Agenda and minutes

            Apologies for inability to attend were reported from Councillors Hanna and Ó Muilleoir.

            The minutes of the meetings of 7th and 21st September were taken as read and signed as correct.  It was reported that those minutes had been adopted by the Council at its meeting on 1st October, subject to the amendment of the minute under the heading “Request for the Use of the City Hall and the Provision of Hospitality” to provide that a finger buffet be served at the Falls Youth Providers Awards in the City Hall on 15th October.

            Councillor Attwood declared an interest in respect of Item 2(a) Local Investment Fund Update in so far as it related to the application by Colin Glen Forest Park.

            (Councillor Attwood left the meeting whilst this item was under discussion.)

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0Relevant Background Information

1.1The Local Investment Fund (LIF) has been developed to support the delivery of key regeneration projects in neighbourhoods and also as a means for Members to connect with local communities, in preparation for their formal role in community planning under RPA.

2.0Key Issues          

2.1AWG Recommendations on LIF proposals

      At the most recent round of AWG meetings, officers updated Members on the external meetings they have facilitated on the LIF proposals. In accordance with Council procedures, individual Members declared any conflicts of interest and this was noted in the minutes of the AWG. Members are asked to note that only the West, North and Shankill AWGs have met in time for the preparation of this report and put forward project recommendations.

      On the basis of the information presented, the West, North and Shankill AWGs have made the following recommendations for the consideration of the Committee:

All of the above have been assessed against the prioritization matrix and the summary is contained in appendix 1. It is recommended that Committee approves the above projects subject to confirmation of costs, clarification of legal issues, sustainability etc.

      Total LIF Commitment to date

2.243 LIF projects have been approved in principle by SP&R Committee at its meetings in June, August and September. At September the amount that had been committed in principle was £3,359,893.40. This was subject to confirmation of detailed costings and sustainability as well as seeking authority from the relevant Committees on leasing arrangements.

**Assuming the above projects at 2.1 are approved by Committee and ratified at Council.

      Feasibility Fund

2.3The SP&R Committee, at its meeting on 22  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

            The Director of Finance and Resources submitted for the Committee’s consideration the undernoted report:

“1.0    Relevant Background Information 

1.1    The Executive has published revised guidance on the implementation of the programme in June 2012.  It outlines that:

‘The aim of the programme is to reduce poverty, unemployment and physical deterioration through strategic areas based interventions of significant scale.  The fund will encourage communities, statutory agencies, business and local political representatives to work together in a co-ordinated way, reducing duplication, sharing best practice and enhancing existing provision for the benefits of those communities most in need.’

         A total funding of £80m (£40m for programmes and £40m in respect of capital programmes) will be provided during the life of the programme to end in March 2015.

1.2    The 4 strategic objectives of the Fund are:

­   Build Pathways to Employment by tackling educational under achievement and barriers to employment; tackling skills deficits and promoting jobs brokerage, widening access to the labour market, promoting business start up and increasing sustainability through social enterprise;

­   Tackling the systemic issues linked to deprivation including poor mental and physical health, young unsupported parents, substance abuse, children and young people at risk, and enhancing community capacity, confidence and partnership working to help reduce deprivation;

­   Increase community physical resources – by regenerating and refurbishing existing facilities and providing play facilities and environmental improvements.

­   Address dereliction – and promoting investment in the physical regeneration of deprived areas.

1.3    The Steering Group within each zone will be tasked with managing the design, delivery and development of an Area Plan.  OFMDFM has defined the criteria for allocating resources as:

­      Areas within the top 10% most deprived super output areas on the Multiple Deprivation Measure 2010;

­      Areas within the top 20% most deprived Super Output Areas on the key domains of income, employment, education and health;

­      Areas with independently verified and robust evidence of objective need which can include data at Census Output Area level.

2.0    Key Issues

2.1    Zones

         The membership of each Steering Group has now been published.  The membership of all Belfast groups is attached. 

         There is a Belfast Councillor on each Steering Group and will be a useful opportunity for Members to strategically align the work of the Council, including the Area Working Groups, to inform and influence the emerging Zone action plans.

         Twinbrook and Lagmore are the only 2 areas which are set to transfer to Belfast under the new local government boundaries which are not included in the Belfast zones.  They are zoned within South East zone.  It will be important to ensure that the Council has sight of their plans.

2.2    Workshop – 17/18 October

         OFMDFM convened an introductory workshop for all the Steering Groups.  The workshop was an opportunity for members to come together to discuss the area planning process, outline the role of Steering Groups and identify priorities for a work plan. 

2.3    Steering Group

         There will be up to 14 people per Steering Group:

   Political x 4  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1          Relevant Background Information 

1.1       The existing objectives for the City Investment Fund (CIF) were agreed in December 2007:

-     create a focal point for the Council to play a leading role in the development of the city;

-     create a ‘can do’ attitude amongst its citizens and create a sense of place and pride;

-     encourage investment from and engagement of public, private and voluntary sectors, in the achievement of that aim; and

-     to contribute to the Council’s priorities and vision for the city.

