Meeting documents

Isle of Anglesey County Council
Tuesday, 15th September, 2009

EXTRAORDINARY MEETING OF THE ISLE OF ANGLESEY COUNTY COUNCIL

 

Minutes of the meeting held on 15 September 2009 (10:00am)  

 

PRESENT:

 

Councillor O Glyn Jones -Chair (For Items 1-3 (a) only)

Councillor Selwyn Williams- Vice-Chair

 

Councillors W.J.Chorlton; E.G.Davies; Lewis Davies;

Barrie Durkin;Jim Evans;K.Evans;C.Ll.Everett; P.M.Fowlie D.R.Hughes; Kenneth P.Hughes;T.Ll.Hughes;W.I.Hughes; W.T.Hughes;Eric Jones; Gwilym.O.Jones;Raymond Jones;R.Dylan Jones;R.Ll Jones;T.H.Jones;Aled Morris Jones;C.McGregor; Rhian Medi; Bryan Owen; J.V.Owen; R.L.Owen; Bob.Parry OBE; G.O.Parry MBE; Eric Roberts; G.W.Roberts OBE,  J.Arwel Roberts; Peter.S.Rogers; E.Schofield; Hefin W.Thomas; Ieuan Williams; J.Penri Williams

 

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE:

 

Acting Managing Director;

Corporate Director (Finance);

Corporate Director (Environment & Technical Services);

Acting Corporate Director (Housing and Social Services)

Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer;

Head of Service (Policy),

Head of Service (Leisure and Community)

Solicitor to the Monitoring Officer;

Committee Services Manager;

Communications Officer

 

 

 

APOLOGIES:

 

Councillors Fflur Medi Hughes, H.Eifion Jones,R.Ll.Hughes

______________________________________________________________________________

 

The meeting was opened with a Prayer offered by Councillor K. P. Hughes.

 

 

1.  DECLARATION OF INTEREST

 

The Chairman declared an interest in Items 3(b) onwards and was not present at the meeting during any discussion or voting thereon.

 

Councillors E.G.Davies,W.I.Hughes, T.Jones,B.Owen,G.O.Parry,MBE, R.G.Parry,OBE, E.Schofield and I.Williams declared an interest in Items 3 (b) and (c) in their capacity as Executive members whilst the Council today exercised a scrutiny function, took part in the meeting but did not take part in any voting thereon.

 

2.  TO RECEIVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE CHAIRPERSON, LEADER,                 MEMBERS OF THE EXECUTIVE OR THE HEAD OF THE PAID SERVICES.

 

The Chair extended a warm welcome back to Councillor P.M.Fowlie following his recent hospitalisation.

 

Councillor P.M.Fowlie took the opportunity of thanking the Chair and Councillor R.G.Parry as neighbouring Ward Councillors for their willingness to undertake his duties during his period of illness. He also congratulated the Chair and Vice-Chair of the County Council and the Leader and Deputy Leader following their appointment last May.

 

He was very grateful for the support he had received during this time and he requested the Acting Managing Director to send a message to all Departments of the Council thanking staff for the thoughts and good wishes that he had received. Rather than any “doubting Peter’s” on the Island asking the Press as to his state of health, one of the conditions he had was heart failure and he was being treated at Manchester Royal Infirmary. On the 13th August, surgeons failed to gain access to his heart. He was going back there this Friday and the surgeon would be telling him what the next stages of his treatment would be. Unfortunately, as a result of the medication prescribed, he had experienced a case of gout.

 

He once again expressed his sincere thanks to everyone and that if anyone wished to check upon his condition or progress, there was no need to ask for this information through the local press, he was always available at the end of the phone.

                                                             
 

 
 

Councillor W.J.Chorlton took the opportunity of presenting to the Chair a petition with over 1,000 signatures objecting to the closure of the Holyhead Swimming Pool. Likewise, petitions were submitted by Councillors Raymond Jones and C.McGregor for their Ward areas.
 

 
 

 
 

3   LEISURE CENTRES STRATEGY
 

 
 

     (a)      Submitted- A verbal report by the Corporate Director (Finance) on the Budget Outlook.
 

 
 

     The Corporate Director (Finance) reported that he had been requested by the Principal Scrutiny  
 

      Committee to submit a presentation to Council so that members could see exactly what the financial   
 

      background was to the decisions with regard to the Leisure Centres Strategy and to matters      
 

      generally.
 

 
 

Public spending was the subject of debate in the media every day as a result of the recession. The presentation before Council today was based on the presentation given to the Executive in May and June, 2009. The main messages were similar but had been updated following a presentation by the W.L.G.A last week.
 

