Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Connell, Fairhead, Hacon, Myers, Reynolds, Rodwell, Stenhouse and Williamson.

There were no declarations of interest.

In accordance with Article 45 (Petition Scheme), His Worship the Mayor was presented with a petition in respect of Land at Pointers East from the Chair of the Caister on Sea Parish Council.  

 (a) Question from Mr J Cannell (Great Yarmouth and District TUC):-

" Great Yarmouth and District TUC continues to be concerned by the lack of UK content in the UK offshore wind industry - 97% of turbines are supplied from outside the UK. Great Yarmouth Borough Council  has already lobbied the Government to protect British steel production from dumped Chinese steel, steel that we believe is being used in the Galloper Windfarm. What will the Council do to influence business and the Government to use British steel and ensure a big increase in the manufacture of turbines in the UK ?"

In response, the Leader reported that for each windfarm approved by the Government there is a requirement that a supply chain plan is produced which demonstrates local UK content. The Governments goal is for at least 50% uk content.  3 offshore windfarms close to Norfolk and Suffolk are currently approved and under development namely East Anglia One, Dudgeon and Galliper offshore windfarms.  The East Anglia One renewable energy project is worth £2.5bn and seeks 50% UK content.  Scottish Power Renewables announced in March that Great Yarmouth Port had been selected for construction and instillation activities.  Dudgeon Windfarm operations and maintenance base was also nearing completion by Statoil in South Denes Great Yarmouth.  The choice of Great  Yarmouth for the construction of East Anglia One and Galliper offshore windfarms by their respected developers bodes well for Great Yarmouth.

The Scroby Sands windfarm is estimated to achieve 55% UK content over the lifetime of the project with 45% of the Capital Expenditure being UK based.  The UK content policy has encouraged Siemens to invest in the UK and build a new factory in Hull to produce blades.

Great Yarmouth Borough Council along with Waveney District Council, Norfolk County Council, North Norfolk District Council  and Suffolk County Council have actively promoted the capability of the local ports and energy companies to the offhsore wind sector to encourage inward investment.  The latest being the renewable UK exhibition in Manchester in June 2016.  Added to this, "PEEL Ports Greats Yarmouth" arrived in December 2015 and we are actively engaging with them on a series of inward investment leads. 

The Borough Council's ambition for the Offhsore Energy Sector is further demonstrated by the establishment  of a energy related enterprise zone at Beacon Park and South Denes is recognised one of the best performing nationally.  Since its establishment in April 2012 it has unlocked 527 jobs, £21.5m of private sector investment and 20,000m2 of new commercial floor space.  Companies at Beacon Park include CIS, SMS, Probe Oil Tools, Magmer Products, Meclain Electrical and NOV Hidra Reed.

In accordance with the constitution, Mr Cannell was then entitled to ask a supplementary question.  Mr Cannell referred to a letter received from the Government Office relating to the issue of the pile pods which had been made in China and had not been suitable for use.  He made the point that Scroby Windfarms were made in the UK as had been the towers.  As non of the three components are made in the UK will the Borough Council ask that British Steel can be used?

The Leader, responded that as far as he was aware nowhere in the UK could make the equipment that Mr Cannell referred to in the time scale that they would be needed.  The Leader referred to the target of 50% being made in the UK and also referred to the proposal for decommissioning that would take place in Great Yarmouth.   

(b) Question from Mr T Crone

"With the closure of The Greyfriars GP and Walk in Centre, Great Yarmouth Town and Northern Parishes residents and tourists will be left without a walk in centre, which will mean that to see a GP out of hours they will need to go to the JPH resulting in extra costs for travel.

This will also put a huge extra pressure on the JPH, at a time when hospitals are stretched to breaking point.

One of the things that is being suggested by the CCG is that residents phone 111 which in Norfolk is totally inadequate, and has not had a CQC inspection.

Over 3000 signatures calling for the GP and walk in centre to remain open have been collected but still the CCG are refusing to listen.

Could you please tell me what the Council are doing to ensure that the walk in centre remains open,and that its residents are listened to by the CCG?"

In response, the Leader reported that as agreed at the Council meeting on the 30 June a letter had been sent to the Chief Executive Officer of the CCG, the local MP and to the Secretary of State for Health, expressing the Borough Councils concern with regard to the proposed closure of the Greyfriars Walk in Centre.  