            To date, £16million has been allocated to four iconic projects (Titanic Belfast; Connswater Community Greenway; Lyric Theatre and the MAC).

1.2       CIF is designed to enable us to take a lead role and work in partnership to deliver key investment projects which:

-     Promote the image of Belfast as a place to visit

-     Enable and/or promote the city as a place in which to do business

-     Bring financial or other economic returns to the city which help to build the city’s rate base

-     Promote Belfast as a city in which its citizens have pride and belief in a brighter future.

-     Enhance the city’s strategic, social, cultural and environmental infrastructure.

-     Provide a lasting legacy for future generations.

1.3       At its meeting on 23 March 2012, SP&R Committee reviewed and confirmed the objectives for the next phase of CIF.  Given both the changed needs of the city as well as the broader economic context, it was agreed that CIF support was extended to include programmes of capital investment (or clusters) as well as single iconic projects, which can demonstrate a cumulative iconic or transformational impact.

2.0       Key Issues

2.1       Moving forward into the next phase of CIF, and drawing from the learning from previous investments, there are a number of key issues for discussion, outlined below for Members’ consideration, in line with the guiding principles for the Investment Programme.

2.2       Good relations and equality

            In the first phase of the CIF, the Council did not make a public call for proposals seeking support.  Rather, in a civic leadership role, the Council considered a number of cultural, environmental and economic ‘legacy’ projects to determine its short-list for investment.  While the Council is still fulfilling a civic leadership role and determining its strategic investments, it may be advisable to issue a public call outlining the criteria and objectives for investment to identify potential projects. It should be noted however that in the context of the projects already identified in the Investment Programme as potential CIF projects, there already has been public consultation and it is suggested that in the case of these proposals public consultation should take place on a short-list agreed by SP&R, allowing the Council to satisfy its equality screening obligations.

2.3       Balanced investment

            At its meeting on 23 March, it was noted by SP&R Committee that in order to ensure a balanced investment across the city, and given the scale of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

            The Director of Property and Projects submitted for the Committee’s consideration the undernoted report:

“1.0    Purpose of report

1.1    The purpose of this report is to update Members on the Girdwood Community Hub project. 

         Key issues

2.0    Current status of submission with SEUPB

2.1    The Girdwood Hub proposal is in the last stages of assessment by the DSD Economist Team after which it will be passed to the DFP for final approval. Council officers met with SEUPB and the DSD Economist Team on 18th September to go through a number of final outstanding clarification points in relation to the project. A number of issues were raised at this meeting –

-     SEUPB emphasised the tight timescales for Priority 2.1 capital projects (all contracts need to be ended by March 2015 with final cut-off by June 2015).  This leaves very little slack in the timescales for delivery/slippage etc.

-     in order to meet the tight timescale projects will need be approved by DFP and a Letter of Offer given by end of October

-     that while there were a number of outstanding issues to be resolved in relation to the Hub project, SEUPB did not believe there are any ‘show stoppers’

-     SEUPB have engaged CPD to review the Girdwood Hub project and costs

         At this meeting SEUPB and the DSD Economists requested further assurance around a number of key issues including usage and costs. The final information provided by the Council is still being economically appraised by the DSD Economist Team.  As outlined above in order to meet the tight timescales it is anticipated that the approval process for projects will be concluded by end of October 2012. Members will be updated when a Letter of Offer is received.

         Initial design and Schedule of Accommodation for the Hub

2.2    Although a formal letter of offer has not yet been received, Committee had previously agreed that the Council work ‘at risk’ on the Hub project in order to ensure that the tight timescale would be met.  This included appointing a design team and continuing with Phase 2 of engagement around the Hub.  Members will be aware that Phase 1 of the engagement was completed in May 2011 and included the distribution of 22,000 newsletters to households; a website questionnaire; an article in City Matters; and a successful community fun day on Clifton Park Avenue with over 400 attendees. From these events, over 110 consultation responses were received, proposing a range of ideas for the Hub.

2.3    Committee Members were updated at their meeting on 7th September that Capita Symonds have been appointed to lead on design of the Hub. Since appointment Capita Symonds have undertaken a number of meetings with a range of stakeholders to ascertain their requirements and consider these as part of the initial design process. It was stressed at these meetings that these were preliminary discussions and that all ideas were welcome and encouraged at this stage. However it was also made clear that budgetary restrictions may constrain  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

            The Committee agreed to recommend to the Council to confer on Dame Mary Peters the Freedom of the City and that a special meeting of the Council be held for that purpose on Thursday, 1st November at 6.00 p.m. prior to the monthly meeting of the Council due to be held on that date.

            The Chief Executive reminded the Members that they had been advised previously that the Council had been requested by IBM to submit a bid to participate in the IBM sponsored Smarter Cities Challenge.  In 2010, IBM had announced its intention to partner with 100 cities around the world to solve complex urban challenges, awarding $50 million worth of services in technology over three years through the Smarter Cities Challenge.  Through those grants, teams of top IBM experts would sit side-by-side with the city leaders for three weeks to investigate issues ranging from workforce readiness to safety and security, economic development, strategies and sustainability and deliver solutions.  By the end of 2012, IBM would have completed 64 of the grants to cities around the world.  Each project had developed new insights into challenges facing cities and what was possible and had built an exciting Global Network of city leaders solving critical problems.