 
 

The information being given today was based on figures which had been published with regard to public spending by the Chancellor, the Welsh Assembly and others.
 

 
 

The situation had arisen because of the global recession. Economic prosperity was reducing, people’s income was going down, profits were going down, which resulted in income from taxes going down throughout the world and a resultant decline in public spending. This Council depended on 80% of its funding from the National Assembly and it in turn depended on its funding from Central Government.
 

 
 

The Council had adopted a 3 year medium term plan in March 2009. In that plan, £2m was used from reserves in 2009/10. The Council was already using reserves to a considerable degree to avoid making higher cuts which would have had to happen. It was projected that the sum needed to be paid back over the next 2-3 years. It was projected at that time that 1.5% annual savings and a 4.5% annual Council tax increase would be required in order to recover the situation over 3 years. However, since publishing the Chancellor’s national budget in April, that plan looked much too optimistic.
 

 
 

The Director referred Members to Table 3 of his presentation (Medium Term Financial Plan) which referred to the total budget for years 2009-12 funded from Council Tax, WAG unhypothecated funding and reserves.
 

 
 

The Director went on to state that the Department were in the process of completing the accounts for 2008/09 which would be submitted to the Audit Committee at the end of the month for confirmation.
 

 
 

There had been a net deterioration since March. The position in respect of reserves looked a bit worse now than in March when officers were trying to project the situation for the end of the financial year.
 

 
 

When one looked at the current year, there was a slight improvement in the financial situation. Based on first quarter monitoring only it could be seen that there was some underspend in corporate budgets. Officers had identified that inflation had been a considerable risk in terms of the current year, but it appeared that perhaps the Council did not require the contingency that it had kept for inflation. If that turned out as expected it was hoped that there would be a slight improvement for 2009/10. The situation had therefore improved in one year but deteriorated in another.
 

 
 

At this juncture, the Corporate Director reminded Council of the message that he had given to the Executive on 9th February, 2009, what it adopted the budget for this year and the 3 year plan. The Council was using its reserves to a considerable degree. By March, it was starting to appear that the national financial situation was deteriorating and officers were becoming nervous in using £2m of reserves.
 

 
 

The message was, rather than using £2m from balances, every saving coming to us this year was something to be banked rather than finance additional spending. This must be the approach for the coming period to ensure that drawing on reserves was minimised. However, reserves would be required in future years to deal with the storm being faced in terms of public finance.
 

 
 

This was the message given to the County Council back in March and the Director did not apologise for repeating it today. The Corporate Director then went on to refer to the next financial year 2010/11. When the Council adopted a 3 year plan, officers were projecting an additional 1.3% WAG funding. 1.3% was historically low. Since then the Chancellor had announced his national budget in April of this year and had cut back considerably on funds coming down from London to Cardiff. The UK budget had cut back WAG revenue funding by £215m and Capital by £200m. If WAG’s budget revenue cut was approximately 1.5% then the neutral assumption might be no cash increase to this Councils funding.
 

 
 

On average the money for local government was increasing by 2.9%. Some Councils were doing better or worse than that. That happened every year since there was a formula funding according to a number of different statistics to measure need. The lowest received 1.6%, the best got 4.7%. Recently the Council had been doing worse under the formula than the average for Wales. The main reason being that the Island’s population was not growing like the remainder of the population in Wales. If the Assembly reduced that 2.9% to 2% then the Councils at the bottom would only get 0.7%. If Councils received 1.3% on average then the Councils at the bottom would receive nothing.
 

An announcement in this respect was expected on 13th October. In 2010-11 it was possible that there would be no increase for inflation or anything else and that this Council would receive something similar next year to this year.
 

 
 

At the moment, Councils were aware of the cut-backs from London to Cardiff. On 6th October the Assembly would be announcing their budget and that was when we would know how local government had done in terms of its share of the cake. The following week we would be aware how that sum was to be shared out between individual Councils. Because Anglesey was likely to get one of the smallest percentage increases, there had been discussion once again at the W.L.G.A. In terms of ‘floor funding’. What this meant was that a floor of 0.5% or 1% was set and no Council would get less than that amount.
 

 
 

At discussions with the W.L.G.A last week there was a feeling amongst Councils in Wales that there should be some kind of floor in the settlement again. The Director welcomed such course of action since it protected this Council in terms of funding levels coming down from the Assembly. However, there was a catch. In a graph prepared by the W.L.G.A as regards Council Tax increases for 2009/10 throughout Wales, capping was set at 5% and a number of Councils were close or on this figure. The average was 3.95%. What some Councils were saying was that, if for example this Authority was in a situation where it had a very low increase from the Assembly and required help from ‘floor funding’, then this Authority was not supposed to use that figure towards reducing the Council Tax. If say a figure of £1m was received from the Assembly, then the Assembly expected a similar amount to be raised from the ratepayers. That message had been made clear over the years and was even stronger by now.
 