The Leader reported that a response had been received from the Chief Executive of the CCG which the Leader commented that he had found unacceptable and that a further meeting with the Chief Executive would be held on 11 August 2016 where all points raised with regard to the concerns regarding the closure of the walk in centre would be raised with CCG's Chief Executive.  The Leader reported on the response received from the CCG which stated that the original finance when the facility was opened seven years ago was less that the recent annual contract figure of £1.4m per annum and certainly not £3.8m per annum covering all 4 services run from the Greyfriars Centre. This money has been assimilated into the CCG's allocation.  The CCG have been  clear that they will make a saving from a change in GP practice provider because the previous contract was at a significant premium now unnecessary given the state of general practice.  However, the CCG will be replicating the current spend on the working element in the new arrangements which is believed by the CCG to be the issue the Council are concerned about.  Any savings will be reused in the CCG's commissioning of NHS services so the allocation benefit is reserved.  The CCG will simply be satisfying the walk in demand differently not more cheaply.

The CCG stated that there is no need for formal consultation on the issue because they are replacing a service need at the end of a contract which can not be extended.  The CCG are engaging actively and extensively to understand the detail of patient need.  Like all of the public sector the CCG has a duty to ensure value for money for  tax payers money and they are doing that in this case making savings where it does not affect policy, investing the same amount where needed and more where that is needed (eg homeless services).

The Leader also reported on the response from the local Member of Parliament who had stated that he was still hugely concerned about the loss of a walk in centre as currently located.  To have nowhere for Northern villages and deprived town areas aside from the JPH seems a totally unacceptable decision, especially when we remember the scale of vacation visitors we have each season.  With many surgeries struggling to cover their lists now how can we expect them or the JPH to cope.  The MP's view about the surgery itself was that the CCG has to look at the best way to give the health cover for patients in the area and the point of the CCG is to allow clinicians to make those decisions, however, to not keep the walk in centre which has such a large investment is simply not acceptable and the MP would ask the CCG to look again at keeping the walk in centre option and at the very least tendering for the service at that facility.  

The Leader referred to a letter received from the Department of Health which stated that in line with the Governments commitment to devolve power to communities decisions about NHS services are essentially a matter for the NHS locally.  Great Yarmouth and Waveney Clinical  Commissioning Group are responsible for ensuring  that there is an adequate provision of health care services in the Great Yarmouth area.  

In accordance with the constitution, Mr Crone was then entitled to ask a supplementary question as follows:-

"The 111 service that is proposed is run by a company known as IC24 and is there anything that the Borough Council can do to stop this service failing? "

The Leader responded by saying that he would raise all of Mr Crone's comments with the CCG at the meeting to be held on the 11 August 2016.

For information His Worship the Mayor reported that there would be a meeting open to the public to be held at Beccles on 28 July 2016 and that one of the issues to be discussed was the closure of the Greyfriars Clinic.

The Mayor presented the minutes of the Council meeting held on 16 May 2016.  

Proposer: Council Plant.  

Seconder: Councillor B Coleman

That the minutes of the meeting held on the 16 May 2016 be approved.

CARRIED

The Mayor presented the minutes of the Council meeting held on 17 May 2016.

With regard to the item in respect of the appointment of Leader and Deputy Leader of the Council , Councillor Walker expressed his concern that the request to have a recorded vote on this matter had been refused.

In response the Leader reported that this matter had been determined through the democratic process.

With regard to the item in respect of the appointment of Chairs of Committees 2016/17, Councillor Wainwright expressed his comments with regard to the way in which the process for the nominations for these positions had been determined.  Councillor Jeal also expressed his comments with regard to the procedures for the operation at the recent meeting of the Great Yarmouth Area Committee.  

Proposer:  Councillor Plant  

Seconder: Councillor B Coleman

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 17 May 2016 be approved.

CARRIED

The Mayor presented the minutes of the Council meeting held on 30 June 2016.

With regard to the item on Sports & Leisure Councillor K Grey was advised that the report on this matter would be considered at the next Council meeting on the 8 September 2016. 

In connection with the item on the Norfolk and Suffolk Devolution agreement, Councillor Wainwright referred to the information document that had been sent to households in the Borough.  Councillor Wainwright asked if the Borough Council will receive a breakdown of the comments made by Great Yarmouth residents and he understood that it was possible that the Borough Council would have to pay to receive this information.

The Interim Chief Executive Officer reported that it was expected that the information would be available from the County Council although no definite advice had been received on this particular matter at this time.  It was expected that the Borough Council would be able to access the information in due course.

Proposer: Councillor Plant   

Seconder: Councillor B Coleman

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 30 June 2016 be approved.

