01258 484325 E-Mail: Jandrews@North-Dorset.Gov.Uk 19 Ma

Home , Iwerne Minster, Localism Act 2011

Customer Contact Team: 01258 454111

Ask for: Jacqui Andrews Direct Line: 01258 484325 E-mail: jandrews@north-dorset.gov.uk

19 March 2015

TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL

Dear Member

COUNCIL MEETING

Your attendance is requested at a meeting of North Dorset District Council to be held in the Council Chamber, Nordon, Salisbury Road, Blandford Forum at 10.00am on Friday, 27 March 2015 for the transaction of the following business.

Yours sincerely

Matt Prosser Chief Executive

A G E N D A

1. APOLOGIES

2. PUBLIC QUESTION TIME

Fifteen minutes will be set aside to allow members of the public to ask questions relating to the work of the Council. (If no questioners are present at this point, the meeting will proceed to the next item.)

3. CODE OF CONDUCT

Members are required to comply with the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 and the Council’s Code of Conduct regarding disclosable pecuniary interests, and personal and prejudicial interests.

• Check if there is an item of business on this agenda in which the member or other relevant person has an interest • Check that the interest has been notified to the Monitoring Officer (in writing) and entered in the Register (if not this must be done within 28 days) • Disclose the interest at the meeting (in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct) and in the absence of a dispensation to speak and/or vote, withdraw from any consideration of the item where appropriate.

4. MINUTES

To confirm the minutes of the Council meetings held on Thursday 19 February 2015 and Friday 27 February 2015 (previously circulated) as a correct record.

5. CHAIRMAN’S NOTICES AND URGENT BUSINESS

6. PRESENTATION BY HEALTHWATCH DORSET

Joyce Guest, Chair of Healthwatch Dorset and Chris Wakefield, Volunteers Officer, will give a presentation to Council on the work of Healthwatch Dorset.

7. NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL PAY POLICY STATEMENT 2015/16

Recommendation

To approve the Pay Policy Statement for 2015/16.

8. INVESTMENT STRATEGY

Recommendation by Cabinet that Council:

a) Approves the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16 including;

i. The Prudential Indicators set out in Appendix C of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement ii. Minimum Revenue Provision Policy set out in Appendix D of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement

b) Adopts the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Acountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition (the CIPFA Code)

9. EXECUTIVE OF THE NORTH DORSET LOCAL ACTION GROUP

LEADER is an established method of delivering rural development funds at a local level. It uses local knowledge to promote community-led delivery of Rural Development Programme grants. In England this is delivered by Local Action groups (LAGs) and it targets rural areas with specific needs and priorities. A Local Action group brings together individuals from local public, private and civil societies, who have been delegated powers of strategy and delivery. through an agreed Local Development Strategy LAGs are able to tackle important local priorities in a locally specific, innovative and participative way. Grants are awarded to local businesses and communities to help them carry out projects which create jobs, help businesses to grow and which benefit the rural economy.

Recommendation

To appoint a representative, with immediate effect, to the Executive Committee of the North Dorset Local Action Group.

10. REPORTS FROM MEMBERS REPRESENTING THE COUNCIL ON OUTSIDE BODIES

Recommendation

To note the reports from the Members who represent the Council on certain key outside bodies.

11. CABINET REPORT AND GENERAL QUESTION TIME

The Leader of the Council will present a report on Cabinet activities during February and March. Members may question individual Cabinet members on the contents of this report. Any questions submitted under the General Question Time procedure will be answered by the relevant Cabinet Member following his/her report.

In accordance with the Procedure for General Questions, Members are asked to submit general questions, other than urgent ones, in writing to the Democratic & Electoral Services Manager by Wednesday 25th March 2015 at the latest.

12. MOTIONS

None.

DATE OF ANNUAL COUNCIL MEETING – Friday 22 MAY 2015 AGENDA ITEM 7 NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL

COUNCIL

Date of Meeting: 27 March 2015

Report title: NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL PAY POLICY STATEMENT 2015/16

Portfolio Holder: Cllr Gary Jefferson

Report Author: HR & OD Manager – Bobbie Bragg

Purpose of Report: To meet the statutory requirement for Council to approve the North Dorset District Council Pay Policy statement 2015/16

Statutory Authority: Section 38 (i) Localism Act 2011

Financial Implications: None

Consultations undertaken: Unison, SMT

Recommendation: To approve the Pay Policy Statement 2015/16

Reason for decision: To meet the statutory requirement.

BACKGROUND AND REASON DECISION NEEDED

1. The Localism Act 2011 requires English and Welsh local authorities to produce a pay policy statement for 2012/13 and for each financial year after that. The Bill as initially drafted referred solely to chief officers (a term which includes both statutory and non- statutory chief officers, and their deputies) but amendments reflecting concerns over low pay and drawing on Will Hutton’s 2011 Review of Fair Pay in the Public Sector introduced requirements to compare the policies on remunerating chief officers and other employees, and to set out policy on the lowest paid. The Act does not apply to local authority schools.

2. The Act as finally passed requires the pay policy statement to range over disparate aspects of remuneration policy. For this reason, and also in the Interests of clarity and transparency, the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) strongly recommends local authorities to use the opportunity to set out their overall rewards strategy for the whole workforce, and not to limit themselves to matters specifically required by the Act and statutory guidance.

3. The Act defines remuneration widely, to include not just pay but also charges, fees, allowances, benefits in kind, increases in/enhancements of pension entitlements, and termination payments.

4. As for process, the pay policy statement:

• must be approved formally by the council meeting itself • must be approved by the end of March each year, starting with 2012 • can be amended in-year • must be published on the authority’s website (and in any other way the Authority chooses) • Must be complied with when the authority sets the terms and conditions to recruit a chief officer.

