Agenda and minutes

Councillor R Shori declared a personal interest that his partner is employed by the Council.

A period of thirty minutes was allocated for any members of the public present at the meeting to ask questions about the work or performance of the Council or Council services.

No questions were asked.

To approve as a correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2016.

Delegated decision:

That the minutes of the meeting held on 19 October 2016 be approved and signed by the Chair as a correct record.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member (Finance and Human Resources) submitted a report informing Cabinet of the Council’s financial position for the period April 2016 to September 2016 and providing a projected estimated outturn at the end of the financial year 2016/2017.

The report included Prudential Indicators in accordance with CIPFA’s Prudential Code.

Delegated decision:

That the financial position of the Council as at 30 September 2016 be noted.

Reason for the decision:

The report has been prepared in accordance with the Council’s Financial Regulations relating to budget monitoring.

Other options considered and rejected:

To amend or reject the recommendation.

The Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member (Finance and Human Resources) submitted a mid-year report on the Treasury Management Strategy which had been prepared in compliance with CIPFA’s Code of Practice, and covers the following:

·          An economic update for the 2016/2017 financial year to 30 September 2016;

·          A review of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Annual Investment Strategy;

·          The Council’s capital expenditure (prudential indicators);

·          A review of the Council’s investment portfolio for 2016/2017;

·          A review of the Council’s borrowing strategy for 2016/2017;

·          A review of any debt rescheduling undertaken during 2016/2017 and

·          A review of compliance with Treasury and Prudential Limits for 2016/17.

Delegated decisions:

1.   That the report be noted.   

2.   That approval be given to the addition of the Greater Manchester bodies to the Counterpart Investment List.

Reasons for the decision:

The review is produced in accordance with the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Code of Practice.

Other option considered and rejected:

To make no changes to the current policy framework.    

The Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member (Business Engagement and Regeneration)submitted a report setting out the policy framework for whole system transformation in Bury. The report outlined the planned approach to the development of a One Commissioning Organisation (OCO).

Delegated decisions:

1. That Cabinet endorse the planning framework, established by the Joint Leadership Team, as the methodology for delivering whole system transformation to support the corporate priorities and strategic outcomes of the Council and the Bury Locality Plan.
2. That approval be given to the planned approach to the development of the One Commissioning Organisation between Bury Council and Bury Clinical Commissioning Group

Reason for the decision:

The decision sets out the approach to the development of an OCO, in line with planned transitional change to deliver on local, regional and national priorities and initiatives within public sector services.

Other option considered and rejected:

To reject the recommendations.

The Cabinet Member (Strategic Housing and Support Services) submitted a report providing an update on the work to explore the option of the Springs Tenant Management Organisation becoming a self-financing tenant management organisation.

Delegated decisions:

That approval be given for the Council to continue to support Springs Tenant Management Organisation to become a self-financing organisation.

Reason for the decision:

The development of a self-financing organisation will continue to improve the Springs Tenant Management Organisation and will benefit the residents of the Springs estate.              

Other option considered and rejected:

Do nothing.  This would prevent Springs Tenant Management Organisation fulfilling its ambitions to become a self-financing tenant management organisation.

The Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member (Business Engagement and Regeneration) submitted a report providing an update on the corporate performance of the Council in line with the Single Outcomes Framework for Team Bury. The Singles Outcomes Framework has been agreed with the Team Bury Wider Leadership Group with the following high level outcomes:

-  All people of Bury live healthier, resilient lives and have ownership of their wellbeing (SOF-1);

-  Bury people live in a clean and sustainable environment (SOF-2);

-  People of Bury at all ages have high level and appropriate skills (SOF-3);

-  All Bury people achieve a decent standard of living, and are provided with opportunities through growth (SOF-4); and

-  Bury is a safe place to live, with all people protected (and feel protected) from harm (SOF-5).

Delegated decision:

That the report be noted.

Reason for the decision:

The continued development of the indicators and performance measures will help improve the overall performance of the Council.

Other option considered and rejected:

To reject the recommendation.

The Cabinet Member (Health and Wellbeing)submitted the Public Health Annual Report on the health of the population of Bury. The theme of the report focussed on inequalities experienced by individuals due to gender, disability, ethnicity, mental health and sexuality. It also highlighted the causes and impacts of health inequalities and how these can be addressed.

Delegated decisions:

1.   That the report be noted.

2.   That the Council continue to work in co-operation with other agencies to implement the recommendations.

Reason for the decision:

The Director of Health has a statutory responsibility to produce an annual report and the Council has a statutory duty to publish the report.

Other option considered and rejected:

To reject the recommendation.

Delegated decision:

That in accordance with Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business as it involved the likely disclosure of exempt information as detailed in the conditions of category 3.

The Cabinet Member (Strategic Housing and Support Services) submitted a report regarding the contract between the Council and Six Town Housing which will expire on 31 March 2017. In addition the Tenure of the Chair of the Six Town Housing Board will end on 31 December 2016. A review of Housing Management arrangements has now commenced and it is proposed that the current contract between the Council and Six Town Housing and the appointment of the Chair to the Six Town Housing Board be extended until 31 March 2018.

Delegated decisions:

1.   That approval be given to extend the current Housing Management Contract between Bury Metropolitan Borough Council and Six Town Housing Limited, on the same terms, to 31 March 2018 (subject to the matters in paragraph 3)

2.   That approval be given to extend of the tenure of Six Town Housing’s Board Chair until 31 March 2018.

3.   That during the extended contract period, approval be given to the following:

·         That a freeze be placed on the Management Agreement Fee provided to Six Town Housing Limited.

·         That, without prior written permission from the Council, Six Town Housing will not:

o   Utilise reserves/surpluses of Six Town Housing Limited or the Housing Revenue Account

o   enter into any new contracts

o   enter into any new business areas

o   undergo any restructures or staffing restructures.

Reasons for the decisions:

1.   The Council require the contract to be fulfilled in the interim period, prior to the recommendations and implementation of the review of the housing management service.

2.   It would be unhelpful in for instance creating instability if a new chair was to be appointed for this interim period.

3.   Any changes to the service and staffing would also be potentially unhelpful in the interim period.

Other option considered and rejected:

To reject the recommendation.