            The Chief Executive reported that, pursuant of that invitation, the Council had submitted a Smarter Cities application, a copy of which was circulated for the information of the Members.  He stated that IBM had now advised the Council that Belfast had been shortlisted as one of the potential challenge cities for 2013/14.  In that regard, representatives from IBM London and Dublin had visited Belfast the previous Wednesday to conduct interviews with key City stakeholders to determine whether the City was committed to working with the Council on the back of the bid.  A telephone conference call had been arranged with the IBM Vice-President in New York and the Council’s team which had been led by Councillor Hargey, Chairman of the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee and the Lord Mayor, Alderman Robinson, Council officers and representatives from the Department for Social Development, the Department of the Environment, the University of Ulster and NICVA had also attended.

            Following that meeting, IBM had contacted the Council the previous day to invite Belfast to attend its Smarter Cities Challenge Conference in New York between 14th and 16th November.  IBM had also offered the City a speaking slot at one of the plenary sessions.  There would be four panels with distinguished city leaders from around the world examining insights on economic development, smarter transportation and open data.  At that meeting, the recipients of the Smarter Cities Challenge Support for 2013/14 would be announced.  The invitation to attend would be extended to the Lord Mayor, Alderman Gavin Robinson, the Chairman of the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee (Councillor Deirdre Hargey) and the Chief Executive.  IBM had extended also an invitation to Dr. Duncan Morrow who had attended the City’s stakeholder briefing with IBM.  The costs of all the Council’s delegates whilst in New York would be covered by IBM and the only cost to the Council would be return flights to New York, which would be unlikely to exceed the sum of £6,000.

            The Committee authorised the attendance of the Lord Mayor, the Chairman of the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee, the Chief  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

            The Committee noted the contents of a report which had provided details of the meeting of the Party Leaders’ Forum held on 27th September.

            The Committee was advised that the undernoted requests for the use of the City Hall and provision of hospitality had been received:

            The Committee agreed to consider a report which had been tabled in relation to a late request for the use of the City Hall grounds.

            The Director of Property and Projects informed the Committee that a request had been received from the Friends of the Earth charity to hold an event in the City Hall grounds on 9th November, 2012 in order to promote transparency in terms of those making large financial donations to political parties.  He pointed out that the Committee had delegated authority to himself for routine type requests for the use of the City Hall grounds on the basis of an agreed set of criteria.  However, it had been recognised that there would still be occasions in which the nature, scale and/or scope of the request meant that it was appropriate to place the matter directly before the Committee.  He indicated that the request from the Friends of the Earth organisers fell into that category and the direction of the Committee was therefore being sought.

            The Director explained that Friends of the Earth would be promoting at the event its “Who Pulls the Strings” campaign which was fighting for the right for people to know who was giving large donations to political parties.  The organisers wished to hold the event between 12.45 p.m. and 1.30 p.m., including set-up and strip-down.  The nature

of the event would involve a short piece of physical theatre lasting no more than five minutes, which would be followed by a short speech and photographs and interviews with the media.  The organisers would be hiring their own PA system for the purpose of background music and the speech.  It was anticipated that between 60 and 100 people would be attending the event.

            Moved by Councillor Maskey,

            Seconded by Councillor McCarthy,

      That the Committee agrees to accede to the request from the Friends of the Earth organisers to use the grounds of the City Hall for the event on 9th November.

            On a vote by show of hands eleven Members voted for the proposal and six against and it was accordingly declared carried.

            The Committee approved and adopted the minutes of the meeting of the Governance Working Group held on 19th September.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0       Relevant Background Information

1.1        As Members are aware, over the last few years the Council has been putting in place the frameworks and structures needed to make it a ‘fit for purpose’ local authority which can deliver the effective, value for money services that our citizens deserve. An important element of this has been the review of those key governance documents which underpin how the Council operates and makes its decisions.

1.2       As agreed previously by Members, work has been ongoing over recent months to develop a draft Council Constitution which would bring together into one document the key governance instruments which explain and govern how the Council operates; how decisions are made and the procedures which are followed to ensure that these are efficient, transparent and accountable. 

1.3       The Strategic Policy and Resources Committee have received a number of updates on the development of the Council Constitution over the past 18 months, most recently on 4 November 2011.

1.4       Governance Working Group

            At its meeting on the 18 November 2012, the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee approved the Terms of Reference for an all party Governance Working Group to take forward discussions on the Constitution.  The Working Group has developed the draft Constitution over the past few months and has recommended that the Constitution be submitted to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee for formal approval.

1.5       The purpose of this report is therefore to seek formal approval from the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee on the attached Council Constitution, a copy of which has been circulated.