5. The Act also requires an authority to have regard to any statutory guidance on the subject issued or approved by the Secretary of State. Statutory recommendations have been issued on pay multiples (within a wider code of recommended practice) on data transparency, and a broader set of statutory guidance on the publication of pay policy statements. The statutory guidance emphasises that each local authority has the autonomy to take its own decisions on pay and pay policies.

SUMMARY OF REQUIREMENTS

6. The statutory guidance sets out the following requirements. A pay policy statement for a financial year must set out the authority’s policies for the financial year relating to:

• The remuneration of its chief officers, • The remuneration of its lowest-paid employees, • The relationship between the remuneration of its chief officers, and The remuneration of its employees who are not chief officers

7. The statement must state:

• The definition of “lowest-paid employees” adopted by the authority for the purposes of the statement, and • The authority’s reasons for adopting that definition.

8. The statement must include the authority’s policies relating to:

• The level and elements of remuneration for each chief officer, • Remuneration of chief officers on recruitment • Increases and additions to remuneration for each chief officer • The use of performance-related pay for chief officers • The use of bonuses for chief officers • The approach to the payment of chief officers on their ceasing to hold office under or to be employed by the authority, and • The publication of and access to information relating to remuneration of chief officers.

9. A pay policy statement for a financial year may also set out the authority’s policies for the financial year relating to the other terms and conditions applying to the authority’s chief officers.

JNC GUIDANCE FOR THE GENERAL APPROACH TO REMUNERATION LEVELS

10. In the context of managing scarce public resources, remuneration at all levels needs to be adequate to secure and retain high-quality employees dedicated to the service of the public. At the same time the Council needs to avoid being unnecessarily generous or otherwise excessive. Each local authority will have its own way of balancing those factors, with legitimately differing emphases reflecting differing circumstances. For

instance, an authority facing particular challenges (in the locality it governs, or with internal governance) may choose to adopt remuneration levels above the average in order to attract and retain employees of the desired calibre. By contrast, an authority which is already an employer of choice may see no need to do so and may therefore adopt less generous remuneration levels.

11. A local authority’s general approach to remuneration levels may differ from one group of employees to another, reflecting factors such as differing degrees of difficulty in attracting and retaining high-quality employees. It would be good practice to make these differences clear, together with the reasons for them.

12. One way of measuring pay relationships is to use a pay multiple. Will Hutton’s 2011 Review of Fair Pay in the Public Sector supported the idea of publishing the ratio of the pay of an organisation’s top earner to that of its lowest earner, and tracking it over time. The JNC recommends that the calculation of the pay multiple should be based on all taxable earnings for the given year, including base salary, variable pay, bonuses, allowances, and the cash value of any benefits-in-kind. The statutory guidance indicates that the local authority may take its own decision as to whether to include a pay multiple in the Policy Statement.

13. Authorities are advised to ensure that the pay policy statement allows the retention of sufficient flexibility to cope with a variety of circumstances (foreseeable or not), such as authorising the use of market supplements or other such mechanisms for individual categories of posts, individual posts, or even individual employees.

14. Public understanding of the roles of local authority employees is not well developed, especially in the case of senior officers. Authorities might therefore consider it helpful to use the statutory pay policy statement to provide (or signpost) information on the degree of responsibility exercised by chief officers in return for their remuneration.

Responsibility for decisions on remuneration

15. Local authorities differ in the detail of where responsibility lies for decisions on remuneration. The pay policy statement could therefore be an appropriate document in which to set out the respective roles (in relation to remuneration) of the council meeting, committees (such as a remuneration committee or personnel committee, where they exist), and officers. Remuneration decisions are, of course, not an executive function.

16. The JNC has emphasised that “it is essential for good governance that local authorities can demonstrate that decisions on pay and reward packages for chief executives and chief officers have been made in an open and accountable way”.

Pay and performance

17. Whatever the stance of an authority towards performance-related pay or bonuses, it should be set out in the pay policy statement. Bonuses must, of course, be used only in ways that are compatible with equal pay legislation.

Remuneration levels

18. As well as being required to set out certain of its policies on pay, a local Authority is required to use the pay policy statement to set out its policies on paying charges, fees (such as for local returning officer or joint authority duties), allowances, and benefits in kind. Where pay scales as opposed to point salaries apply, it would be helpful to make clear what factors are taken into account in deciding on what point of a scale a recruit is appointed, and by whom the decision is made.

19. Completeness also requires that policies on the use of any honoraria and ex gratia payments are covered in the pay policy statement.

20. In March 2012, as a result of recent controversy elsewhere in the public sector, the Government has added to the statutory guidance a request to state policy on payment arrangements that “could be perceived as seeking to minimise tax payments”.

Severance payments

21. Local authorities are already required by other legislation to adopt, review, and publish their policies on making discretionary payments on termination of employment so the Act’s requirements in this area constitute nothing new. However, JNC recommends that it would be helpful if the three policy statements were combined in the Pay Policy Statement.

22. Although not required by legislation, it would be good practice to set out the authority’s policies on the following related lawful areas of discretion as well:

• flexible retirement under regulation 18 of the same legislation • immediate payment of pension under regulation 30 of the same legislation • payment of pension without reduction, on compassionate grounds, under the same regulation • Outplacement, counselling, or similar.

23. In the case of the first two areas of discretion, the authority must be satisfied that the policy is workable, affordable, and reasonable, having regard to the foreseeable costs. In the case of all four areas of discretion, the authority must have regard to whether a particular policy could lead to a serious loss of confidence in the public service.

