Meeting documents

1

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillors L. Davies, B. Durkin, P.M. Fowlie, R.Ll. Hughes, R. Dylan Jones, C. McGregor, B. Owen, G.O. Parry MBE, R.G. Parry OBE, E. Schofield and I. Williams declared an interest in Item 5 of these minutes and were not present at the meeting during any discussion or voting thereon.

Councillors P.M. Fowlie, T.H. Jones, A. Morris Jones, R.L. Owen, R.G. Parry OBE, E. Roberts and P.S. Rogers declared an interest in Item 9 of these minutes and were not present at the meeting during any discussion or voting thereon.

Councillor W.J. Chorlton declared an interest with regard to any item on the agenda which might relate to the employment of his daughter in the Environmental Services Department.

The Director of Legal Services/Monitoring Officer declared and interest in Item 5 of these minutes and was not present at the meeting during any discussion or voting thereon.

1

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

The Chair on behalf of the members and officers extended Birthday greetings to Councillor Trefor Lloyd Hughes, who was 60 years old today.

Congratulations were also extended to Ryan Conolly and Leon Newall, pupils at Ysgol Gyfun Llangefni, who had been chosen to represent Wales at the under-16 football tournament known as the ‘Sky Victory Shield Home Nations’.

Thanks were extended to everyone associated with the success of the Council in it being awarded official recognition as an Investor in People. A letter had already been sent to all staff, members and Trade Unions informing them of this. Congratulations and thanks to all staff in achieving this accreditation.

Congratulations also to the 9 members of staff, who had succeeded in the ‘Institute of Leadership Management Course’ at Coleg Menai. Certificates had been awarded to them by the Leader and the Managing Director last Tuesday.

The Chair took the opportunity of referring to the death of Gwilym Williams, Y Wenallt, Penysarn who had worked as the former Borough Council’s Administrative Director between 1974-1980. Before that he had worked for the Twrcelyn Rural District Council. Deepest sympathy was extended to his wife Betty, his son Elfed and the whole family.

On behalf of the Chair, Councillor G. O. Parry,MBE referred to the death of Captain Drakley, former Maritime Officer of the Borough Council.

The Chair also sympathised with any Member or member of staff who had suffered bereavement. Members and officers stood in silent tribute as a mark of their respect.

2

MINUTES

Submitted and confirmed as a true record, the minutes of the meeting of the County Council held on the following dates:-

(i) Minutes - 16th September, 2008

Arising thereon :-

Item 10. Political Balance

Councillor J. Penri Williams wished it to be noted that he had supported Councillors P. S. Rogers and B. Durkin in their viewpoint as regards the allocation of seats to committees of the Council.

Councillor W. J. Chorlton referred to both sets of minutes before Council today in that he was yet to receive a reply in respect of the Breakwater Country Park (Item 2 of meeting held on 16th September, 2008) and an answer from the Leader with regard to a declaration of interest by the Chair of the County Council.

The Chair in reply stated that he had visited the Country Park with the Head of Service (Planning) and that he would be in further correspondence or discussion with Councillor Chorlton in that respect.

As regards the declaration of interest, the Chair left the Chamber and the meeting was chaired by the Vice-Chair.

The Leader in reply to Councillor Chorlton’s question, stated that he had understood that the Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer had provided Councillor Chorlton with a response as regards the declaration of interest.

Councillor W. J. Chorlton stated that he had received a written reply from the Solicitor to the Monitoring Officer but that he did not feel that the reply was sufficient in that he had not received the information he had requested. He said he had failed to set up a mutually convenient date to discuss this matter with the Leader since the Leader was re-arranging dates agreed upon.

The Leader in reply stated that he had before him a copy of the answers from the Legal Department to the question put. He would arrange a meeting between himself, Councillor Chorlton and the Legal Department. He had no recollection of cancelling any meeting at all.

Councillor Chorlton referred to the fact that two meetings with the Group Leaders had been cancelled since the Leader and Deputy Leader were not available on the dates arranged.