2.0       Key Issues

2.1       Council Constitution

            The Council’s overarching Constitution is a key governance document which sets out how the Council operates, how decisions are made and the procedures which are followed to ensure that these decisions are efficient, transparent and accountable. 

            Councils in England and Wales are statutorily obliged to have a Constitution.  Whilst there is no statutory obligation here, the DOE issued a consultation document on Local Government Reform Proposals in November 2010 which, in the interests of transparency, recommended that each local authority in Northern Ireland produce and publish a Constitution which sets out details of how it operates in terms of:

-     decision making arrangements;

-     standing orders;

-     scheme of delegation in operation for decision making by officers;

-     links to the Corporate and Business Plan

            The requirement to prepare a Constitution will therefore be included within the forthcoming Local Government Reform Bill (the Reorganisation Bill) which is due to be presented to the Assembly in the near future.  In the interim, Council officers will liaise with the Department of the Environment to discuss governance and transitional arrangements to ensure the Council’s approach is aligned to the Department’s.

2.2       The draft Constitution is comprised of the following 5 sections –

§  Section 1 - Who we are

§  Section 2 - What we do

§  Section 3 - How we do it

Part 1 - Structures and Decision Making  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

            The Committee was advised that the National Association of Councillors was holding its Annual General Meeting and Conference in Bournemouth from 23rd till 25th November.  This year’s conference would focus on two themes, that is, health and well-being and equality in service provision, both of which were extremely important and relevant to local communities.  A number of prominent speakers from across the tiers of Government would address the conference and take part in a “Question Time” session.  The cost per delegate of attendance would be £650.

            Accordingly, in accordance with the Council’s policy in relation to attendance at National Association of Councillors events, it was recommended that the Committee authorise the attendance at the event of the Chairman, the Deputy Chairman and the Council’s representatives on the National Association of Councillors (Northern Ireland Region) and a representative from each of the Parties on the Council not represented by the aforementioned Members.

            Moved by Councillor McKee,

            Seconded by the High Sheriff (Councillor M. Campbell),

      That the Council not be represented at the event.

            On a vote by show of hands six Members voted for the proposal and eleven against and it was accordingly declared lost.

            The Committee accordingly adopted the recommendation.

            The Committee was reminded that the Boundary Commission for Northern Ireland had published its Provisional Proposals Report for the 6th Review of Parliamentary Constituencies on 13th September, 2011.  That report had set out for public consultation the boundaries and names of the proposed new constituencies. 

            The Assistant Chief Executive reported that, following that consultation, the Commission had published a Revised Proposals Report and was undertaking a consultation exercise from 16th October until 10th December during which comments would be invited on the revised proposals.  In accordance with the legislation, there would not be any public hearings in connection with the proposals.

            He explained that the Council had, in the past, when previous reviews were being conducted, agreed to display the report and constituency maps in the Reception area of the City Hall in order to inform the public and to assist those interested to submit responses to the consultation.  In addition, the Council’s accepted practice when considering consultations on proposed changes to electoral boundaries was not to make a corporate response but rather to leave it to each of the Political Parties to respond.

            Accordingly, it was recommended that the Committee:

(i)      grants authority for the Boundary Commission for Northern Ireland’s Revised Proposals Report for the 6th Review of Parliamentary Constituencies to be displayed in the Reception area of the City Hall with effect from 19th October; and

(ii)     refer consideration of the consultation to each of the Political Parties on the Council.

            The Committee adopted the recommendations.

            The Committee approved and adopted the minutes of the meeting of the Budget and Transformation Panel of 11th October.

            The Committee was reminded that Employment Agency workers were used to provide temporary cover for short-term shortfalls in Council staffing levels.  However, while the use of Agency workers within the organisation was currently being analysed to determine if any directly-employed Council posts could be created, in line with the Investment Programme, the need for a contracted employment agency service to provide short-term cover for unexpected events and/or unpredicted upsurges in workload remained a Council requirement.  Accordingly, the Committee agreed to:

(i)      approve the initiation of a tendering process for employment agency services on the basis of a two-year contract, with the option to renew on an annual basis for a further two year period;

(ii)     extend the current contract(s) on a month-by-month basis until the successful appointment of new contractor(s); and

(iii)    note that, in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation, the Director of Property and Projects would award the contract to the successful tenderer.

            (Mr. J. McGrillen, Director of Development, attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee was advised that the Development Committee, at its meeting on 16th October, had considered a report in relation to the hosting of a stage of the Giro d’Italia Grande Partenza in May, 2014.  That Committee had agreed to support the bid for the staging of the event, at a cost of £400,000, a portion of which would be the in?kind provision of the use of the Waterfront Hall, with the remainder allocated to the festival programme delivery.  However, it was a matter for the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee to agree to the costs being met from the Events Fund and the Development Committee was seeking that authority.

            The Committee agreed, in principle, to fund the event, subject to a further report being submitted in November outlining how the costs would be met by the Council.

