Agenda item

Following the receipt of a Notice of Call-in within the required deadline, from Councillor Caserta calling in the decision of the Cabinet set out in Minute CA.10 of the meeting held on the 14th October 2020, a meeting of the Committee has been convened in order to consider the matter in accordance with the reasons set out on the Notice of Call-In.

In considering the matter, the options available to the Scrutiny Committee are as follows:

1.   The Scrutiny Committee decides not to offer any comments on the Notice. In this situation the decision of the Cabinet will stand.

2.   The Scrutiny Committee decides to offer comments or

objections, which will be referred back to the Cabinet at the meeting arranged for the 11^th November 2020.

3.   The Scrutiny Committee may refer the Notice, without comment, to the Council. The matter will then be considered by the Council on the 25th November 2020 (a standard item appears on all Council summons to consider referrals from Scrutiny Committees). Any comments or objections from Council will be referred back to the Cabinet at the earliest opportunity, in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet will be required to consider any objections and comments but will not be bound by them unless "it is contrary to the Policy Framework or contrary to or not wholly consistent with the Budget" (Overview and Scrutiny Procedure Rules - Paragraph 16(g) of the Council Constitution).”

A copy of the original paperwork considered by Cabinet, along with the decision Minute and Call –in notice are attached in the agenda packs.

The Scrutiny Committee considered a called-in decision of the Cabinet meeting held on the 14^th October 2020 in accordance with the Council Constitution.

The Cabinet had made the following decision:

Delegated decision

Cabinet agrees to:   

Approve the Terms of Reference for the Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board as detailed in the report.

Reasons for the decision:

It is important that there are clear roles and responsibilities for oversight and delivery of the Radcliffe SRF. Each structure for governance including the RRDB needs clear terms of reference and division of responsibilities to enable the delivery of the SRF and other regeneration initiatives that may emerge over time.       

A call-in notice had been submitted by Councillor Caserta setting out the reasons for the call-in of the decision.

The reasons were set out below:

·         It is unclear how the members of the board was established. It is unclear on the size and scope of the budget available. It is unclear on the responsibilities of the board. There needs to be a more detailed description of the aims and objectives.

As mentioned previously in the meeting, the Chair had split the public question time item and dealt with the public questions related to the agenda item at this stage of the meeting.

Carol Birchmore asked a question onthe Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board:-

At a recent meeting regarding the 2020 draft of the GMSF I questioned the Head of Strategic Planning and Development at Bury Council about the choice of the Elton Reservoir site. He replied that the site was chosen because of its infrastructure. When I refuted this saying it was well known that there was a severe lack of decent infrastructure in Radcliffe it was pointed out that Radcliffe was currently the subject of a Strategic Regeneration Framework (SRF). At a recent webinar the public were informed that investment in the SRF was not dependent on Radcliffe being included in the GMSF and that the two issues were entirely separate. It was recently reported on Facebook by the chair of the SRF that Radcliffe will be receiving an investment of £100 million over the next decade but failed to say where this investment would come from. I therefore would like to know if investment in the SRF will only come about if the residents of Radcliffe accept another 3,500 homes built on their greenbelt and is long overdue investment in Radcliffe only now being considered in order to get Bury’s GMSF plan through?

A Supplementary question was asked:-

Is it not questionable that the individual in charge of trying to push through one of the largest proposed greenbelt developments (Elton Reservoir) in the plans of all 10 authorities making up the GMCA is also in charge of decisions about spending of public money in Radcliffe?

Gareth Staple-Jones asked a question onthe Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board:-

Will the council please declare whether funding for the Radcliffe regeneration project has been ring fenced and protected amidst a climate of cuts from Bury MBC?

Over the last 50 years there has been a chronic lack of investment in Radcliffe compared to other towns in the borough - given recent statements from the council leader regarding the council’s budget after the COVID-19 pandemic it has become a concern of Radcliffe residents that funding will now, yet again be scrapped for Radcliffe.

A Supplementary question was asked:-

Can the councillor/officer in question specifically declare what funds will be protected and what quantities will be available for the project?

The Chair welcomed the Leader and Cabinet Member for Finance and Growth, Councillor Eamonn O’Brien to the meeting and he responded to the public questions and reported that following Cabinet’s endorsement of the Radcliffe Strategic Regeneration Framework (SRF) the Council had been moving to implement the SRF as a priority. This was not dependent on the GMSF and a budget had been allocated towards this project.

Councillor O’Brien informed the committee that a report to Cabinet in September 2020 set out a governance framework to deliver the proposals within the Radcliffe SRF. It asked that a clear terms of reference and division of responsibilities was produced for each of the delivery agencies.

This report proposed a terms of reference for the Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board (the Board), the body which will provide strategic direction, and oversight of the SRF’s proposals.

The SRF was now in the preliminary stages of its delivery phase. As such, it was a critical time to establish a robust governance framework, with strong remits and clearly marked parameters, to ensure a sturdy platform was built from which prompt delivery can come. 

The Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board would be chaired by Sir Howard Bernstein and would coordinate the strategic direction, delivery, oversight and monitoring of the SRF’s projects.

Councillor Susan Southworth had some concerns with the make-up of the board and the lack of females included on it and would welcome outside bodies being contacted to be included.

The highest standard of membership was hoped to be met although right representation was important to get the wider views of all in Radcliffe.

The Chair asked about wider public engagement on the board and it was stated that with Council Members sitting on the board, they had been elected by the public to represent local residents.

Councillor Harris questioned if Sir Howard Bernstein would have conflict of interest given his other advisory work. It was stated that he would chair the board but receive no financial benefit of any payments.

Councillor Powell commented on cross party representation on the board. It was reported that the MP for Bury South had a place on the board.

The Chair enquired about what criteria had been sought for the chairmanship of the board and had there been any other candidates. It was acknowledged that Sir Bernstein was very experienced and a well-known name which could draw attention and investment into the plan with his range of contacts along with his local knowledge of the area.

A discussion took place on Deloitte LLP who had been appointed in February 2020 to prepare the (SRF) for Radcliffe.

The Chief Executive, Geoff Little provided the committee with a brief summary of the key projects for Radcliffe which included improved health and leisure facilities, housing and a new education establishment.

It was agreed:

That, having considered the points raised in the Notice of Call-in, this Committee does not offer any comments to the Cabinet in respect of Minute CA.10 Terms of Reference for the Radcliffe Regeneration Delivery Board.