 
 

This Council was expected to have an increase in Council Tax if it were to receive that protection from the Assembly. There was a very important message here for all Members when this Council came to discuss the Council Tax. This Council was playing a national game with other Authorities and with the Assembly.
 

 
 

The Director did not consider that this Council was in a position where any national body could compel decisions upon it. At the end of the day it was a democratic local decision that would be made. But in making that decision, one had to consider what was expected and the possible loss of financial support.
 

 
 

Looking at the prospects for 2010-11 the recession would create pressure on some budgets with more demand for some services. Job evaluation was possibly going to be an additional burden on the budget. Public sector pensions were also a problem across the board in the public sector. Some were saying nationally that public sector pensions were an unfair burden on the country. That burden fell on the pension fund.
 

 
 

There was limited capacity to raise income because of the recession. People’s ability to pay in terms of fees was reducing. Inflation was low and public expectation had decreased in terms of what was reasonable to pay. In the past increasing parking fees or school meal fees had contributed to alleviating the financial problem. Perhaps the ability to do this now was limited because of the financial situation.  There was also great uncertainty as regards inflation and interest rates and how the recession would affect Council Services. We were in a position that was unprecedented.
 

 
 

Looking forward to prospects for 2011-12 and thereafter - Cuts to total public spending were known since the Chancellor set out his budget for the year. It also depended on what the Prime Minister said today in that there was reference to further cuts on top of cuts mentioned previously.
 

 
 

Pricewaterhouse Coopers also reported last week and the title of their presentation was ‘Managing in a Perfect Storm’. What this meant was that everything bad happened together in that you lost money and there was a burden and higher costs on service. They stated that within 2-3 years we could be facing cuts of between 20-30%. That was much worse than any figures he as Corporate Director had given members today.
 

 
 

This was also what SOLACE were saying in that their draft figures of the approximate annual budget shortfall for 2013/14 for small Authorities would be £5m at best, moderately £13.8m and the worst case scenario at £33.4m. This Council was only a small Authority with an annual budget of £110m. £33m was therefore a 30% cut in budget. The Director hoped that this Council would be nearer the moderate case, but it could be worse and unlikely to be better.
 

 
 

When he looked at the prospects for 2011-12, he saw there was pressure on costs, national insurance and pension increases from 2011, a landfill tax escalation and a cash cut in WAG funding.
 

 
 

If members thought that this news was bad, then the capital expenditure for the public sector was much worse. WAG capital funding was to halve by 2013-14. It was very difficult to think this through in its impact with regard to capital programmes.
 

 
 

He foresaw cuts over the next few months to core funding and some capital grants being discontinued by the Assembly and local government. There could even be no new capital projects at all.
 

 
 

He drew the Council’s attention to the following statements made by individuals in recent months as regards public expenditure.
 

 
 

“As Finance Minister, I have been saying consistently for around 18 months now, the years of plenty have come to an end, and we need to be planning for some lean years coming ahead” Andrew Davies AM, Dragon’s Eye, 12 February 2009.
 

 
 

“Public service managers that do not plan their spending on the basis that they will have substantially less money to spend in two years are living in cloud-cuckoo-land”  Steve Bundred, Chief Executive of Audit Commission, The Times 27 February.
 

 
 

“For years politicians have argued about how to spend the proceeds of growth. For years to come they will have to argue about what should be cut” Nick Robinson, BBC, 23 April 2009.
 

 
 

The Director thought that this last statement was very significant for this Authority. When the Council discussed its priorities they were usually priorities for the development of services for the capital programme i.e. new buildings, etc. But in future, the discussions would have to concentrate on cuts and the possibility of improvement of growth in services was more or less nil.
 

 
 

“The public sector will be the last sector into the recession and the last one out. So far, it has been government policy to protect public services, and no government is going to introduce cuts or even threaten them with a general election looming. This all bodes very ill for the budgets allocated to public organisations after the election” Jeff Jones, Local Government Consultant, Western Mail, 12 August 2009.
 

 
 

“The decisions we take over the next year or so will define the shape of Wales, the United Kingdom, for the next decade and beyond” Alastair Darling, speaking to Welsh business leaders, 8 September 2009.
 

 
 

People were not mentioning cuts before the General Election. However, by today, political parties were acknowledging that cuts were inevitable, whoever was in power. The public sector usually followed the private sector in an economic crisis. Even if the recession ended today, the pressure of cuts on public expenditure still existed.
 