24. The statutory guidance also addresses the remuneration of chief officers who have returned to a local authority. Specifically, the guidance states that pay policy statements should set out policies on the reward of chief officers who fit into one of the following categories:

• were previously employed by the same authority, left with a severance or redundancy payment, and have come back as a chief officer • were previously employed by the same authority, and have come back as a chief officer under a contract for services • are in receipt of a Local Government Pension Scheme or Firefighter Pension (whether their previous service was with the same authority or Not).

PAY POLICY STATEMENT 2015/16

25. The 2015/16 Pay Policy Statement is attached at Appendix 1. It has been drafted to meet the statutory requirements and the additional guidance from the JNC. Members of the Personnel Policy Committee have been invited to comment on the Pay Policy Statement and have not recommended any changes.

26. The Statement has been written to reflect current policies. It will not be possible at this stage to make major amendments to policies because these would require a consultation process. A Statement will need to be agreed each year and may be amended during the year.

27. The Review of Fair Pay in the Public Sector (Will Hutton, 2011) supported the principle of publishing the ratio of the pay of the top earner to that of its low earners and to track

it over time. Guidance requires the measurement to be the median average of a low earner. The salary for the post of Chief Executive is approximately 6.7 x the median salary of an employee on Range 1. The maximum salary for the General Managers’ posts is approximately 5.3 x the median salary of an employee on Range 1.

OPTIONS

28. To approve the Pay Policy Statement 2015/16.

To decide to amend the Pay Policy Statement during 2015/16 for consideration in 2016.

COSTS

29. This is the adoption of a policy on existing terms and conditions and will not therefore require any financial cost outside the existing budget.

DIVERSITY AND CUSTOMER FOCUS

30. The compliance measures required by the Localism Act will not adversely impact upon any of the protected characteristic groups within our workforce.

HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS

31. The compliance measures required by the Localism Act will not adversely impact upon any human rights.

RISK MANAGEMENT

32. Failure to publish this information would result in the failure:

• To meet the code of recommended best practice on data transparency, openness and accountability in local pay • To comply with the Localism Act employer obligations

RECOMMENDATION AND REASON

33. These obligations complement and build upon the recommended best practice measures contained within the Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency, Openness & Accountability in Local Pay.

34. The Council is required to implement the compliance measures placed upon the Council by the Localism Act in relation to senior officers pay and related matters.

35. It is recommended that Council approve the Pay Policy Statement 2015/16.

Author: Bobbie Bragg, HR and OD Manager Date: 16 March 2015

Background papers: NDDC Pay Policy Statement – 2015/16

APPENDIX 1

PAY POLICY STATEMENT

March 2015 –March 2016

Contents

1 Purpose and aim of the policy

2 Reward Strategy

3 An Integrated Approach

4 –19 Pay

20 Retirement

21 Redundancy

22 Consultation

23 Review

24 Communication

25 Changes to the Policy

26 Information

27 Decision Making

1 Purpose and Aim of the Pay Policy Statement

This pay policy statement describes the Council’s policies that relate to the pay of its workforce, particularly to compare policies on remuneration of Chief Officers and other employees and to set out policy on the lowest paid.

This document fulfils the requirement of the Localism Act 2011 that local authorities prepare and publish a pay policy statement for each financial year, commencing in 2012/13.

It also sets the context for the numerical information that is already published by the Council under the Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency and by the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2011.

2 Reward Strategy

The Council is committed to transparent, fair and equitable pay and reward arrangements that provide value for money and enable the recruitment and retention of employees with the skills and motivation to deliver high quality services for North Dorset and its community.

The Council has moved from a deliverer of services to a mixed economy of service delivery. This requires a more developed commissioning role and greater business acumen so the Council has restructured to create a senior post for Commissioning and trained a team to lead LEAN reviews. A number of years ago the Council removed the ‘Heads of Service’ layer of management so has two rather than the traditional 3 layers of Management this has provided a cohort of service managers who have a professional operational front line responsibility as well as a role to meet corporate objectives.

Extensive research shows that individuals are attracted, retained and engaged by a range of financial and non-financial rewards so the Council is committed to providing a coherent link between the overall approach to people management and reward.

3 An Integrated Approach

People translate the Councils Corporate Plan and priorities into action; they have the biggest influence on the quality of service delivery. Therefore the attitudes, flexibility, skills and capability of our employees are critical to the improvement of the Council and the delivery of high quality, customer focused public services.

Our Workforce Development strategy and plan is consistent with good practice and focuses on pay and reward, recruitment and retention, skills, development, leadership, efficiency, succession planning and talent management. An integral part is the annual Learning and Development programme, Core values, Core Competency framework, annual appraisals and regular investment in the IiP accreditation.

The Council continues to strive to be an’ employer of choice’ attracting and retaining the right people with the right skills, knowledge, and experience. This includes young people, people from diverse back grounds and those who are unemployed by using a range of succession planning and talent management methods i.e. Apprenticeships, Trainee programmes, Career Development Schemes and Work Placements.

4 Pay Design

The Council has on occasion found it difficult to attract a reasonable number of applications to fill some professional vacancies which is thought to be related to the 3

high cost of living in the area and the remote location of the district. It therefore has adopted competitive pay rates and where it is difficult to recruit has adopted a Market Forces Supplement for affected posts. It has not implemented performance related pay but has a recognition scheme which offers a financial token reward of £50 and rewards long service of 25 years by awarding £125 of high street vouchers.

5 Pay Structures

The pay and grading structure has a small number of increments for each grade which recognises growth in knowledge and experience. A person may be appointed at any point on that grade depending on their experience at the time of selection.

