people were now in rent arrears and 6% of those affected had resorted to credit cards or payday loans to pay the rent. He urged Council to encourage Ian Duncan Smith to ?end the Bedroom Tax now?.

Councillor Ms Bell rose to say she was pleased and honoured to be able to second this motion. She said that before she retired she had worked with some of the most vulnerable residents in South Ribble. Their circumstances had been varied but they had all needed help and support in what for them had been a very difficult time. A recent letter to the Lancashire Evening Post had referred to some of the recipients of food parcels as ?abusers? and she said that whilst there may be a few who took advantage, for the majority it took a great deal of courage to ask for help. No one knew what the future held and how our own circumstances could change and lead us to needing a whole range of support. She was aware that many councillors gave time, money and food to a variety of causes but she said that the Council, as a corporate body, must do whatever it could to enable the residents of South Ribble to have a better equality of life. One way for the Council to show its support was by providing financial support to local food banks.

Councillor Ms Bell also urged Council to be mindful of the fact that continuing changes in Welfare Reform often meant delay, with a new applicant for most benefits sometimes having to wait over five weeks for any money to be paid. She urged the Council to do everything in its power to ensure it kept a very close eye on the timeliness and accuracy of payments during the proposed pilot.

Councillor Ms Bell went on to say that although there may have been some sense in trying to free underused homes and moving families into more appropriate housing, smaller homes were simply not available and in fact only 89 affordable homes had been built in South Ribble over the last few years. She repeated Councillor M Tomlinson?s call for the Council to write to central government to call for the abolition of the unfair ?bedroom tax?.

Councillor Howarth said that he could support all but the first part of the motion. He and Councillor Mrs Woollard worked with a local charity in Penwortham which was able to distribute at its own discretion food which had been freely given. He foresaw that if the Council were to become involved in supporting food banks financially there would be some criteria drawn up for how the food bank would operate and distribute. He therefore proposed that bullet point 1. of the motion resolution should be amended to read ?engage in a dialogue with all food banks with a view to directing them to sources of financial support for their future activities?.

A member of the public spoke passionately about his own experiences when he was in dire straits himself and said that food banks were not the solution. He firmly believed that local residents experiencing difficulties should be directed to agencies such as the Citizens? Advice Bureaux and the Money Advisory Service.

Councillor O?Hare pointed out that everybody was aware of the current economic situation and wanted to help, with everyone in the room being well intentioned and volunteering in one way or another. However, the motion was overtly political and would achieve nothing.

The Mayor invited members to vote on the amendment. The vote was lost (YES ? 2) (NO ? 44).

Councillor Hamman said that food banks were a growing reality across the country and although this was of concern, he did not think this growth could be put down simply to Welfare Reform. Benefit recipients had had their payments index linked and when the DWP had transferred the Social Fund to the county council, the latter sometimes referred claimants in crisis to food banks rather than making a financial payment to them. He pointed out that the pilot scheme with DWP related to Universal Credit which was only one element of Welfare Reform. The pilot was currently restricted to single non-householders but would expand to include couple non-householders from the end of July.

Councillor Hamman explained that the contract with DWP included funding to support with access to a dedicated PC that claimants could use themselves, help with inputting necessary information and budgetary advice. Gateway staff had been trained to provide this support, not just to Universal Credit applicants but to anyone. Timeliness and accuracy of benefits would be the responsibility of DWP. There would be a single payment including Housing Benefit paid monthly by direct debit direct to the claimant. This council?s accuracy on payment of Housing Benefit was 96.65% in June and speed of process after all information required was 4.45 days. The Council would closely monitor DWP performance and compare it with our own.

In relation to the third part of the motion, Councillor Hamman pointed out that the Labour government introduced the Local Housing Allowance Scheme in April 2008. This scheme, like Under Occupancy, restricted the amount of Housing Benefit payable depending upon the number of bedrooms required by the household. Unlike the Labour government however, the current Conservative government had extended discretionary Housing Payments to assist with the most vulnerable cases. Initially 650 claimants in South Ribble had been identified as Under Occupiers and this figure had fallen to around 460.

Councillor Robinson said that the Local Housing Allowance had been applied to the private sector only but Under Occupancy now applied in the Registered Social Landlord Sector. The council had not seen any massive increase in homelessness and the reasons for homelessness were too varied and complex to suggest they were directly linked to welfare reform. Nationally under occupancy rates were down by 11% and within South Ribble by 30%, due in part to the fact that some occupants had now reached pensionable age and in part to the fact that many occupants had now found work.

Councillor Robinson went on to say that commentators on all sides were now stating that the welfare reforms brought in by the current government were largely responsible for the dramatic falls in the rate of unemployment. Fewer people were now claiming any of the three main out-of-work benefits than at any time during the last Labour government and the number of incapacity benefit claimants had fallen dramatically. The current welfare reforms were about helping good people who were trapped in a bad system. He considered the motion to be badly worded, poorly presented and without merit.

Councillor Mrs Moon spoke of her experience as a Housing Officer and the impact of the introduction of the Local Housing Allowance in the private sector under the last Labour government. She believed that the under occupancy programme was about basic need and adequate provision and she could not support the motion which would only serve to perpetuate a historical injustice.