            (Mr. J. McGrillen, Director of Development, attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee was advised further that the Development Committee, at its meeting on 16th October, had agreed also to support a bid for the Champion of Champions Piping Competition for 2013 at an estimated cost of £80,000 and again was commending that the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee make the funds available for the event.

            The Committee agreed, in principle, to fund the event subject to the aforementioned report on how the costs would be met being submitted to the Committee in November.

            (Mrs. J. Minne, Head of Human Resources, attended in connection with these items.)

            The Committee was reminded that the Review of Public Administration Vacancy Control Procedures, which had been agreed by the Local Government Reform Joint Forum and issued under the authority of the Local Government Staff Commission, had come into force on 1st October, 2009 and had been subsequently suspended on 23rd June, 2010.  The primary rationale of those procedures was to seek to “safeguard the employment of existing Council staff as a result of the decisions arising from the Review of Public Administration”. 

            The Head of Human Resources reported that now that the timetable for implementing the Review of Public Administration in Local Government had been clarified, the Local Government Staff Commission had advised that the Vacancy Control Procedures would be re-introduced under Section 40(4)(f) of the Local Government Act (Northern Ireland) 1972 with effect from 1st November, 2012.  The procedures set out a stepped process for councils to follow in respect of mitigating potential redundancies which were as follows:

Step 1  -     Avoid creating any new posts unless there was an inescapable need or requirement to do so;

Step 2  -     Avoid filling any vacant posts;

Step 3  -     If needs be, fill vacant posts using restricted pools, that is, from “at risk” staff within own council; “cluster” councils; 26 councils; or the Review of Public Administration Affected Group;

Step 4  -     If a post was not filled via the restricted pool approach, publicly advertise the vacant post but consider filling it only on a temporary basis, fixed-term basis, etc;

Step 5  -     Record all relevant issues/decisions made and provide regular reports to the Local Government Staff Commission.

            The Head of Human Resources reported that at this stage the procedures related only to vacancies that existed in the following groupings of staff:

·        Chief Executive

·        Director

·        Head of Service

·        Personal Assistants to the above posts

·        Members’/Democratic Services posts

            The re-introduction of the Vacancy Control Procedures would be incorporated into the Council’s existing vacancy control processes whereby the decision to fill a post was considered on a case by case basis in the context of corporate priorities, the efficiency programme and the need to deliver the Council’s Investment Programme.

            She reminded the Members that the Council was committed to providing 200 job opportunities as part of the Investment Programme which in effect meant 200 job opportunities publicly advertised by the Council.  The re-introduction of the Vacancy Control Procedures would have a minimal impact on the Investment Programme because the need to avoid creating any new posts, avoid filling vacant posts and fill posts via the restricted pool approach instead of public advertisement would only relate to the aforementioned five categories of affected staff.  However, should the scope of affected Review of Public Administration staff be widened beyond those five categories, then the impact of the Review of Public Administration Vacancy Control Procedures might be more significant.  She undertook to keep that issue under review and update the Committee accordingly.

            The Committee noted the re-introduction of the Review of Public Administration  ...  view the full minutes text for item 22.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

            Belfast City Council’s Trade Unions wrote to the Council seeking the intervention of elected members in the pay arrangements of Council officers earning less than £21,000 per year and in cases where part-time employees of the Council have been adversely affected by recent changes to the HMRC Working Tax Credit system.

            Specifically, the BCC Trade Union group has asked that the Council make a payment of £250 to employees earning less than £21,000 per year, in the same way as payment was recently made by Lisburn City Council to such employees.

            In respect of part-time employees adversely affected by changes to the Working Tax Credit system, the Trade Union Group has asked that the Council analyse the circumstances of part-time employees who have been disadvantaged by these changes and facilitate an increase in their hours of work where they request it.

Key Issues

Payment of £250 to employees earning less than £21,000 per year

            The Trade Union group letter appears to link to a June 2010 budget statement which announced ‘a two-year pay freeze for public sector workforces, except for workers earning less than £21,000 a year who will receive an increase of at least £250 per year in these years,’ to a recent payment by Lisburn City Council to its officers earning less than £21,000 per year.

            The pay awards referred to in the June 2010 budget statement were not, however, made by local government, and the Government’s proposals in this regard were set aside by the Employers’ Side of the National Joint Council (NJC).

            Lisburn City Council made a one-off, consolidated payment of £250 to any member of staff who was remunerated at or below the NJC pay point Spinal Column Point (SCP) 24. (This did not take into account overtime, weekend or shift enhancement).

            While the decision whether or not to make one-off, additional payments of this kind is for individual councils, Belfast City Council legal advice is that under the Local Government Act (NI) 1972 an officer of the Council shall not, under colour of his office or employment, exact or accept (whether directly or indirectly for himself or through another) any fee or reward whatsoever other than his proper remuneration. In addition, the fixing of wages and salaries is conducted through the joint negotiating machinery of the NJC. Wages are deemed to be the reasonable pecuniary equivalent of the service rendered and anything beyond that is an addition to wages and is a gratuity. The payment of gratuities to officers is ultra vires and therefore unlawful so that the suggested payments to employees would be considered unlawful.

