Agenda item

The Director of Tourism, Culture and Inward Investment submits a report to provide an update on the Executive decision taken by the City Mayor on 28 May 2024 relating to continuation of Phase 4 and 5 capital works programme at Leicester Museum and Art Gallery (LMAG).

The Culture and Neighbourhoods Scrutiny Commission is recommended to either:

a) Note the report without further comment or recommendation. (If the report is noted the process continues and the call in will be considered at Council); or

b) Comment on the specific issues raised by the call-in. (If comments are made the process continues and the comments and call in will be considered at Council); or

c) Resolve that the call-in be withdrawn (If the committee wish for there to be no further action on the call-in, then they must actively withdraw it. If withdrawal is agreed the call-in process stops, the call-in will not be considered at Council and the original decision takes immediate affect without amendment).

The Monitoring Officer submitted a report informing the Commission that the

Executive decision taken by the City Mayor on 28 May 2024 relating to continuation of Phase 4 and 5 capital works programme at Leicester Museum and Art Gallery (LMAG) had been the subject of a 6 member call-in under the procedures at Rule 12 of Part 4D, City Mayor and Executive Procedure Rules, of the Council’s Constitution.

The Chair clearly outlined the process that he would follow in determining how to resolve the call-in. The Commission was recommended to either:

a) Note the report without further comment or recommendation. (If the report is

noted the process continues and the call in will be considered at Council) or

b) Comment on the specific issues raised by the call-in. (If comments are made

the process continues and the comments and call in will be considered at

Council); or

c) Resolve that the call-in be withdrawn (If the committee wish for there to be

no further action on the call-in, then they must actively withdraw it. If withdrawal

is agreed the call-in process stops, the call-in will not be considered at Council and the original decision takes immediate affect without amendment).

The Chair invited the proposer of the call-in, Councillor Porter, to the table and allotted them five minutes to make their case. The proposer raised the following points:

• Reference was made to the precarious nature of the Council’s finances and the issues faced by residents of the city as a result of poverty.  This in mind it was suggested that there was a moral duty to challenge and scrutinise multi-million-pound proposals from the City Mayor.  It was further noted that the plans had bypassed all scrutiny commissions and had not been presented at full council and as such elected members had not been given the normal opportunity to see the details and voice their views on the proposal and it was suggested that this was detrimental to the democratic process in the city and did nothing to help the poorest and most vulnerable in the city.
• The current financial crisis raised the question of whether, with a limited pot of money, a new café was a priority in the hierarchy of needs.
• It was suggested that on a local level, money could be better spent on projects in wards.
• It was further suggested Council should focus on high-quality public services since the private sector could deliver a new café.

The Chair invited the seconder of the call-in, Councillor Joshi (the original seconder, Cllr Osman, could not attend the meeting), to the table and allotted them five minutes to make their case.  The seconder suggested that this was not aa priority given the economic issues faced in the city and the suffering it caused citizens.

The Chair invited Assistant City Mayor for Culture, Libraries and Community

Centres, Councillor Dempster, to respond and the following points were raised:

• The Council were not spending £3.6m on the café alone, it was a complete project, a small part of which was the café.
• The stresses on Council funding were known and it was acknowledged that the revenue budget was in a precarious situation, however, the scheme being discussed was a capital scheme that would not affect the revenue budget.
• The previous café had not been fit for purpose, which had been why the private operators had pulled out.  It was in the wrong part of the museum and could only be open when the museum was, which had made it financially unviable.  The new café would be able to be run outside of museum hours and would be run and furnished by a private company.  As such the Council were facilitating a situation whereby the operators could have a viable business.
• The museum was something that attracted people to the city.  The national museum service had entrusted the museum with a painting by Renoir, showing that it was right to invest in the museum.
• Investment in the museum and café would bring jobs and generate money which in turn would increase revenue.  This added to the range of reasons to improve the visitor experience. 
• The programme aimed to redesign the ground floor of the building to allow items in storage to be displayed.
• When projects like this were invested in, it was often the case that match-funding was offered, which would mean that the experience would improve further.

The Director of Culture, Tourism and Inward Investment gave a presentation in response to the call-in (slides attached) and the following points in addition to those on the slides were raised:

• The Wildspace Gallery was being shut down and decanted as it was no longer fit for purpose, so the opportunity was being taken to move the café to this space as it was a better location for a private operator.  It would also strip the building back to how it looked 100 years ago.
• New ventilation equipment would be installed, for which £1m of Arts Council funding would help to deliver.
• The money would need to be spent by March 2025 or there would be a risk of losing the Arts Council Funding.
• Since the previous café could only be open when the museum was, museum staff would need to be paid if the café needed to remain open.
• The National Lottery Heritage Fund (NLHF) bid aimed to make the area around the entrance to the museum information about history which then pointed to other areas that the city had to offer.
• The operator of the café should have more capacity to sell food and drink and many potential operators were interested in the opportunity. 
• Since the previous operators had pulled the service due to it being unprofitable, it was important to attract people who were keen to invest once they were given the lease.  This would take some of the cost out of the project and there would be a more efficient model moving forwards.
• The Arts Council MEND fund would cover essential repairs.
• The bulk of the fit-out cost would be paid for by the operator.

The Committee were invited to ask questions and make comments. Key points

included:

• When money was spent on capital projects it was an investment rather than a loss.
• It was wrong to connect this spend with a lack of spending on SEND Transport or adventure playgrounds as it was a different pot of money.
• The Café could provide jobs which could help to alleviate poverty in the city.
• Other cafés were not close to the museum and were often full, meaning that the new café would not take business from elsewhere.
• In a separate comment, it was suggested that the café at Soft Touch Arts could be affected.
• The project would help the energy efficiency of the building.
• Families with limited incomes looked forward to visiting the museums.  Additionally, schools made trips to the museums, so it was important for them to be there.  Museums also brought in tourists to the city.
• In terms of phasing, the project would take around a year, and many areas of the museum would remain open whilst the work was being undertaken.
• In response to a question about the figures for the project, Councillors were referred to the data in the papers.
• The whole spend, on the whole area of the café was around 10% of the budget.
• As the museum was a listed building, all improvements would be worked out with an architect and designed with environmental controls in mind to make the building more environmentally efficient than previously.
• Work would be undertaken on the Victorian Gallery to make it more welcoming.

The Chair asked if the proposer wished to withdraw the call-in. It was noted that the proposer wished for the call-in to proceed.

Councillor Dawood moved that, following the points raised during the meeting, the call-in be withdrawn.

This was seconded by Councillor Aldred and upon being put to the vote the motion was CARRIED.

RESOLVED:

That the call-in be withdrawn.