Agenda item

The Corporate Director of Regeneration and Culture Department and the Chief Finance Officer submits a report seeking the views of the Scrutiny Committee of the draft revenue strategy for the Regeneration and Culture Department which have been requested by the Cabinet Member.  The Committee is asked to consider the draft revenue strategy and make its comments to the Cabinet.

The Corporate Director of Regeneration and Culture and the Chief Finance Officer submitted a report seeking the views of the Scrutiny Committee on the draft revenue strategy for the Regeneration and Culture Department which have been requested by the Cabinet Member.

Members of the committee discussed the Performing Arts Centre (PAC). In terms of the management of the project, members of the Committee felt that the Chief Executive should take a leading role. Other more general concerns were raised about the input of senior managers in the project. Officers commented that the Cultural Quarter Project Manager reported to a project board. The Chief Executive, the Town Clerk and the Corporate Director of Regeneration and Culture were members of this board. Further points were raised about the PAC. One member felt that his query regarding the size and cost of the originally proposed theatre and the actual size and cost had not been correctly responded to. Committee members also expressed concern that they had not seen a copy of the business plan for the PAC. The Acting Corporate Director commented that he undertook to find out the current position on the business plan and report back to committee members as a matter of urgency. The Chair noted that he had invited the Cultural Quarter Project Director to attend the meeting to discuss the PAC in private session as an item of urgent business. He felt that these issues may be clarified at that point.

A member of the committee raised concern about the 60% reduction of the existing revenue budget for local environmental works and investment in streets. It was felt that this gave the impression that the Council was over focussed on the city centre.

Members of the committee also considered the Haymarket Car Park. It was felt important to retain this as a strategic asset and if potential buyers were aware the Council was to sell then a lower price would be achieved. Other members of the committee felt that fuller consideration should have been given to the proposal to sell the car park lease before it was proposed for sale in a budget strategy. Officers commented that it was previously intended to sell the car park lease as part of the PAC funding strategy. It was previously thought that a rent increase and repair of dilapidations would make retention of the lease too expensive. However it was ascertained that these costs were not as high as it was previously thought, therefore it was agreed to retain the car park lease as a strategic asset. It was however intended to put the Haymarket Theatre lease for sale on the open market.

RESOLVED:

(1)that the committee expresses its disappointment to Council that it had not seen the Performing Arts Centre business Plan;

(2)that the committee recommends that the Chief Executive take personal charge of decisions relating to the Performing Arts Centre;

(3)that the Committee recommends that Council delegates decision making powers on the Performing Arts Centre to the Chief Executive;

(4)that the Committee expresses its concern at the proposed reductions to Local Environmental Works;

(5)that a finalised and clear response be provided for the question regarding the difference original proposal for a theatre that cost £26 million for an 18,000 square foot theatre and the actual theatre which was costing £59 million for a 12, 500 square foot theatre.