 
 

The Director went on to explain his attempt at amending the 3 year plan for 2009-10 to 2012-13. There would be more pressure on expenditure, pensioners, etc and funding reduced. He had assumed in his figures that the Council would raise Council Tax by 4% following the message given to him by the WLGA. Because of this, the figures were slightly better than the figures he had provided back in June. In June he was talking about cuts of £10m over 3 years . The level of cuts to be made would be more than the level of cuts made at any time during the life of this Council.
 

 
 

The Director went on to suggest how cuts could be achieved. The usual suspects were to reduce top management, back-office functions and delete non-statutory services.
 

 
 

However, this would not be enough and were only a small part of the budget. To save 20% of top tier management costs would only achieve £0.3m; 10% of support services would achieve £0.7m. These were very high targets and were usually lower than this, i.e. the realistic level to achieve: All the non-statutory services provided by the Council only cost £5m. Even if the Council decided to close all of its Leisure Services and Economic Development it still would not achieve sufficient savings.
 

 
 

The Council would therefore have to look at Statutory Services. Most of that budget went towards Education and Social Services. The Council would have to think about different patterns of services since it was possible that the expectations of the public might change. National standards may change throughout the country, throughout the world.
 

 
 

The Director was recently asked at the Principal Scrutiny Committee to provide a list of what the Council might have to do in order to achieve these savings. At the end of the day there would be very difficult decisions to make, as regards the type of savings that must be achieved.
 

 
 

The Council must therefore look at whether or not it could afford the present level of Leisure Centres, Libraries and Day Centres in its towns and villages.
 

 
 

Regarding the rationalisation of primary schools, this Council had already discussed closing 4/5 schools. That had caused great concern in the community. The Director considered that this figure would have to be revised and that over the next few years this figure might well be between 10-20 primary schools. Could the Council continue to maintain a sixth form in every secondary school? If we did rationalise, then there was a question as regards the sustainability of 5 Secondary Schools.
 

 
 

As regards Social Services, certainly the Council must re-visit the threshold where people were given support in the community. In this climate, people must become more independent, or more dependent upon family or neighbours, because the public sector support would not be there. We must go back to the old way of thinking and not depend so much upon the State.
 

 
 

He also believed that it was necessary to re-consider the nature of some Social Services provided by the Council. Some individuals with very acute needs and the unit cost of maintaining them in the community was very high. It had been national policy for many years to take people out of establishments and into the community. He understood that policy, but in future those policies would have to be re-considered.
 

 
 

Another major budget was Highways and it might be necessary to make hard cut-backs to highway maintenance. There may be a necessity to introduce more restrictions on the highways, such as weight, speed, and closing some rural roads in the long term. Lastly, economic regeneration was not statutory and the Council might have to reduce the level of investment. Compared with England, the level of expenditure in Wales on economic regeneration was very high. There were questions being raised as regards duplication and Counties competing against each other.
 

 
 

The above were not options but must all be acted upon over a period of time.
 

 
 

Lastly, the Director referred to what might improve the situation? The freezing of public sector salaries nationally would help. Also some restriction on public sector pensions. If UK cuts fell on non-devoloved departments,e.g. if the British Government cancelled Trident or identity cards, the Assembly would not receive the same share of the cut. There needed to be a global re-thinking on acceptable levels of public debt to take us out of the recession.
 

 
 

Perhaps things might be worse at the end of the day with inflation out of control, economic pressures leading to increased service demand and further public expenditure cuts after the General Election.
 

The Corporate Director apoligised to the Council for the bad news but he considered it to be useful as background to the difficult decisions facing this Council.  
 

 
 

                                                                                                         
 

 
 

The Chair thanked the Director for his presentation and stated that a copy of the slide would be available to all Members if requested.
 

 
 

Councillor Tom Jones, Portfolio Holder for Finance thanked the Director for his presentation. The Council was facing difficult times. Things were not likely to get better in public expenditure until at least 2018. In other words, the Council was facing a difficult years. It was a sad situation but at least the Council had been provided with a realistic picture of the prospects.
 

 
 

Councillor P.S.Rogers stated that he was a member of the North Wales Police Authority and that they had been more than aware of what was happening. They were not in such a state of doom and gloom. They were facing the future and had put plans in place and were looking to achieve those objectives. How much money had been wasted by this Council on the school meals contract and on re-organising this Council and losing its former Managing Director? There was now a Recovery Board and an Interim Managing Director coming in to run this Council. This Council was rich in assets , yet this was the lowest performing Authority in Wales with the poorest people in Wales. The first hit in his opinion should not be the Leisure Centres and the Council should be looking at an overall figure.
 

