Agenda and minutes

To receive any disclosure of interests from Members and Officers in matters to be discussed.

Note:  Councillors are reminded of their obligations to declare disclosable pecuniary interests, personal and/or prejudicial interests in accordance with legislation and the Council’s Code of Conduct.      

If you require advice, please contact the appropriate Democratic Services Officer, prior to the meeting.

Councillor Tod declared a personal (but not prejudicial interest) in item 7 (Community and Voluntary Sector Grants Review) as he was a Trustee of the Friends of Dean Garnier Garden (based in Winchester).  He was also Chief Executive of the national Men's Health Forum charity - which is a member of the Department of Health's Health and Well-being Alliance.  Neither of these bodies had made a request for grant assistance.  In addition, as a County Councillor he had rights to give grants (from County funds).

Councillors Hiscock and Stallard both declared a personal (but not prejudicial interest) in item 7 (Community and Voluntary Sector Grants Review) as County Councillors they had rights to give grants from County funds and the County was also a partner in grant giving as well.

Councillor Mather declared a personal (but not prejudicial interest) in item 7 (Community and Voluntary Sector Grants Review) as she was a Council representative on the Trinity Winchester Advisory Board.

The Chairman stated that the Minutes of the previous meeting held on 3 September 2018 would be submitted to the Committee’s next meeting.

The Chairman stated that Winchester Markets item had been withdrawn from the Forward Plan to allow further discussion with the officers on how to proceed with matters.  Following debate, the Chairman agreed that the discussion with officers be extended to include the Winchester Christmas Market and to involve the expertise of the Winchester Business Improvement District (BID), for example for advice on car parking.

RESOLVED:

That the Scrutiny Work Programme for 2018/19 and Forward Plan for November 2018, be noted.

To receive and note questions asked and statements made from members of the public on matters which fall within the remit of the Committee

No comments or questions were made during public participation

OS210

(Report OS210 refers)

Councillor Humby introduced the report and the Corporate Head of Engagement provided detail on the report.

During questions and debate, Members raised a number of questions which were responded to accordingly, as summarised below:

(i)            It was explained that the proposals would not take away Winchester Town Forum’s input into the decision-making on community and voluntary sector grants.  Monies already allocated for grants in the Winchester Town Forum budget would be ring-fenced for town use only.  Organisations in the town would also be able to benefit from grants provided to the District as a whole.  The proposal would remove the need for applicants to apply twice as there would be a single bid which could receive joint consideration (between members of the Panel and members of the Winchester Town Forum).  Matching funding (from the Winchester Town Forum Account) could be provided if required.  The Winchester Town Forum Grant Committee could comprise the Panel for grant consideration if required and this point required clarification.

(ii)          The situation referred to in paragraphs 5.1 and 5.2 of the report relating to organisations that occupied Council owned buildings, or buildings that are on the Council owned land was complex and was still being researched.

(iii)         The Council had reviewed the work of the Directory for Social Change and had benchmarked with other local authorities in its research.  It had  also worked in association with Community First.

(iv)         The reporting cycle and monitoring of organisations would be in relation and appropriate to the size of grant provided and the risk and nature of the organisation.

(v)          The proposal to provide funding over a three year period would provide more security for organisations.

(vi)         Kayak had now been renamed Unit 12.

(vii)        Deprivation, need and health had been taken into consideration in setting the target figures for objectives and priorities.  Issues relating to mental health (including mental health of young people) could be given further consideration.

(viii)      the Council’s Strategy and its periodic review would be the mechanism for objectives and priorities to evolve over time.  Flexibilty would aso be retained to respond to new priorities as they emerged.

(ix)         A wider scope and broader view of the voluntary sector was achieved by working with Community First.  There was also joint consideration of grants and partnership working between the District Council and the County Council and also by Member representation on the Southern Health Trust.  Capturing volunteering (for example through Action Hampshire which oversaw community groups) was also important.  It would also be beneficial to achieve joined up working between similar organisations delivering similar outcomes.

(x)          The small grant Local Panel’s membership was still to be determined and grants would be provided in tranches, perhaps three times per year, over a trial period.  The Panel may include Ward Members that were local to its sitting.  There was value in taking the Panel out into the District as it could be active in local decision-making and could bring people together in a local area  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

OS209

(Report OS209 refers)

In summary, matters were raised regarding the pattern and trends of complaints and how the level of compensation was calculated when a case was upheld by the Ombudsman.

                        RESOLVED:

That the Report be noted.