            Employees adversely affected by changes to the Working Tax Credit system.

            Working tax credits can be claimed from HMRC by employees on low incomes. Eligibility for tax credits, however, depends very much on individual circumstances (eg the employee’s age, whether they are part of a couple and whether they have children). HMRC made a number of changes  ...  view the full minutes text for item 23.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0       Purpose

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek approval of a draft response to the Department of the Environment’s review of the Local Government Staff Commission.

2.0       Background

2.1       The Department of the Environment is seeking views on the continuing need for the Local Government Staff Commission, which was established in 1972 and given a range of statutory responsibilities under the Local Government Act (NI) 1972.  The Staff Commission is an Executive Non Departmental Public Body (NDPB) and its remit includes general oversight of matters connected with the recruitment, training and terms and conditions of employment of council officers.

2.2       The Commission’s statutory duties have been static for many years while in contrast the political landscape and policy context in which the Commission operates has changed significantly.  Policy priorities are articulated by the Programme for Government, one of which is the reform of local government.

2.3       The review also includes the Local Government Training Group (LGTG) established in 1993 to help discharge one of the statutory responsibilities of the Staff Commission, assisting councils to identify and address training and development needs from an over arching and sector wide perspective.

2.4       The consultation questionnaire examines the benefits that councils have derived from the Commission over the years; the validity of the Commission’s current remit and how well it has met councils’ needs; the sustainability of the Commission in the future; and value for money.

3.0       Key Issues

3.1       The full response is set out at Appendix one, but in summary it is proposed the Council responds with these key points;

·        Since the establishment of the Staff Commission, councils have matured as corporate public bodies, directly and legally responsible for their own actions, delivering services and internal functions including HR and training.  It is expected that capacity to do this will certainly increase post RPA and there will be less need for the Commission’s oversight of these matters.

·        The amount of advice sought by Belfast City Council from the Commission over the years has diminished as internal HR capacity has grown.  Employment legislation has evolved, ensuring that all council’s have in place and follow best practice recruitment and employment policy and procedures.  In addition, the Equality Commission set up in 1998 now acts as a watchdog in these matters.

·        The Council has benefitted from Staff Commission initiatives and the LGTG’s training programme and select list of training providers over the years and its current aims and objectives are generally in line with council needs. Belfast City Council however believes that delivery of some of the strategic issues around capacity building for the sector, i.e.  leadership development at senior level, hasnot been progressed as a priority.  The Training Group open course provision offers good value for money, often derived from economies of scale achieved through procurement for the sector.  Five hundred and fifty- two  council officers have attended open courses ( with subsidised daily   training rates)  in the last 5 years and the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 24.

            The Director of Property and Projects submitted for the Committee’s consideration the undernoted report:

“1    Relevant Background Information

 1.1   Members will be aware that Council undertook extensive ground decontamination of the former Gasworks site following cessation of gas production in order to permit its redevelopment. To provide sufficient comfort to potential developers the Development Committee at its meeting on 15th October 1997 approved additional insurance protection in the event of possible environmental liability claims arising. The resulting commercial redevelopment of the former Gasworks, facilitated by Council’s ground remediation policies to date, has received many national awards.

1.2As a result of a planning application in 2008 for a second international hotel to be developed on an existing car park within the Gasworks Estate further potential land contamination risks were raised by the Northern Ireland Environmental Agency (NIEA) in respect of ground water contamination. Difficulties were encountered by the developers in quantifying and agreeing the extent of the contamination risks with the NIEA and how to address their concerns should further development be permitted. Over two years after receiving the application Planning Service finally granted consent to this hotel development subject to conditions in respect of addressing the perceived additional land contamination risks.

1.3At its meeting of 21st May 2010 the Strategic Policy & Resources Committee approved the procurement of suitably qualified consultants experienced in the management and development of brownfield sites to undertake a review of the Gasworks Estate (including the Northern Fringe) in order to produce a strategy for its management and future development.

1.4Following the Strategic Policy & Resources Committee decision Land Quality Management Ltd (LQM) were appointed to undertake this review with the aim of providing Council with advice that would be used to develop an appropriate and cost-effective environmental plan for the Gasworks Estate that would satisfy further land contamination concerns raised by the NIEA. This report was delivered to Council officers in mid-September 2012 with the key message that the existence of contamination on the site will need to be managed through regular monitoring however that does not preclude any further development only how that development is to be undertaken. A copy of the executive summary from the has been circulated.

2    Key Issues

2.1Despite undertaking Department of the Environment accredited remediation of the former Gasworks site and the fact that Council also maintains environmental liability insurance for the Estate the NIEA have identified a perceived contamination risk to the underground aquifer located beneath the site.

2.2Coinciding with the economic downturn the delay caused in securing conditioned planning consent for a second international hotel resulted in the loss of further development for the Gasworks Estate and the benefit of additional income for the Council from an enhanced equity ground rent.