 
 

Councillor J.Penri Williams stated that the Government had given £50b extra to the Banking system which was on average £55m of Anglesey money. He asked how much extra money this Council would receive if the Barnett formula was revised? The Olympic Games were costing £112m and it was all being spent in London. Gwynedd Council had already received a list of cuts along with costings and it amounted to £22m.
 

 
 

The Corporate Director (Finance) in reply that the projected figures for public expenditure was as a result of the recession and not this Government’s bailing out of the Banks.
 

 
 

The money given to the Banks was paper money, i.e money that had been created by adiminstrative action. He agreed that there was an injustice in the Barnett Formula as had been outlined recently by the Holtham Commission. With a fairer formula Wales would be better off. However, this was not a time that the Government would acknowledge this, particularly before a General Election. As regards a list of cuts, that fell upon elected members in conjunction with officers.
 

 
 

Councillor G.W.Roberts OBE stated that today had been a reality check. He was led to believe that there would be a £5m cut this year for Anglesey by the Assembly and £8m thereafter.
 

 
 

The Corporate Director (Finance) stated that in his June projections he was talking about £5m p.a. for the next two years. In today’s projections he had rolled it forward another year. He was therefore looking at £3-4 m per year in that projection. When the Assembly budget was received those figures would change.
 

 
 

Councillor Aled Morris Jones considered that the Council needed to ask the Assembly and Central Government to be honest with their figures before the General Election. He asked the Leader to write to the WLGA requesting Central Government to look at certain projects, such as identifity cards, with a view to them being scrapped.
 

 
 

Councillor E.Schofield thanked the Director for his clear report. By 2013 the projections were that there would be cuts of 30%. During the next financial year, the Council would have to commence its work of achieving savings not only in its non-statutory services but also in its mandatory services.
 

 
 

Councillor C.LL.Everett stated that the Council had assets over and above other Councils such as realising some of the money available from the sale of the Tunnicliffe paintings at Oriel Mon. This could be used towards retaining the Leisure Centres.
 

 
 

The Corporate Director (Finance) in reply stated that asset sales had a place in financing capital schemes. However, during the present climate, people did not have the money to buy or could not borrow finance from the banks. Prices in the art market were collapsing as well.
 

 
 

Councillor C.Ll.Everett went on to refer to S.106 Agreements regarding developments on the Island. The Council needed to be looking for planning gain to be put into non-statutory capital and revenue projects. He referred to Morrisons at Holyhead as a prime example.
 

 
 

Councillor J.V.Owen enquired as to the cost to the ratepayers of Anglesey if the Leisure Centres were all retained?
 

 
 

The Corporate Director (Finance) in reply stated that if instead of cutting £5m next year, the Council decided to maintain the status quo, then this would involve an increase of 20-30% on the Council Tax. The Council would not be allowed to take such course of action since it would be capped by the Assembly.
 

 
 

Closing the Leisure Centres would not be enough and this Council was faced with making a dozen unpopular decisions over the course of the next few years in order to balance the budget.
 

 
 

Councillor Raymond Jones considered that large amounts of money had been wasted by the Council in defending the Beaumaris Marina, the termination by agreement of the Managing Director’s contract, the weekly cost of funding Oriel Mon and the Llangefni Golf Course.He considered that the land at the Golf Course could be sold for housing development.
 

 
 

Councillor Keith Evans enquired as to why the Leisure Centre Service had been singled out for attention? Was it a soft target or not?
 

 
 

The Corporate Director (Finance) in reply stated that it was not possible to unveil a programme of savings all at once, something had to come first. Leisure Services was not singled out, it was just unlucky to be considered first.
 

 
 

The Deputy Leader stated that it was his understanding that Llangefni Golf Course was making a profit and not a loss. As regards the point raised earlier as to the Recovery Board, all that it would do, would be to look at the decisions made by Councillors and it would not even meet on the Island.
 

 
 

The Acting Managing Director in reply stated that he would be referring to the remit of the Recovery Board at this afternoon’s meeting. As regards the Llangefni Golf Course, this was a public facility that had over the years been very healthy as regards its budget and income. However, over the last two years the Course had suffered financially due to the inclement weather.
 

 
 

Councillor J.Arwel Roberts considered that cuts should commence with the Education Service, in that teachers who retired on Friday came back on Monday as supply teachers, costing a fortune to the people of Anglesey. Young qualified teachers were unable to get jobs as a result.
 