The Leader assured Councillor Chorlton that once there was a gap in their diaries, the meeting would take place.

Councillor Chorlton referred to the urgent decision taken by the Executive with regard to the disposal of Council property at a discount. How could such matters be discussed by members, when the Chair of the Council had agreed to it being dealt with as an urgent matter.

The Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer in reply stated that the Chair of the County Council had agreed to the decision of the Executive last Monday being treated as urgent and not subject to call-in because there was a deadline for exchange of contracts on 19th December, 2008. If call-in were involved, the end period of call-in would take the matter to the 2nd of January which would mean that the transaction could not take place.

Councillor Chorlton could not understand the urgency of the matter and questioned whether the Council was doing away with the scrutiny function?

The Director of Legal Services / Monitoring Officer in reply stated that the urgency was in accordance with the deadline set for European funding which would be clawed back if not committed by 19th December. Three of the four properties mentioned were actually considered by the Executive on 11th September and were not called-in at that time.

Councillor Chorlton disagreed, in that members should have been given the opportunity of looking at the details of the contract and what it was worth to the Authority.

(ii) Arising thereon - Minutes - 30th October, 2008 (am)

Councillor B. Durkin challenged the accuracy of the minutes with regard to the School Meals issue. (In view of the declaration of interest in this respect, the Vice-Chair again took the Chair).

Councillor B. Durkin stated that he had spoken twice at this meeting and that there was no minute to this effect.

The Vice-Chair agreed to the following addition as a correction to the minutes :-

“Councillor B. Durkin stated that the officer had commented that the group service supplying the school meals service were changing over to an alternative meat source which also showed that as the memo was dated, 15th October, 2008, there was clearly some serious discussions taking place with the Leader and the officer in question to get things changed. In this memo from Eden dated 15th October, they stated that they were switching to a wider range of chilled meats products and that these would have to be ordered a week before delivery as was already done with their frozen meat. The first delivery would be from week commencing 27th October and would need to be ordered from Monday 20th October. The current product minced beef was to be replaced with chilled Red tractor beef mince; diced chuck steak with chilled Red tractor diced chuck steak; diced pork with chilled Red tractor Pork diced shoulder and raw diced chicken meat with chilled Red tractor chicken diced breast and thigh meat. He suggested that this was a major step forward in what the Leader and the officers had achieved in attempting to rectify the meat situation which appeared to be the  predominant problem.”

“Councillor B. Durkin stated in reply to observations made by Councillor P. S. Rogers as regards the praise given by himself and by Councillor Ff. M. Hughes that the Leader had acted in this respect and that the publicity by Councillor Rogers to the matter should not be entertained.

In reply to being named by Councillor Rogers he stated that he had been looking forward to some humility in the Chamber today. Hindsight was a wonderful thing and one could not castigate an attack without giving praise where praise was due. It had been accepted by everyone here that all contracts, in particular major contracts, had teething problems. It appeared that those teething problems were being met head on and hopefully they would be sorted out entirely. Human nature had to be considered and he suggested at future meetings, irrespective of what they were, a good dose of humility would go a long way.”

(iii) Minutes - 30th October, 2008(pm)

Councillor C. McGregor wished to correct the minutes by stating that in his previous employment he had worked on the Data Protection Act and not the Freedom of Information Act as was referred to in the minutes.

The Chair accepted the correction.      

3

STANDARDS COMMITTEE - TOWN AND COMMUNITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE

Reported by the Solicitor to the Monitoring Officer - That Under Part III of the Local Government Act 2000 (as amended) the Council must have a Standards Committee consisting of no fewer than five and no more than nine Members and one Member must be a Town or Community Councillor collectively nominated by the Town and Community Councils.

This Council, in revising its original structure, removed County Councillors from the Standards Committee, which now consisted of Independent/Lay Members and one Town/Community Council Member.

Community Councillor Eric Roberts became County Councillor Eric Roberts on 1st May 2008 and therefore was disallowed from being the Town/Community Council member of the Standards Committee and a vacancy was created.