CARRIED    

Council considered the Monitoring Officer's report which reminded members that the Council would shortly be setting up a trading company to deliver new housing for sale at Beacon Park.  The Council agreed to form a Stakeholders Committee which would oversee the operation of the company and a politically balanced appointment of 13 members to the Committee was made at the Council meeting in May 2016.  However, this Committee was set up as an outside body rather than forming part of the Council's constitution.  On reflection it would seem for sensible to constitute a politically balanced Committee of the Council and it would then be able to make decisions in relation to the controlled exercise of the company by virtue of the Council's shareholding.  

Councillor Wainwright commented that at a previous meeting a consultant had advised how the Shareholder Committees should be set up and the Director of Housing and Neighbourhoods confirmed however that the Council had agreed to set up a politically balanced committee of 13 members and that Council at this stage were simply being asked to agree to an amendment to the Council's constitution to include the Shareholder Committee as an Article of the Constitution.

Proposer: Councillor Plant              

Seconder: Council Hammond

That approval be given to amend the Council's Constitution to include as an Article the Local Authority Trading Company Shareholder Committee and to also agree that the terms of reference of the Shareholder Committee will be :-

a) To determine the name of the company

b) To determine the appointment of the first directors to the company (the Leader has already been appointed as one of the Directors).

c) Recommend to the company the appointment of 2 non executive directors who have experience of property development and finance.

d) Recommend to the company the terms of appointment of the 2 non executive directors .

e) Exercise control over the company in relation to the Council's shareholding (save where this is reserved to the full council)

f) Monitor operation of the Company

g)  Act as a liaison between the Council and the Directors of the company.

CARRIED

Council was asked to agree to the proposed amendments to the delegation scheme for property matters as detailed in the report from the Group Manager (Property and Construction).  

Members were advised that this matter had been discussed by the Policy and Resource Committee who had agreed to recommend to Council that the addition of responsibilities for decisions should ensure that there is cross party support in the decision making process.

For clarification, the Leader reported that the delegation scheme as detailed in the report should be amended as follows:-

• New leases of licences  where the premium of annual rental is over £100,000 should now read £50,000.
• Transfers of free hold or leasehold land where the consideration is above £10,000 and below £100,000 should read £50,000 instead of £100,000 

The Leader also proposed an amendment to the delegation scheme as follows:- 

"That the proposed amendments to the delegation scheme as detailed in the Group Manager Property and Construction's report be agreed, subject to the addition of responsibility for decisions to include the Group Leaders on the Policy and Resources Committee and the Vice Chairman of Policy and Resources Committee to ensure that there is cross party support in the decision making process."

Proposer:  Councillor Plant                            

Seconder: Councillor Carpenter 

(i) That the proposed amendments to the delegation scheme as detailed in the Group Manager's report be agreed, subject to the addition of responsibility for decisions to include the Group Leaders on the Policy and Resources Committee and the Vice Chair of the Policy and Resources Committee to ensure that there is cross party support in the decision making process.

(ii) That the amendments of the figures from £100,000 to £50,000 as specified above by the Leader be agreed.

CARRIED

Council was asked to consider the appointment of a representative to the Great Yarmouth Seafarers Centre. 

Proposer: Councillor Wainwright                                    

Seconder: Councillor Jeal

That Councillor Borg be appointed as representative on the Great Yarmouth Seafarer's Centre.

LOST 

Proposer: Councillor Plant         

Seconder: Councillor A Grey 

That Councillor Walch be appointed as the representative to the Great Yarmouth  Seafarers Centre.

CARRIED

Council was asked to consider a Motion of Notice submitted from Councillor's Wainwright, Walker, Williamson, Waters-Bunn, Robinson-Payne, Jeal and Fairhead.  

Councillor Waters-Bunn stated that as part of our withdrawal from the EU the Government may choose to amend legislation to remove from UK law certain laws that originated from the EU, this puts at risk things like paid sick, Maternity/Paternity and Holiday pay, the EU working time directive and a whole host of workers rights that are presently enshrined in UK Law.  The motion calls on Great Yarmouth  Borough Council to write to Government to preserve in any successive legislation those workers rights as they exist today as a minimum charter of workers rights.

Councillor Wainwright commented that he hoped Government would stand by their recent pledges and that workers rights would be protected.  The Leader reported that he hoped that his Group would agree to the motion as this is enshrined in UK Law.

Councillor A Grey also stated that the workers rights should be protected.

Proposer: Councillor Waters-Bunn   

Seconder:Councillor Wainwright.

That this Council urges Her Majesty's Government to preserve in any success of legislation following our exit from the European Union as a minimum charter of employment rights those workers rights currently enshrined in UK Law.

CARRIED

There was no other business.

Council stood in one minutes silence in tribute following the recent tragedy in Nice, France. Council agreed that His Worship the Mayor should send a letter of condolence to the Mayor of Nice.