Agenda and minutes

Apologies were received from Councillor Shelton.

Members are asked to declare any interest they may have in the business on the agenda, and/or indicate that Section 106 of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 applied to them.

Members were asked to declare any Disclosable Pecuniary or Other Disclosable Interests they may have in the business on the agenda.

Councillor Chowdhury declared an Other Disclosable Interest, as he had worked with Multi-Access Centres (MACs), and had been contacted by Highfields MAC with regards to Appendix B on the agenda.

Councillor Chaplin declared an Other Disclosable Interest as she had been contacted by Highfields Community Centre with regards to Appendix B on the agenda, but had not responded to a telephone message that was left.

In accordance with the Council’s new Code of Conduct the interests were not considered so significant that they were likely to prejudice Councillor’s judgement of the public interest. Members were, therefore, not required to withdraw from the meeting during discussion of the business on the agenda.

The minutes of the meeting of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Scrutiny Commission held on 28^th November 2012 and 20^th December 2012 are attached, and Members are asked to confirm them as a correct record.

Councillor Chowdhury asked that the minutes of the meeting held on 20^th December 2012 be amended to reflect his attendance at the meeting.

RESOLVED:

that the minutes of the previous meeting of the Economic Development, Culture and Tourism Scrutiny Commission meetings held on 28^th November 2012 and 20^th December 2012, be agreed as a correct record, subject to the amendment above.

Minute 42 – Scrutiny Review of Grants to Curve, Phoenix and De Montfort Hall

The Chair had received correspondence from Chris Maughan, Consultant, who had asked for feedback from Scrutiny Commission Members on the review process and work undertaken by Chris and his team. Chris stated in his letter that there had been little precedent on the study of value for money of arts organisations in receipt of public sector support and was interested to know how the work had been received.

Members’ feedback was positive on the whole, though they stated the misinformation of data during a presentation was regrettable, and had not helped discussion, though a full amendment and amplification had been received. Members also said that future research projects should have information on what other work is being done by the Council or any other organisation locally to avoid duplication. Members said the review had raised questions that needed to be worked on over time, and that information on the three venues should be brought to future Scrutiny Commission meetings to be assessed as to whether the review was productive.

Members asked that the results from the ODI Team’s project also be brought to a future meeting of the Scrutiny Commission.

The Chair summarised Members’ responses by stating there was an enormous amount of data that required careful analysis by departments, and that recommendations in the final report needed to be looked at by venues and department in terms of the agreements and arrangements and service level contracts with two of the venues, and the more direct relationship with De Montfort Hall. She added that following on from the report, all three venues had been asked to each develop a three-year business plan, and an action plan was required to reach out to under-represented groups and out of county residents through the development of the tourism offer in the city. The Chair said further work to look at the expenditure of County residents was required, as the subsidy the city council provided to county residents was not met by county residents’ expenditure.

Jerry Connolly, Members Support Officer, said that a huge methodology had been put in place over the course of the work. He added that the review had got the three venues talking to each other in a way they hadn’t done previously.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any questions, representations or statements of case received in accordance with Council procedures.

It was reported that no questions, representations or statements of case had been received.

The Monitoring Officer to report on the receipt of any petitions received in accordance with Council procedures.

It was reported that no petitions, in accordance with the Council’s procedures, had been received.

The Scrutiny Commission will receive a ‘fly through’ presentation of the design of the market redevelopment from officers and architects, from Cheapside through to the new Food Hall and from Molly O’ Grady’s public house to give a better idea of what the scheme will look like when complete. A link to the City Council’s website www.leicester.gov.uk/marketconsultation will enable the proposals to be viewed.

As part of the consultation process, a series of public displays will be held in the Market Square, attended by officers and members. Comments on the proposals outlined are required by 22^nd February 2013.

Mike Dalzell, Head of Economic Regeneration, made a presentation on where the market redevelopment proposals were, on which consultation was scheduled to run until 22^nd February 2013. Also present at the meeting were Nigel Stephenson and Adam Parker from Greig and Stephenson Architects. The presentation is attached to the minutes for information.