6 Pay Rates

All NDDC employees below Chief Officer Level are subject to the ‘National Agreement on Pay and Conditions of Service of the National Joint Council for Local Government Services commonly known as the ‘Green Book’. NDDC uses a pay and grading structure that commences at the national Spinal Column Point (SCP) 7 and ends at SCP 60 (Annexe 1). The pay structure is divided into 12 pay ranges, which mainly contain four incremental points. Range 1 is the lowest range and Range 12 is the highest range.

All posts are allocated to a salary range through the job evaluation process: Greater London Provincial Council (GLPC) scheme based on the National Local Government Spinal Column Points (SCP) and for Chief Officers the HAY job evaluation scheme.

The values of the SCPs in these pay ranges are determined by the pay awards which are informed by the National Joint Council for Local Government Services. For information, The Local Government annual cost of living pay awards were frozen between 2009 and 2012. The pay scales for the whole Council are attached at Annexe 1.

6.1 Lowest Paid Employees

The definition of the Council’s lowest-paid employees is employees on Range 1 as this is the lowest pay scale. No employee will be paid at a SCP that is lower than a point contained within Range 1. The bottom of Range 1 is SCP 7 and the top is SCP 11. At 31 March 2015, the full-time equivalent (FTE) annual values of these two SCPs are £13,715 (SCP 7 which is above the national minimum wage) and £15,207 (SCP 11) = The Median is SCP 9 £14,075.

6.2 Unison Living Wage Campaign

The Council has introduced a living £7.45 per hour which is defined as 'the threshold at which people can live above the poverty level with a sufficient safety net to also provide for quality of life'. NDDC pay scales commence at range 1 SCP 7 – 11, SCP 11 equates to £7.88 per hour. There are no employees (other than apprentices, see below) currently earning below SCP 11. This position will continue to be monitored.

6.3 Apprentices

The National Apprenticeship Scheme for 16-18 year olds recommends the payment of an hourly rate of £2.73 which is below the national minimum wage. If after three months, they satisfy their probationary period, then their hourly rate rises to £3.68 per hour (the national minimum wage for apprentices) for the remainder of their one year apprenticeship contract.

6.4 Chief Officers

For the purposes of this Pay Policy Statement, Chief Officers are those staff whose posts are subject to the provisions of either the Joint Negotiating Committee for Local Authority Chief Executives or the Joint Negotiating Committee for Chief Officers of Local Authorities. The Chief Officers are comprised of the Chief Executive and the General Managers.

The Chief Officers lead and take responsibility for the efficient working of the Council including the work of partnership delivered services. The gross income of the Council is just over £30,000,000

In November 2014, NDDC, WDDC & W&PBC approved a business case and agreed to take forward plans to develop and implement a Tri-Council Partnership. In February 2015 the Chief Executive retired and in March 2015 a new shared partnership Chief Executive was appointed. An formal arrangement was agreed for the salary costs to be shared between all three Councils and equally apportioned. Arrangements are currently being developed to implement a new Tri Council Senior leadership Team structure in May 2015. New Pay arrangements for the newly appointed Chief Officers will require this pay Policy statement to be subject to amendment on the 1st May 2015.

6.5 Shared Chief Executive Chief Executive –Tri-Council arrangements

. The shared Chief Executive is the Council’s Head of Paid Service. As at 31 March 2015 the annual FTE salary range is £130,000 (salary equally apportioned)

• The cost of living payment is currently being negotiated by the Joint Negotiating Committee for Chief Executives of Local Authorities.

• The Local Government Employers (LGE) has determined this level of pay differential to be appropriate

• The Chief Executive is not in receipt of any Allowances, Bonus or Car Lease Scheme

• The Chief Executive also receives a Returning / Acting Officer fee in respect of District and Parish Councils which is determined by recommendations from the Electoral Services Commission and varies in accordance with the level of responsibility.

6.6 General Managers

• As at 31 March 2015, the annual FTE salary range for the two posts is £74,460

• A 2% cost of living payment was awarded to the current post holders in 2015. These are determined by the pay awards agreed by the Joint Negotiating Committee for Chief Officers of Local Authorities.

• The Local Government Employers (LGE) using the HAY scheme has determined this level of pay differential is appropriate

• The General Managers are not in receipt of any Allowances, Bonus or Car Lease scheme

• The statutory role of Monitoring Officer is included within the duties of one of the General Managers Posts

• The statutory role of Section 151 officer is provided by Dorset County Council according to a service level agreement. This post is not included within this pay policy.

7 Pay Structures

The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development research reveals the local government pay ratio between the highest and lowest earners to be about 1:10. The Government has indicated that over 1:20 is unacceptable. The Council’s pay ratios are significantly lower than each of these.

The value of salaries within the Council’s pay structure (Annexe 1) is influenced by the outcome of national pay bargaining and by periodic reviews which take into account relevant market information.

The Council’s pay structure (Annexe 1) creates the foundation for the relationship between the pay of Managers and employees and the roles within the scope of the Pay Policy statement.

8 NDDC Gender Pay Gap

North Dorset District Council is committed to the principles of equal pay for work of equal value and recognises the requirement to operate a fair pay system based on objective criteria and ensures measures are in place to include an annual pay audit in order to proactively monitor the gender pay gap.

National Gender Pay gap

The National median Gender full time pay gap 19.2% Public sector 27.5% Private sector The National median Gender part time pay gap 31.1% Public sector 49.7 Private sector

(Office for National Statistics 2011)

NDDC Gender Pay gap

NDDC median Gender full time pay gap 24% NDDC median Gender part time pay gap 17%

North Dorset District Council’s average hourly earnings for women working full-time is £14.34 and for men is £18.92.