 
 

The Acting Managing Director in reply stated the question of re-employment of teachers had arisen on numerous occasions over the years. Their employment at the end of the day was a matter for the School Governors and the Council had no control in this respect as long as they were qualified, fit and well. He reminded the Council, that schools very often over the last 10-15 years had been obliged to make cuts and that many of those teachers had to leave, not out of choice but out of necessity. The Department had reminded Governors of the need to give priority to newly qualified teachers. However, the Department could only advise in this respect. As regards Leisure Centres, officers had been had been attempting over the years to ensure that the Service was more cost effective. At the end of the day it was a matter for members to decide upon their list of priorities.
 

 
 

Resolved that the Leader be requested to write to the WLGA requesting them to contact Central Government asking them to review national projects which could be done away with at the present time, without having an effect on local services.  
 

 
 

    (b)Submitted for information- Reports received by the Executive on 23 June, 2009 and 21 July,                    2009 in relation to the Leisure Centres Strategy.
 

 
 

     The Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer stated that she had been requested to advise upon, the discussion that could take place for this part of the meeting. The full Council was now sitting in its role as a Principal Scrutiny Committee. What that meant was that the members of the Executive who took part in the original decision had a prejudicial interest, but the Code of Conduct permitted them to remain at the meeting and to take part in the discussion. However, they had been advised that they were not permitted to vote on any resolution, because effectively the Council today was acting as the Principal Scrutiny Committee. Agenda Item 4 could however,be decided by all Members of the Council.
 

     The Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer had also been requested to advise whether 
 

     decisions on reductions in Services at Leisure Centres including the closure of pools, should be a             matter for the Executive or the full Council to decide.
 

      
 

     What it said in the Constitution was “that if a decision of the Executive is contrary to or not wholly in accordance with the policy framework, then the decision must be made by the full Council.” The policy framework started at Page 36 of the Constitution and it listed in excess of 30 plans and strategies that had been adopted by full Council itself. So any decision that was going to have any material impact on those plans and strategies needed to be taken by full Council rather than the Executive.
 

      
 

     She had therefore liaised with every Head of Service and asked them to analyse the plans and strategies in the policy framework for which they had responsibility and to come back to her with their views as to whether or not the proposed closure of the Beaumaris Leisure Centre and the proposed closure of two swimming pools was contrary to, or wholly not in accordance with any plan or Strategy which fell under the remit of the full Council. She had received 5 replies, analysed the information and had reached the conclusion that the proposed closures were not wholly in accordance with the Children and Young People’s Plan and the Social Care Plan. There were also some elements of the Improvement Plan and the Community Plan that also caused her concern. She was in receipt of a fully reasoned argument that was prepared by Leisure Services which she was happy to share with anyone who required a copy. She was satisfied that this matter should ultimately be a decision for full Council and not the Executive.
 

      
 

     Councillor G.O.Parry, MBE requested that he be provided with a written copy of her statement for 
 

     clarification purposes.
 

      
 

     The Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer stated that she would provide Councillor Parry with a copy.
 

      
 

     Councillor Rhian Medi enquired as to whether the same argument applied to the schools rationalisation programme?
 

      
 

     The Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer in reply stated that advice had been given on the last occasion, when this matter was before the Executive, based on the information received from the Education Service about the contents of their plans and strategies at the relevant time and also on advice the Education Solicitor had received from the Welsh Assembly. She had asked the Education Solicitor and Mr Geraint Ellis to undertake that exercise again before any decisions were taken on school closures.
 

      
 

     Councillor E.Schofield wished to state that the decision of the Executive at the end of the day regarding swimming pool closures was that the Executive would be considering the closure of 2 swimming pools, subject to consultation with the Unions and also subject to a full report regarding their condition. The decision by the former Executive 3 years ago was not robust enough with regard to the Beaumaris Leisure Centre and was the Council finding itself in the same position here today?
 

 
 

     The Acting Managing Director confirmed that no final decision had been taken regarding the Leisure Service. What the Executive had been doing was considering what was affordable. They had come to an interim conclusion that it did not look likely that the Council could afford to maintain the status quo and had asked officers to undertake further work as regards the condition of the buildings, the opinion of staff and the Unions. There was he stated nothing preventing the Executive from presenting recommendations to the Council in this respect.
 

      
 

     Councillor E.Schofield went on to state that the Executive had not made a final decision regarding the closure of pools. He asked whether the Executive would be prohibited from taking part in discussion and voting upon the matter at Council?
 

      
 

     The Director of Legal Services/ Monitoring Officer in reply stated that once the matter was before Council for decision, there were no restrictions on members, unless they had a personal interest. They would be allowed to take part in discussion and voting providing everybody could demonstrate that they had kept an open mind, i.e. that they were prepared to consider all the evidence, the arguments, and all the consultation material received, by the time of the final decision.
 