2.3Working with the Council’s Legal and Environmental Health Services it was recommended that a three stage land contamination report that would include a legal review undertaken by Council’s Legal Services following an initial Preliminary Risk Assessment (PRA) of the site. The final  ...  view the full minutes text for item 26.

            The Committee was reminded that the Council owned the land to the rear of Smithfield Market which the Department for Regional Development Roads Service (and formerly the Department of the Environment) had been operating as a car park since 1990.  The former Health, Markets and Meat Plant Committee had, in May, 1990, agreed to seek car park operators and had subsequently entered into a Licence Agreement with the Department of the Environment.  The Licence Agreement allowed for a review of the licence payment on 1st December each year and could be terminated by either party giving three months’ notice in writing.

            The Director of Property and Projects reported that negotiations had taken place with Land and Property Services, which was acting for the Department for Regional Development Roads Service, regarding the Licence payment from 1st December, 2011.  The licence fee was based on the gross annual turnover generated by the car park for the preceding twelve month period immediately prior to any review and was subject to fluctuation.  The current licence fee was £64,500 per annum.  The licence fee proposed for the year 1st December to 30th November, 2012 was for the same amount as there had been a slight fall in gross receipts for the car park and the Department for Regional Development were in agreement to the licence fee remaining unchanged.

            The Committee granted approval to the continuation of the Licence Fee at £64,500 per annum, payable by the Department of Regional Development, Roads Service for the Smithfield Car Park for the year commencing 1st December, 2011.

            The Committee approved and adopted the minutes of the meeting of the Good Relations Partnership of 8th October and adopted the recommendations in respect of the following:

            Consultation on Human Trafficking and Exploitation

To approve a draft response to a consultation on a Private Member’s Bill entitled ‘Human Trafficking and Exploitation (Further Provisions and Support for Victims) Bill’.

            Intercultural Cities Conference

To approve the attendance of the Chairman of the Partnership and the Good Relations Manager (or their nominees) at an Intercultural Cities Conference, to be held in Dublin from 6th till 8th February, 2013.

            The Committee was reminded that a major exhibition entitled ‘Shared History: Different Allegiances’ had been commissioned earlier in the year to mark the Decade of Centenaries and covered the period 1912–1914.  It had been launched at the beginning of August and would be in place in the East entrance of the City Hall until the end of February, 2013.  The exhibition had received much positive media coverage and the feedback from the numerous visitors had been very encouraging.

            The Good Relations Manager reported that, at the beginning of September, Ballymena Borough Council had contacted the Council requesting the Good Relations Unit to facilitate a visit by a number of their Elected Members and senior staff.  That cross-party visit had taken place on 12th September and had been very successful, with the Ballymena representatives stating that they had enjoyed the visit and were very impressed with the exhibition.  The matter had been discussed within the Ballymena Borough Council and at their monthly meeting in October it had unanimously agreed to host the exhibition.  Subsequently, a formal request to borrow the exhibition and display it in the Braid Town Hall Museum and Arts Centre for a period of four months next year, that is, from March till June, 2013 had been received.  The Braid Centre was a new purpose-built museum and arts venue and would draw a whole new audience from a wider region.

            The Good Relations Manager reminded the Members that the exhibition had been designed specifically so that it could be dismantled, transported and re-mounted elsewhere, as it had been envisaged being displayed, for example, in another venue in Belfast and had also specified that the design should be modular so that individual elements or panels within the exhibition could be loaned out for display.  The Ballymena representatives had already discussed the possibility of making slight amendments to some of the panels to give them more of a “Ballymena” focus.  Some of the artefacts currently in the glass display cases would not automatically be included in the travelling aspect of the exhibition but Ballymena might be able to make their own loan arrangements with the owners of those objects and the Council could assist in that.

            The exhibition had been funded under the District Council Good Relations Programme by the Office of the First Minister and Deputy First Minister at a cost of approximately £45,000.  That Office, as principal funder, had indicated that it was delighted to hear of the very positive feedback regarding the exhibition and was very supportive of the proposal to stage it in another district council area, since that would demonstrate collaborative working and sharing of public resources within the good relations sector.  The Good Relations Manager pointed out that the costs of the removal and the re-build of the exhibition would be met by Ballymena and would be at no cost to the Council.

            The Committee approved of the loan to Ballymena Borough Council of the exhibition for a period of four months, subject to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 30.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“Relevant Background Information

            The Committee will recall that at its last meeting it agreed that consultation on proposals in relation to Operation Banner should be undertaken with a broad and inclusive list of groups in Belfast and that this consultation exercise should be time-bound, with a further report to be submitted to its next meeting on 19 October.

            Accordingly, those groups named on the two lists submitted to the Committee on 21 September were contacted (lists attached).  Representatives from the army, UDR and police welfare groups were invited to a meeting on Tuesday 2 October and representatives from the various victims groups in the city, as indicated on the list provided by the Victims & Survivors Service (V&SS), were invited to a meeting on Thursday 4 October. The invitation letter, a copy of which has been circulated, outlines the various options that had been considered).