North Dorset District Council’s part-time women earn £11.45 on average, and comparing this figure with men’s average part-time earnings of £13.93.

9 Appointments and Terminations

Employees are normally appointed to the minimum point of the range unless there is a substantial reason for making an exception, for example to secure the appointment of a candidate of the right calibre.

On resignation/termination of employment NDDC employees will only receive compensation:

(a) In circumstances that are relevant e.g. redundancy and/or

(b) It is in accordance with our policy statement(s) on how we exercise the various employer discretions provided by the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) and/or

Any decision to re-employ an individual, who was previously employed by the Council and on ceasing to be employed was in receipt of a severance or redundancy payment, will be made on merit in accordance with the Council’s recruitment and selection policy and procedures. The Council will not normally engage such an individual under a contract for services.

10 Tax Avoidance

The Council does not have permanent contractual arrangements through companies or agencies for the employment of people.

11 Pay and performance

The Council does not have a policy of awards for performance related pay.

The NDDC pay and grading structure has been modelled on using the equality principles determined by the GLPC Job Evaluation scheme i.e. using narrow incremental pay scales of 4 – 5 SCP within each pay range.

Employees progress through the range for their job through annual increments which are not performance related, subject to the top of their grade not being exceeded.

The Council expects all employees to consistently demonstrate high levels of performance. In the event there is evidence of lower levels of performance than required the matter is dealt with promptly using appropriate management interventions.

12 Job Evaluation

Job evaluation is used to determine the relative value of jobs within the Council. Different elements within each job will accrue a number of job evaluation points. The total number of points accrued will determine the relevant salary range for each job (Annexe 1).

The Council uses the Greater London Provincial Council (GLPC) and HAY Job Evaluation Schemes.

13 Market Forces Supplements

In exceptional circumstances the Council may pay a market supplement in addition to the salary for the job where, in the absence of such a payment, it would not be possible to recruit and retain suitable employees. The value of the market supplement takes into account the labour market pay information for similar jobs. Any market supplements are reviewed on an annual basis and are varied or ceased as necessary according to the labour market evidence for the job in question.

14 Overtime

Overtime is time worked beyond the standard working week (37 hours) which attracts additional payment.

Overtime is only paid in circumstances where it is not practicable to grant compensatory time off in lieu. All paid overtime is subject to authorisation in advance by the relevant manager.

Only employees in receipt of a salary at or below SCP 28 are eligible for payment for work beyond 37 hours per week.

15 Out of Hours

Employees who undertake out of hours duty are required to be available to receive and deal with work related issues for a pre-determined period outside of normal working hours. An out of hour’s phone is provided to registered officers who work on a rota basis to answer calls outside office hours. The rota changes on a weekly basis and employees are paid 15.97 hours per week at SCP 10.

16 Allowances

16.1 Relocation Allowance

The Council does not offer a relocation allowance for newly appointed employees.

16.2 Acting up Allowance and Honoraria

Employees who act up in the absence of more senior employees for a continuous period of at least four weeks are entitled to be paid the salary of the higher graded post or a proportionate allowance where they are not undertaking the full duties and responsibilities.

Once the qualifying period of four weeks has been satisfied, the higher salary is paid with effect from the first day on which the employee took on the duties and responsibilities of the higher graded post.

Where the preceding circumstances do not apply, an honorarium may be granted (of an amount dependant on the circumstances) at the Council’s discretion, to an employee who performs duties outside the scope of his or her post over an extended period, or where the additional duties and responsibilities are exceptionally onerous.

16.3 First Aid Allowance

Employees designated by the Council as recognised first aiders are entitled to a First Aid payment. A payment of £250 per annum is made to full-time employees and pro rata for part-time employees, provided they maintain a current First Aid Certificate.

17 Professional Fees

The Council pays one professional fee for each employee whose professional membership is essential for their continuous professional development.

18 Business Travel and Expenses

Where employees are required to travel in the course of their duties they are expected to determine the most appropriate form of transport taking into account the total cost, travel time and carbon emissions. The cheapest form of transport will normally be chosen unless the travel time is unreasonable. If there are two forms of transport with comparable costs the transport with the lowest carbon emissions must be selected unless the travel time is unreasonable. If public transport is used the cheapest travelling fare should be chosen. It is the Council’s policy not to pay for first class travel unless it is the cheapest travel ticket.

19 Mileage Allowances

NDDC no longer operates a Lease car scheme.

The Council pays Essential and Casual Car User allowances in appropriate circumstances. These allowances are in accordance with NJC National agreement on pay and conditions of service rates and are reviewed and updated annually and set out below:

Engine CC 451 - 999cc 1000 - 1199cc 1200 - 1450cc Essential Users Lump sum per annum £846 £963 £1,239 Per mile first 8,500 36.9p 40.9p 50.5p Per mile after 8,500 13.7p 14.4p 16.4p

Casual Users Per mile first 8,500 46.9p 52.2p 65.0p Per mile after 8,500 13.7p 14.4p 16.4p

Employees who are not designated essential users are required to use the Council’s pool cars in order to keep travel costs low. In the event pool cars are unavailable, employees will use their own vehicles for business purposes using the current mileage allowances.

19.1 Essential Car Users

Subject to certain conditions, employees who travel over 2,000 business miles may apply to become an essential user. The Council pays a lump sum, currently between £846 – £1,239 per annum and business mileage.

19.2 Subsistence Allowances

Employees may only claim subsistence allowances (locally agreed) in respect of out of District travel when there is an overnight stay.