Mike said a number of sessions were being held directly in the Market Square, talking to traders and to shoppers and explaining the scheme. Detailed one-to-one discussions with food hall traders and the architects had explored what traders’ requirements were when they moved into the new hall. Details of the meetings and the formal consultation process could be found on the website, at http://www.leicester.gov.uk/consultation/

Given the nature of the scheme, Mike said a lot of stakeholder engagement was being undertaken. He added that a positive meeting with the Chair of the Civic Society had been held, and the scheme would be taken to the next Conservation Advisory Panel meeting on 13^th February 2013. Regular updates had also been presented to Market Forum meetings on which traders were represented. Mike said officers had spoken with English Heritage who were less enthusiastic about the scheme as they liked the Market Corner, with the side of the Corn Exchange exposed. Officers were waiting to receive feedback from them. They had asked if the existing footprint could be used to house the food hall traders, but the suggestion would mean the loss of the new square, and traders would have to be decanted into temporary accommodation, which would be expensive. The City Mayor said English Heritage were consultees, and it was a matter for the Planning Committee to decide the validity of English Heritage concerns. With regards to the work required on the Corn Exchange, the City Council owned the Freehold and a discussion was required with the tenant as to who would pay for the works. Nigel Stephenson added that a conversation with the brewery who owned Molly O’Grady’s was very positive.

Mike discussed the design of the new building and subsequent development of the new square. The East facade had been requested to be re-aligned with the line of the Corn Exchange by Conservation Officers. The roof of the new build would be in scale with the existing roof line, and materials used would be sustainable. Mike said solar glass would be used to provide a comfortable environment inside the building.

Ongoing discussions were being held with planners, as the rear of the Corn Exchange housed the services for Wetherspoons, including fire escape, air conditioning units etc. Nigel Stephenson added there was an option for the west facade facing the new square to have an extension for A3 use, or for extending Wetherspoons, but it would be necessary to create a screen to accommodate Wetherspoons’ services.

Mike said the scheme was still subject to change, and at the end of the consultation a report would be given to the City Mayor, after which it  ...  view the full minutes text for item 73.

The Director, Learning Services, submits a report that will update Members on Multi Access Centres, Adult Skills and Learning Service Review and ESOL.

The Director, Learning Services submitted a report which outlined a proposal to reconfigure the Multi-Access Centre service in order to align with the Leicester to Work initiative and achieve efficiencies, progress on ESOL developments, and Community Learning purposes and priorities. The report was presented by Kerry Gray, Interim Head of Service, Adult Skills and Learning.

Kerry updated the Commission on the current position of the eight Multi-Access Centres (MACs) in the city, and since April 2012, following the end of Working Neighbourhoods Fund (WNF), the MACs had been funded out of the Skills Funding Agency Community Learning grant. Six of the centres were directly managed by the City Council, and the MACs in Braunstone and Highfields were sub-contracted. Kerry said the £119,000 funding for Highfields included admin support and accommodation for adult learning courses, which was different to Braunstone’s contract.

She said it was proposed to consult on a service organisational review in two phases to achieve £416,000 of savings in staffing reductions and a further £92,760 in other efficiency savings. She added that the target date for implementation was the end of July 2013 for Phase 1, and September 2013 for Phase 2.

Kerry said the service was looking to reduce the staffing working on 1:1 consultations in the six MACs under the control of the Council, and the staffing reductions referred to advisers and managers in the service; admin staff were not included in the review. The Chair asked for a report to be presented to a future meeting of the Commission on proposals for spend of the remaining WNF money held by the Council.

Kerry, responding to Members' questions, said all options had been considered. She said completely stopping the support for the unemployed by the Adult Skills and Learning Service would not be desirable, but it was important to focus activity and the available funds on the most effective parts. Kerry added the service was looking at the impact of the services delivered, and it was proposed to redesign and rebrand the Workclubs to provide regular contact with an adviser and rapid response if required - for example if a person needed advice for a job interview. Kerry said advisers would be qualified to at least NVQ Level 3.

Margaret Libreri, Director, Learning Services, said there had not been a sufficient overarching strategic view of initiatives, and the report presented to the Commission had begun to tackle the big issues. As stated in the report the previous management review which had begun in May 2011 would not have achieved the savings required, and the proposed staffing structure would not have been fit for the  the service needs, therefore the decision had been made to stop the review. Margaret said the move of the Adult Skills and Learning  services to Learning Services was a pragmatic decision to address  immediate operational issues, and the service would look at where LASALS best fit. Margaret said that wherever the service sits itsconnections with other sections in the Council were  ...  view the full minutes text for item 75.

The meeting closed at 7.34pm.