            Each meeting was facilitated by the Council’s Equality & Diversity Officer, the Good Relations Manager and staff from the Good Relations Unit.  Groups who were unable to attend the meeting were informed that their opinions were still welcomed and some submitted comments via e-mail.

Key Issues

Police and armed forces

            The first meeting on Tuesday 2 October was attended by representatives of the police and Royal British Legion.   The police welfare representatives who attended supported in general the proposal to erect a substantial memorial to all those who served in Operation Banner, along with a granite bench, but were not in favour of tree planting.

            The official representative from the Royal British Legion reported that he was speaking on behalf of the RBL, the national Custodian of Remembrance and an organisation that makes significant use of the existing Garden of Remembrance at the City Hall.  He pointed out that there was already a National UK Memorial at the Arboretum in Staffordshire.  He was aware of the political sensitivities surrounding any proposed memorial and stated that the Royal British Legion was keen to avoid anything that might contribute to negative tensions or negative publicity on the issue.  Their main concern was the impact that any planned memorial may have on the Garden of Remembrance, which was a focal point for their two main annual commemoration ceremonies in July and November.

            The Royal Irish Regiment representative was unable to attend but in a written submission proposed an ‘alternative to the ideas of trees, windows, plaques, statues, etc., of which there is already a plethora in and around City Hall and which, I suggest, may be of limited interest to the citizens of Belfast and casual visitors’.

            The RIR representative stated that they are currently planning a Military Gallery in Belfast which would tell the story of the Irish soldier in service to the Crown.  The involvement of the Army in Northern Ireland would form a significant part of that story but would be set in the wider context of the service of Irish men and women, from all sections of our  ...  view the full minutes text for item 31.

            (Mrs. S. Wylie, Director of Health and Environmental Services, attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee was advised that the Health and Environmental Services Committee, at its meeting on 3rd October, had approved a draft response to the consultation document on the proposed new 10-year Public Health Framework for 2012/22 entitled “Fit and Well – Changing Lives” which had been issued by the Department of Health, Social Services and Public Safety.  The framework was designed to be strategic and to provide direction for policies and actions to improve the health and wellbeing of the people of Northern Ireland.  It built on the aims of the previous strategy, Investing for Health, and placed a focus on dealing with the health inequalities which existed using the recommendations put forward through the Government’s review on addressing the social determinants of health (the Marmot Review).  In view of the impact of the public health framework on the role of the Council, in terms of its community planning role, any further comments to the response were being sought from the Committee in that regard.

            The Committee endorsed the draft response to the consultation, a copy of which would be included within the minutes of the Health and Environmental Services Committee of 3rd October.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report and approved the comments as the Council’s response to the consultation:

“1.0    Relevant Background Information

1.1    The Department for Social Development (DSD) is currently running a public consultation on the Government’s proposals for an Urban Regeneration and Community Development policy framework for Northern Ireland. The consultation ends on 25 October 2012.

         DSD state that the new framework will:

-   shape the strategic direction of urban regeneration and community development policy over the coming years, and

-   set out clear priorities for urban regeneration and community development programmes, both before and after the operational responsibility for these is transferred to councils under the reform of local government.

         The Development Department led on the co-ordination of the council’s response working with the Centre for Local Economic Strategies (CLES) and the Chief Executive’s Strategic Planning & Policy team. Given its obvious cross-departmental implications input was gathered from across the council via a number of methods:

·   A special meeting of the Development Committee was held in September, to which all Members of the Council were invited;

·   A facilitated workshop for relevant officers from all departments; and

·   A facilitated workshop for CMT

         The three meetings all considered a series of questions which were used to frame the draft corporate response:

   What were the council’s priorities for urban regeneration and community development?

   How could the new framework contribute to these priorities?

   How could the council best work with DSD post-RPA?

   How could the council work strategically to support DSD to shape the final framework and its delivery.

2.0    Key Issues

2.1    The draft council response (attached as Appendix One) broadly welcomes the new Framework and suggests that it has the potential to set a clear direction for the future in its stated intention to establish clear priorities for urban regeneration and community development. 

2.2    The response also endorses the policy objectives that are set out within it, particularly those which outline the ongoing focus on tackling deprivation and on city competitiveness.  The response suggests that these are central to the success of any framework for urban regeneration and community development. 

2.3    However, the council response also provides a series of challenging recommendations which would strengthen the final DSD framework. These are summarised below:

1.     The framework should act as a catalyst for discussions on the future source and allocation of resources for urban regeneration and community development;

2.     The economic and social potential of Northern Ireland is dependent upon effective urban regeneration and community development in Belfast City;

3.     It must support the future role of local government in place making, post local government reorganisation;

4.     Urban regeneration and community development must be fully integrated within the Framework to achieve positive social and economic outcomes;

5.     The language of urban regeneration and community development used in the Framework should consider using an asset based approach, which recognises the opportunities as well as the challenges;

6.     The private sector must be included as a partner in the process of urban regeneration  ...  view the full minutes text for item 34.