      
 

     Councillor C.Ll.Everett drew members attention to the fact that the Executive on 21st July did resolve to close two pools on Anglesey. This was then called-in by the Principal Scrutiny Committee which prevented that decision being carried out. He actually proposed at this meeting that the matter be referred to full Council since he considered that the Executive was breaking certain conditions of the constitution. This had been confirmed by the Director of Legal Services/ Monitoring Officer today.
 

      
 

     Councillor E.Schofield in reply stated that this was a conditional decision by the Executive and that no final decision had yet been reached.
 

      
 

     Councillor W.J.Chorlton stated that the fundamental point at the end of the day was that it was the Council and not the Executive that should decide the future of the swimming pools.
 

      
 

     Councillor P.S.Rogers asked Councillor G.O.Parry to explain to Council some of the comments he had made recently in the local press telling young children to jump into the sea?
 

      
 

     Councillor G.O.Parry, MBE in reply stated that the comment he had been made was that there were beaches around the coastline and that it was an opportunity for people to use them and learn to swim there. So many people had done so in the past.
 

      
 

     He was not ignoring the fact that the pools were also useful. He had also indicated that the tourists who came here took advantage of our beautiful coastline and beaches and that was part and parcel of maintaining their health. There were also all kinds of opportunities for people to enjoy our Island and to keep fit and healthy.
 

      
 

     RESOLVED to note the contents of the reports received by the Executive on 23rd June and 21st July, 2009.
 

 
 

    (c)   Submitted and noted, the minutes of the meeting of the Principal Scrutiny Committee held on               7 August, 2009. (Call-In)
 

 
 

     Councillor C.Ll.Everett referred members to Pages 5 and 6 of those minutes where he had specifically referred to the Weightlifting Club at Holyhead. He requested that the future of the Club should be referred to the Charitable Trust with a request that they release capital money in order to achieve the aspirations of the Club. He further requested that Councillor G.W.Roberts accept this as part of this Notice of Motion the Council would be discussing at Item 4 of the agenda. His proposal was seconded by Councillor W.J.Chorlton.
 

      
 

     The Corporate Director (Finance) stated that certainly it was not out of order for the Council to ask for the release of capital from the Trust. However, his advice to the Trust would be that it would have to be rejected since it did not comply with the rules of the Trust in that the Trust could not make a contribution to a service that was the responsibility of the County Council. The Trust was not in existence in order to bail out the problems of the Council. It was not out of order, but he considered it unwise for the Council to make such a request.
 

      
 

     Councillor E.Schofield, as Chairman of the Charitable Trust, stated that he would be prepared to accept an application from the Weightlifting Club for consideration if it met the conditions of the Trust.
 

      
 

     Councillor C.Ll.Everett stated that in views of the above assurance by Councillor Schofield, he was prepared to withdraw his proposal.
 

      
 

     Councillor T.Lloyd Hughes requested that any application to the Charitable Trust in this respect should also take on board the views of the Holyhead Secondary School.
 

      
 

     Councillor J.Penri Williams on another matter referred members to Page 7 of the minutes where he had enquired as to the possibility of saving money at our Leisure Centres, via the use of carbon trust, green power solar panels, steam power, windmills and paper insulation of the buildings?
 

      
 

     The Head of Service (Leisure Communities) in reply stated that discussions had previously taken place in respect of using wind turbines and the carbon trust. Every effort was being made in order to save money. There was more work to be done before Officers could bring a report back to members on ways of achieving savings.The Leader confirmed that the matters referred to by Councillor J.Penri William would be taken into consideration before a final decision was reached.
 

      
 

     RESOLVED  to note the contents of the minutes of the Principal Scrutiny Committee of 7th August, 2009.
 

 
 

4.  NOTICES OF MOTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARA 4.1.13.1. OF THE                      CONSTITUTION.
 

 
 

     (i)The following Notice of Motion was submitted by Councillor G.Winston Roberts,OBE:-
 

      
 

     “The decision of closure on the Leisure Centres in Ynys Mon should be deferred for 3 years, as this would create stability for both staff and users.
 

      
 

     An in-depth impact assessment should be carried out of cost and to look at other options, but most of all an in depth discussion with the public, and to work within our own Council Policy - The Health and Well-being Strategy.”
 

      
 

     The Leader of the Council proposed an amendment to the Motion, that was agreed by the Executive last week, in that no single Leisure Centre would close until a full inquiry had been completed on every Centre. The Executive would review staffing and maintenance costs, structural conditions of buildings, conduct a full debate with the work force and also the response of the Voluntary Sector and the Private Sector if they were prepared to take over those Centres and whether they would require some sort of financial assistance to promote any transfer.
 