“One Voice Wales” was asked to arrange for all the Town and Community Councils on Anglesey to nominate one collectively agreed Town/Community Councillor to be appointed to the Standards Committee and fill the vacancy created. That nomination was agreed at a meeting which took place on the 16th July 2008, and was Councillor Raymond Evans of Llanfihangel Ysgeifiog Community Council.

The County Council was also asked on 13th December 2007 to consider the merits of allowing the Standards Committee Section Panel to remain in place, to fill any casual vacancies which may arise. The Council resolved - “The Standards Committee Selection Panel shall remain in place, for the purpose of filling any casual vacancies which may arise, until a new Panel is established in 2011 (subject to Election in May 2008).” At the meeting on the 16th July the Town and Community Councils resolved to nominate Councillor Alistar Grant of Beaumaris Town Council as the Town/ Community Councillor to serve on the Selection Panel, in the place of Community Councillor

O. Gwyn Jones who had become indisposed.

The Council’s three representatives on the Standards Committee Selection Panel were Councillors John Chorlton, Phil Fowlie and John Roberts. As John Roberts was no longer a County Councillor it was necessary to appoint another County Councillor to the Panel.

RESOLVED

Ÿ

With immediate effect until the 17th of December 2011, that the Council appoints Councillor Raymond Evans, of the Llanfihangfel Ysceifiog Community Council, as the Town / Community Council representative of the Standards Committee, subject to him remaining as a Town / Community Councillor.

Ÿ

That the Council appoints Councillor Alistair Grant of Beaumaris Town Council  as the Town / Community Councillor representative of the Standards Committee Selection Panel, subject to him remaining as a Town / Community Councillor.

Ÿ

That Councillor R. G. Parry, OBE be appointed to fill the vacancy on the Standards Committee Selection Panel.  

4

CANDIDATE SITE REGISTER

Reported by the Legal Services Manager and the Head of Planning Service - That at its extraordinary meeting on 30 October 2008, full Council, whilst approving the pre-deposit publication of the LDP for public consultation, resolved to receive a report and advice with regard to identifying those people who had submitted sites for inclusion in the Candidate Sites Register (the Register).

During the extraordinary meeting the matter was raised as to whether the identity of those people who had submitted sites for inclusion in the Register would be disclosed. There appeared to have been two principal arguments raised in favour of such disclosure:

Ÿ

That possession of the information would allow members to assess whether they had interests to disclose under the Code of Conduct.

Ÿ

The public’s knowledge that members possessed the information would strengthen public confidence in the LDP process. It was unclear as to whether members wanted that information published merely to them or be published publicly.

Officers considered that there were strong if not compelling arguments as to why this information need not be known at all and these were detailed at Page 2 of the report.

The advice given was of significance and the point as regards this information being immaterial to the decisions to be made was suggested to be of exceptions significance to members when they considered whether this was information they should ask for.

As part of the report consideration relating to the Freedom of Information Act / Environmental Information Regulations; Data Protection Act; Local Government Act 1972 and The Common Law were drawn to members attention.

In conclusion, officers were of the opinion that:-

Ÿ

The names and addresses of those proposing sites for the Register was not relevant information in assessing the suitability of the site for inclusion in the LDP. The information was not, therefore, necessary for members to carry out their duties as regards the LDP.

Ÿ

The names and addresses of those individuals proposing sites was personal data under the Data Protection Act and authority for its publication to members or the public was not obtained.

Ÿ

The names and addresses of those proposing sites was exempt information under Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 and no reason was known as to why the public interest test ought not to conclude that the information remained exempt.

Officers therefore recommended that the names and addresses of the proposers of sites for inclusion in the Candidates Sites Register for the LDP be not open to inspection by members.

Councillor Tom Jones was of the opinion that everyone who offered land to this process, offered it voluntarily and there was no compulsion involved. Proposing land for this process was almost tantamount to offering land up for planning permission and was therefore a totally open process in that land ownership was publicly revealed. He could not see any obstacle at all to this information being in the public domain.