Councillor W Bennett regretted that the motion was not workable as presented as it was so poorly written. He was supportive of welfare reform and Under Occupancy was simply an extension of what had been introduced under Labour. He was pleased that 450 South Ribble residents who had been out of work twelve months ago had now found employment. He pointed out that the county council had a budget of ?300K for financial support to food banks.

Councillor Mrs Ball explained that she worked alongside a charity which worked with young people in need and showed them how to budget, cook and make meals. She had asked about the charity?s experience of young people and food banks and been told that some used food banks but then spent their disposable income on socialising. From her knowledge of the food bank in Penwortham, Councillor Mrs D Gardner was aware that some who accessed it actually travelled to and from the food bank in taxis.

Councillor M Tomlinson said he was pleased by the level of debate that the motion had generated. The Labour group was not against welfare reform and in fact supported Universal Credit although they felt that its implementation had been awful. He pointed out that most benefit recipients were actually in employment but in low paid jobs. The Labour group could have accepted a scheme where new claimants would be paid an amount appropriate to the number of occupants but objected to the fact that it was being applied retrospectively to all claimants. The Labour group considered it to be a very well written motion.

The Mayor then invited the meeting to vote on the substantive motion. The vote was lost.
(YES ? 17, NO ? 27, ABSTENTION ? 3).

Notice of the following motion, to be proposed by Councillor Howarth and seconded by Councillor Pimblett, had been submitted in accordance with Standing Order 9(2).

?'Council notes our ongoing successful and popular waste collection service introduced in 2008 and the commitment to subsequent improvements since.

It commends the educational and co-operative approach taken with our residents in promoting the merits and benefits of recycling which has made a major contribution to driving up recycling figures and reducing the amounts going to landfill.

Council therefore congratulates all those involved in achieving record recycling figures of nearly 50% including 10,456 tonnes of garden and food waste, and customer satisfaction levels with the waste collection service of 97.58%.

Given these outstanding achievements, Council expresses deep concerns at proposals by the Communities and Local Government Minister to impose a return to costly and damaging weekly waste collections. Council further regrets the actions of other local authorities in imposing additional and detrimental charges for green waste collections.

South Ribble Borough Council thereforre resolves:-

i) to maintain our commitment to alternate weekly waste collections and to support the Local Government Association view that local authorities should be left to implement and run services that best fit their areas and priorities in line with Localism.

ii) to give a commitment to our residents that we will not impose additional charges for the much valued green waste collection.

?

In moving the motion Councillor Howarth spoke of his pride as the cabinet member at the time with responsibility for the introduction of the re-cycling service and thanked the members of the coalition for their support. He recalled opposition from the Conservative group at the time, including pledges to maintain the ?essential? back door general refuse collection and mention of an imminent threat of some sort of plague. He therefore thanked the subsequent Conservative administrations for not undoing what had been started and for implementing policy to enhance and improve the alternate weekly waste collection service.

Councillor Howarth spoke of the ever greater challenge to the environment posed by disposing of non biodegradable waste, with harmful chemicals and greenhouse gases released from rubbish in landfill sites. Unlike some other local authorities which had come into conflict with residents by imposing unpopular fines and penalties, this council had worked with its residents with schemes like assisted collections and education campaign, all of which contributed to our record recycling figures and high satisfaction levels.

Councillor Howarth went on to say that it would be a retrograde step if any incoming government were to impose a return to weekly collections. It would be financially costly in terms of vehicle replacement and change to current working, as well as environmentally costly as recycling figures would fall away and landfill increase. It would also be damaging and counter productive were we to go down the route of a number of other councils in introducing additional charges for green waste collections leading to dumping on spare land, green waste being mixed in with general refuse and a drop in what we collected. He concluded with the old adage ?if it isn?t broken, don?t fix it?.

Councillor Pimblett was pleased to second the motion.

Councillor Mullineaux, as Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Street Scene, confirmed that the alternate weekly waste collections would continue but as the council was currently part way through a tendering process he was not in a position to comment on future costs or charges. He therefore proposed the following amendment to bullet ii) of the motion.

?ii) to endeavour to maintain the provision of the much valued green waste collection service and maintain our commitment to work with LCC to make our collection service one of the best in the country, following on from the investment of nearly ?1m we have recently made for new waste vehicles?.

Councillor O?Hare was pleased to second the motion and said that although this Council may not wish to introduce charges it was not yet known what might be imposed by central government.

Councillor M Tomlinson said that the council and residents were to be congratulated for their commitment to recycling. The Labour group had real concerns about Eric Pickles MP who, in spite of talking of ?localism?, actually told local authorities what they should do. Collecting residual waste on a weekly basis would significantly add to the council?s costs. Although his group would have supported the original motion they could not support the proposed amendment.

Councillor Howarth summed up by saying that Eric Pickles MP was putting the council?s waste collection service under threat.

The Mayor invited the meeting to vote on the proposed amendment.

The vote was carried. (YES ? 27, NO ? 19).
?

RESOLVED (unanimously):
That the press and public be excluded from the meeting during the consideration of the following item of business as it involved the discussion of information which was defined as exempt from publication under paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 ?Information relating to the financial or business affairs of any particular person (including the authority holding that information))? and in which the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed the public interest in disclosing it.

The Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources presented the report which sought to promote re-development of land in Bamber Bridge. The report was seconded.

RESOLVED (unanimously):
That the recommendations in the report be approved.