Employees can only claim actual expenditure up to the maximums below (excluding alcoholic drinks):

Breakfast £4.48 (depart before 7.00 am) Lunch £6.17 (depart before 12 noon/return after 2.15) Tea £4.53 (return after 6.30 pm) Evening Meal £7.64 (return after 8.30 pm) Accommodation £70.00 (Approx.)

20 Pensions

The policy statement on how the Council exercises the various employer discretions is provided by the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS). The Council’s policy is not to contribute to any Shared Cost Additional Voluntary Contribution scheme.

21 Salary and Pension Payments

The Council does not exclude a person in receipt of a pension from another public sector organisation from applying for and being appointed to a job with the Council. The Council’s primary concern is to appoint the best person for the job using the Council’s recruitment and selection process. The Council’s policy is to disregard any previous public sector retirement income as that is a matter for the relevant public sector pension fund.

22 Retirement

22.1 Early Retirement

The Council’s policy is not to allow employees to retire early unless a financial saving can be achieved and there is a benefit to the service.

The Council’s policy is not to grant augmented benefits under the Local Government Pension Scheme except where it is essential to do so in order to facilitate a tangible and specific organisational benefit.

22.2 Flexible Retirement

This is where an individual aged 55 or over who reduces their grade or hours of work (or both) may receive all or part of their LGPS benefits immediately, even though they have not left the Council’s employment. This will be allowed only in circumstances where it is demonstrated to be in the long-term interests of the Council.

The Council's policy on Flexible Retirement is that an application will normally only be approved where:-

a) The employee’s pension is ‘actuarially reduced’ so that the Council is not required to make any additional contribution to the Pension Fund by virtue of early payment of the pension.

b) There are no other additional costs to the Council arising from the employee's flexible retirement.

c) The Flexible Retirement will provide benefits to the Council, for example financial savings or the facilitation of organisational or staffing changes and will not result in any detriment to the level of service required.

d) If the request is to work reduced hours, the Council must be satisfied that the change enables its operational and organisation needs to be met.

e) If the request is for a move to a lower graded post, this would normally be subject to an appropriate vacancy arising and the operation of the Council's normal recruitment procedures in filling the post.

23 Redundancy

Payments and benefits in respect of employees who are made redundant will be in accordance with the Council’s Policy Statement made under Section 106 of the Local Government Pension Scheme Regulations 1997.

The Council will endeavor to redeploy employees in all circumstances in which their employment is ‘at risk’ of redundancy.

The redundancy payment will be based on the statutory scheme up to a maximum of 20 years’ service and on a weekly wage based on actual salary counted at the time the statutory notice period commences. The statutory scheme gives half a week’s pay for each year of continuous local government service up to age 21; one week’s pay for every year of service between the ages of 22 and 40; and one and a half week’s pay for every year of service age 41 and above.

However, is the policy of the Council to normally make compensation payments at the rate of 1.75 times the number of weeks prescribed in the statutory redundancy pay scheme (see above). At maximum entitlement this equates to two thirds of the rate provided for in the Local Government (Early Termination of Employment) (Discretionary Compensation) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006.

In accordance with the Regulations, such compensation payments are inclusive of any redundancy payment made under the above paragraph.

Currently, the Regulations provide, inter alia, that a combined redundancy and compensation payment will not exceed a maximum of 104 weeks’ pay.

The Council calculates compensation and redundancy payments based on actual salary and continuous local government service.

24 Consultation

The recognised trade unions representing the relevant employees within the scope of this policy have been consulted on this policy statement.

25 Review

In accordance with the requirements of the Localism Act this policy will be kept under review and as a minimum be reviewed and updated as necessary on an annual basis to ensure an accurate pay policy is published ahead of each related financial year,

prepared by the Human Resources Manager. The policy will be subject to review by no later than 31 March 2015.

26 Communication

The Council will publish its pay policy statement on its website as required by the Localism Act.

27 Changes to the Policy

The Council may at any time by resolution of the Council amend this pay policy statement based on approval and recommendation of the Personnel Policy Committee and Full Council.

28 Information

Further information relating to this policy can be obtained from the Human Resources Manager.

29 Decision Making

The Council’s Constitution outlines the responsibilities for decision making. It provides for an ad-hoc committee to oversee the recruitment of the Chief Executive or General Managers. This committee is able to act as a remuneration committee if given the authority to do so by Full Council.

Author: Bobbie Bragg

Personnel Committee approval:

Council approval:

NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL

PAY & GRADING STRUCTURE 1 January 2015

Range 1 (SCP 7 – 11) Range 2 (SCP 12-16) Range 3 (SCP 17-21) JE Maximum score 239 JE Maximum score 289 JE Maximum score 339 minimum score 180 minimum score 240 minimum score 290 SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum

7 £13,715 12 £15,523 17 £17,372 8 £13,871 13 £15,941 18 £17,714 9 £14,075 14 £16,231 19 £18,376 10 £14,338 15 £16,572 20 £19,048 11 £15,207 16 £16,969 21 £19,742

Range 4 (SCP 22 -26) Range 5 (SCP 27-31) Range 6 (SCP 32-36) JE Maximum score 389 JE Maximum score 439 JE Maximum sore 489 minimum score 340 minimum score 390 minimum score 440 SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum

22 £20,253 27 £23,698 32 £27,924 23 £20,849 28 £24,472 33 £28,746 24 £21,530 29 £25,440 34 £29,558 25 £22,212 30 £26,293 35 £30,178 26 £22,937 31 £27,123 36 £30,978

Range 7 (SCP 37-40) Range 8 (SCP 41-44) Range 9 (SCP 45-48) JE Maximum score 539 JE Maximum score 589 JE Maximum score 639 minimum score 490 minimum score 540 minimum score 590 SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum

37 £31,846 41 £35,662 45 £39,267 38 £32,778 42 £36,571 46 £40,217 39 £33,857 43 £37,483 47 £41,140 40 £34,746 44 £38,405 48 £42,053

Range 10 (SCP 49-52) Range 11 (SCP 53-54) Range 12 (SCP 55-60) JE Maximum score 690 JE Maximum Score 691 JE Maximum Score 742 minimum score 640 minimum score 741 Minimum score 792 SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum SCP £ per annum

49 £42,957 53 £46,665 57 £50,623 50 £43,810 54 £47,637 58 £51,611 51 £44,963 55 £48,647 59 £52,595 52 £46,559 56 £49,639 60 £53,573

AGENDA ITEM 8 NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL

COUNCIL

Date of Meeting: 27 March 2015

REPORT TITLE: INVESTMENT STRATEGY

Portfolio Holder: Cllr Deborah Croney

Report Author: Finance & Resources Manager

Purpose of Report: To approve the 2015/16 Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy and the Prudential Indicators for 2015/16

Statutory Authority: Local Government and Housing Act 1989 Local Government Act 2003

Financial Implications: These measures underpin the ability of the Council to achieve the investment income of £60,000 as set out in the 2015/16 revenue budget.

Consultations required/ Senior Management Team, Portfolio Holder. undertaken:

Recommendations: It is recommended by Cabinet that Council:

a) Approves the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16 including;

I. The Prudential Indicators set out in Appendix C of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement II. Minimum Revenue Provision Policy set out in Appendix D of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement

b) Adopts the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition (the CIPFA Code)

BACKGROUND AND REASON DECISION NEEDED 1. The purpose of the treasury management operation is to ensure that cash flow is adequately planned, with cash being available when it is needed. Surplus monies are invested in counterparties or instruments commensurate with the Council’s low risk approach, pursuing optimum performance while ensuring that security of the investment is considered ahead of investment return. 1

2. The second main function of the treasury management service is the funding of the Council’s capital plans i.e. the longer-term cash flow planning to ensure that the Council can meet its capital spending obligations. 3. The purpose of Prudential Indicators is to set a framework for affordable, prudent and sustainable capital investment. 4. At present, the Council’s investments are being conducted within the parameters set in this report to minimise risk exposure. The strategy allows the use of a wider range of financial instruments and investments, after due consideration of security and liquidity, to enable the generation of improved returns. 5. The strategy provides the flexibility to pursue a range of diverse investment avenues within appropriate investment boundaries. This approach fits with the latest advice from Arlingclose, our treasury advisors.

INVESTMENT STRATEGY

6. The Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy and Annual Investment Strategy are rather technical by necessity, in order to comply with legislation, regulation and codes of practice. 7. The Council has a portfolio of investments resulting from events such as the sale of the housing stock and other Council assets. The authority has an in house officer treasury management team to manage the Council’s investment portfolio and cash flow. The team obtains support from the Council’s external treasury advisors, Arlingclose. 8. The Council uses its external Treasury Management Advisors to provide expert advice on all treasury issues and their expertise has been used to develop the strategy for 2015/16. These advisors report quarterly on the performance of the in- house officer treasury management team and also provide a list of counterparties for investments that they consider represent an acceptable risk.

PRUDENTIAL INDICATORS 9. The Local Government Act 2003 requires the Council to have regard to the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s (CIPFA) Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition, which defines a set of prudential indicators within which it should manage its borrowing and investment decisions when considering its borrowing and investment strategy. 10. The Code provides a framework under which councils’ capital finance decisions are carried out. It requires councils to demonstrate that capital expenditure plans are affordable, external borrowing is within prudent and sustainable levels and that treasury management decisions follow professional good practice.

OPTIONS 11. Cabinet can accept or amend the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16 as set out in Appendices 1. 12. The Prudential Indicators reflect the decisions taken on the capital programme and need to be approved before 31 March 2015.

COSTS

13. There are no direct costs incurred as a result of the recommendations, which reflect decisions already taken on the revenue budget and capital programme. Decisions on the flexibility to be allowed in the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16 will have a bearing on the returns achieved from investment.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS

14. This report has no direct implications for economic development.

DIVERSITY AND CUSTOMER FOCUS

15. This report has no direct implications for diversity and customer focus.

HUMAN RIGHTS IMPLICATIONS

16. This report has no direct implications for human rights.

CLIMATE CHANGE IMPLICATIONS

17. This report has no direct implications for climate change.

RISK 18. The primary risks to which the Council is exposed in respect of its treasury management activities are adverse movements in interest rates and the credit risk of its investment counterparties. Adverse movements in interest rates are extremely unlikely given the current position of the low base rate and the estimate of investment income has been assessed using current data to mitigate this risk still further. 19. The risk associated with the credit worthiness of investment counterparties is mitigated by limiting investments to low risk counterparties and limiting the size of investments with any one counterparty, as set out in the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy. 20. The main sensitivities of the investment income forecast are likely to be the two scenarios below. Council officers, in conjunction with the treasury advisers, will continually monitor both the prevailing interest rates and the market forecasts, adopting the following responses to a change in market conditions: (a) for a significant risk of a sharp rise in long and short term rates then the portfolio position will be re-appraised with the likely action that investment will be kept short; or (b) for a significant risk of a sharp fall in long and short term rates then the Council would opt for longer term lending, i.e. we would wish to lend on a long term basis at a good rate of interest, prior to the market falling. 21. It is not proposed to recommend change in the Council’s investment principles of good performance, stability and security, whilst maintaining a return of at least 105% of the benchmark (LIBID rate + 5%).