Councillor Rhian Medi agreed wholeheartedly with Councillor Tom Jones that the Council must be seen to be transparent in this respect. It was important to know if a member of the Council owned land. She considered that perhaps members required alternative advice from the Welsh Assembly, to the advice that was being given in the report.

Councillor R. Ll. Jones considered that the information should be available to members but on the basis that the confidentiality of this information be respected. He referred to particular Councils which did allow Councillors to know who the applicants were for various sites. He was all for transparency and that any piece of land included on the register should include the names of the landowners.

Councillors J. Penri Williams and J. V. Owen considered that transparency should be the highest consideration in this respect.

Councillor W. J. Chorlton was of the opinion that Councillors should not be looking to identify the individual, but should rather be making  a judgment as regards land use, based on officer’s recommendations.

Councillor K. P. Hughes disagreed with Councillor Chorlton in this respect in that members needed to know who the owner was so that they could declare an interest if required.

Councillor H. E. Jones considered that members needed to be totally transparent in such matters. He requested a legal opinion as to the interpretation of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972 with regard to exempt information. Likewise, he enquired as to whether or not it would be possible for permission to be granted under the Data Protection Act.

The Legal Services Manager in reply to the questions and observations raised, stated that if one made a planning application there was specific legislation which said that the information with regard to the applicant should be placed on a public register. He did not consider it fair to compare that, with what was before Council today. He considered that the thrust of the report was perfectly clear. Should the Council go against officer recommendation, detailed reasons for any decision would need to be given in the minutes in case the matter went before the Information Commissioner.

The Legal Services Manager also felt that it would be impractical to go back to every individual landowner asking them to confirm whether or not they were agreeable to releasing  their names into the public domain. This would no doubt lead to an incomplete register.

He reiterated, that the recommendation was clearly and strongly of the view that there was a risk that publishing such information would breach the Data Protection Act and that members should give clear reasons for any decision against the recommendation. The identity of an individual either on a planning application or as a submitter of a candidate site on the register was immaterial to the decision that needed to be made, as to whether the land ought to be included in the plan.

In response to the question raised by Councillor H. E. Jones he stated that the answer with regard to Schedule 12A was included within his report. As regards the Data Protection Act, if half of the individuals questioned were in favour of publishing and half against, this would leave the Council in a worse position at the end of the day.

Councillor P. S. Rogers proposed that the report be accepted. The proposal was seconded.

Councillor T. Jones proposed an amendment, in that the information should be available to members but that they respect the confidentiality of such information. The amendment was seconded.

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

For the amendment put forward by T. Jones (i.e. that the information should be available to members but they respect the confidentiality of such information).

For: Councillors E. G. Davies, Jim Evans, K. P. Hughes, T. Ll. Hughes, A. M. Jones, G. O. Jones, O. Glyn Jones, Raymond Jones, R. Ll. Jones, T. Jones, Rhian Medi, J. V. Owen, R. L. Owen,

Eric Roberts, J. Penri Williams, J. Williams, S. Williams.

TOTAL = 17        

Against: Councillors W. J. Chorlton, P. S. Rogers.

TOTAL = 2

6

MEMBERS ALLOWANCES

Ÿ

Not to adopt a co-optees allowance (clause 6.5 of Appendix B refers).

Ÿ

To adopt the remainder of Appendix B (revised Members Allowances Scheme) as from 1st January, 2009.

7

TREASURY MANAGEMENT - AMENDMENT TO APPROVED LENDING LIST

Ÿ

deleting the maximum limit of investments in government institutions such as the deposit accounts in the Debt Management Office. The current maximum was £10m.

Ÿ

add AAA rated money market funds to the list and using those funds investing in governments bonds and similar instruments.

Ÿ

To approve the deletion of the maximum limit for deposits with the UK Government.

Ÿ

To add AAA rated money market funds to the approved lending list.        

8

SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING GUIDANCE - A.O.N.B AND RECYCLING FACILITIES IN NEW DEVELOPMENTS

9

SCHOOL MEALS CONTRACT

10

DELEGATIONS BY THE LEADER