      
 

     Earlier reference had been made to completing this work within 3 months. This time period was inserted intentionally since the Executive wanted to start the work immediately so that it would be in a position to formulate a budget for adoption by Council for the 2010/11 financial year.
 

      
 

     As Leader, he accepted that because of what the Acting Managing Director said at the last Executive meeting, that the timetable was too tight for the type of work envisaged. And so, it was hoped that this work would be completed by January 2011 at the latest, 15 months forward from today.
 

      
 

      
 

     The Acting Managing Director stated that there was an element of concensus across the Political Groups to ensure that further work was done before the Council reached its final decision. He reiterated what he had said at the Executive, that the necessary detailed work could now be completed within the revised timetable. He requested that the Council should consider this as a target and that officers should not be tied excessively to a firm date. the right answers were required before reaching a decision. He agreed that there should be a project plan and that officers should report regularly to Committee so that any slippage or difficulties were identified early in the process.
 

      
 

     Councillor E.Schofield was of the opinion that a decision on the Leisure Centres should not be made until information was to hand regarding savings achievable across all of the Council’s services, especially the statutory services. He had great difficulty at this stage is isolating one service from the other services.
 

      
 

     Councillor G.W.Roberts, OBE stated that if the Council were in agreement with the amendment put forward by the Leader, then he was quite prepared to withdraw his Motion, on the understanding that the Council agreed that as from today it should be looking to achieve a 10% saving in that decision.
 

 
 

     The Leader in response stated that he was not prepared to include the figure of 10% in his amendment but certainly the very last cut-off date for the Executive to make a decision on the Leisure Centres needed to be in time for the budget round for 2011/12.
 

      
 

     Under the provisions of Council Rule 18.5 it was agreed that a recorded vote to be taken on the matter.
 

      
 

     For the amendment put forward by the Leader:-
 

      
 

     For: Councillors W.J.Chorlton, B.Durkin, E.G.Davies, Lewis Davies, K.Evans, Jim Evans, C.Ll.Everett, D.R.Hughes,K.P.Hughes,T.Ll.Hughes, W.I.Hughes, W.T.Hughes, A.Morris.Jones, G.O.Jones,R.Ll.Jones,Raymond Jones, R.Dylan.Jones, T.Jones, C.McGregor,Rhian Medi, B.Owen, J.V.Owen, R.L.Owen, G.O.Parry, MBE, R.G.Parry, OBE, Eric Roberts, J.Arwel. Roberts, G.W.Roberts, OBE, P.S.Rogers, J.Williams, J.Penri.Williams, Selwyn Williams.                                                                                          Total: 32
 

      
 

     Against: None                                                                                                                  Total: 0
 

      
 

     Abstention: Councillor E.Schofield                                                                                  Total: 1
 

          
 

     The amendment was therefore carried.      
 

 
 

     (ii) The following Notice of Motion was submitted by Councillor W.J.Chorlton:-
 

      
 

     “On the day of the special Council, 20th July, 2009, we handed a notice of motion to           Mr.Richard Parry Jones which was to be forwarded to you as Chairman of the Council.
 

      
 

     The notice under Rule 4.1.3.4. of the Constitution asked you to call a special meeting of the Council to discuss the Leisure Centres closures. To date, I have not received a reply from you. I therefore intend to revoke 4.1.3.1.2 of the Constitution and will ask Mr.Richard Parry Jones, as the Acting Managing Director, to call a special meeting of the County Council under the rules to discuss the above.”
 

      
 

     Councillor Chorlton stated that he had received no acknowledgment of his request. The Chair had ignored the rules of the Constitution and he considered that an official complaint should be made against the Chair in this respect.
 

      
 

     The Acting Managing Director in reply confirmed that he had received the Notice of Motion and that it had then been forwarded to the attention of the Chairman. He could not answer on behalf of the Chair since he was not present at this juncture of the meeting. He suspected that the matter was overtaken by events in that there was a decision by officers to call today’s special meeting. The formal answer, was yes, Councillor Chorlton should have had a formal reply to his letter of
 

     20th July.
 

      
 

      
 

      
 

      
 

         
 

      
 

 
 

 
 

     The meeting concluded at 1:15pm
 

      
 

     COUNCILLOR  O.GLYN JONES
 

     CHAIRMAN (Items 1-3a only)
 

      
 

     COUNCILLOR SELWYN WILLIAMS
 

     VICE-CHAIRMAN (Items 3(b) - 4)