RECOMMENDATION AND REASON

22. It is recommended by Cabinet that Council:

a) Approves the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16 including;

b) Adopts the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition (the CIPFA Code)

23. There is a statutory requirement to set prudential indicators and the CIPFA Code of Practice requires that a Treasury Management Strategy is approved.

APPENDICES Appendix 1: Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16

Author: Andy Smith Post: Finance and Resources Manager Date: 24 February 2015

Background papers Draft Treasury Management templates supplied by Arlingclose Ltd, Treasury Management Advisors. Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition.

Appendix 1

North Dorset District Council

Treasury Management Strategy Statement 2015/16

Introduction

In March 2012 the Authority adopted the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition (the CIPFA Code) which requires the Authority to approve a treasury management strategy before the start of each financial year.

In addition, the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) issued revised Guidance on Local Authority Investments in March 2010 that requires the Authority to approve an investment strategy before the start of each financial year.

This report fulfils the Authority’s legal obligation under the Local Government Act 2003 to have regard to both the CIPFA Code and the CLG Guidance.

The Authority has invested substantial sums of money and is therefore exposed to financial risks including the loss of invested funds and the revenue effect of changing interest rates. The successful identification, monitoring and control of risk are therefore central to the Authority’s treasury management strategy.

External Context

Economic background: There is momentum in the UK economy, with a continued period of growth through domestically-driven activity and strong household consumption. There are signs that growth is becoming more balanced. The greater contribution from business investment should support continued, albeit slower, expansion of GDP. However, inflationary pressure is benign and is likely to remain low in the short-term. There have been large falls in unemployment but levels of part-time working, self-employment and underemployment are significant and nominal earnings growth remains weak and below inflation.

The MPC's focus is on both the degree of spare capacity in the economy and the rate at which this will be used up, factors prompting some debate on the Committee. Despite two MPC members having voted for an 0.25% increase in rates at each of the meetings August 2014 onwards, some Committee members have become more concerned that the economic outlook is less optimistic than at the time of the August Inflation Report.

Credit outlook: The transposition of two European Union directives into UK legislation in the coming months will place the burden of rescuing failing EU banks disproportionately onto unsecured local authority investors.

The Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive promotes the interests of individual and small businesses covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme and similar European schemes, while the recast Deposit Guarantee Schemes Directive includes large companies into these schemes. The combined effect of these two changes is to leave public authorities and financial organisations (including pension funds) as the only senior creditors likely to incur losses in a failing bank after July 2015.

The continued global economic recovery has led to a general improvement in credit conditions since last year. This is evidenced by a fall in the credit default swap spreads of banks and companies around the world. However, due to the above legislative changes, the credit risk associated with making unsecured bank deposits will increase relative to the risk of other investment options available to the Authority.

Interest rate forecast: The Authority’s treasury management advisor Arlingclose forecasts the first rise in official interest rates in August 2015 and a gradual pace of increases thereafter, with the average for 2015/16 being around 0.75%. Arlingclose believes the normalised level of the Bank Rate post-crisis to range between 2.5% and 3.5%. The risk to the upside (i.e. interest rates being higher) is weighted more towards the end of the forecast horizon. On the downside, Eurozone weakness and the threat of deflation have increased the risks to the durability of UK growth. If the negative indicators from the Eurozone become more entrenched, the Bank of England will likely defer rate rises to later in the year. Arlingclose projects gilt yields on an upward path in the medium term, taking the forecast average 10 year PWLB loan rate for 2015/16 to 3.40%.

A more detailed economic and interest rate forecast provided by the Arlingclose is attached at Appendix A.

For the purpose of setting the budget, it has been assumed that new investments will be made at an average rate of 0.5%, and that no long-term loans will be borrowed.

Local Context

The Authority currently has £14.5m of investments. This is set out in further detail at Appendix B.

Table 1: General Fund Capital Finance Requirement

31.3.14 31.3.15 31.3.16 31.3.17 31.3.18 Actual Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate £m £m £m £m £m General Fund CFR 0 0 0 0 0

The underlying need to borrow for capital purposes is measured by the Capital Financing Requirement (CFR).

The Authority is currently debt free and its capital expenditure plans do not currently imply any need to borrow over the forecast period. Investments are forecast to fall by £1m in the short term as capital receipts are used to finance capital expenditure and reserves are used to finance the revenue budget.

CIPFA’s Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities recommends that the Authority’s total debt should be lower than its highest forecast CFR over the next three years. Table 1 shows that the Authority expects to comply with this recommendation during 2015/16 as it remains debt free.

Borrowing Strategy

The Authority currently holds no external loans, which is the same as in the previous year. The balance sheet forecast shows that the Authority does not expect to need to borrow in 2015/16.

The Authority may borrow short-term loans (normally for up to one month) to cover unexpected cash flow shortages.

Sources: The approved sources of long-term and short-term borrowing are:

• Public Works Loan Board (PWLB)

• any institution approved for investments (see below)

• any other bank or building society authorised to operate in the UK

• UK public and private sector pension funds (except Dorset Pension Fund)

• capital market bond investors

• Local Capital Finance Company and other special purpose companies created to enable local authority bond issues

In addition, capital finance may be raised by the following methods that are not borrowing, but may be classed as other debt liabilities:

• operating and finance leases

• hire purchase

• Private Finance Initiative

• sale and leaseback

Investment Strategy

The Authority holds significant invested funds, representing income received in advance of expenditure plus balances and reserves held. In the past 12 months, the Authority’s investment balance has ranged between £6 and £15 million, and similar levels are expected to be maintained in the forthcoming year.

Objectives: Both the CIPFA Code and the CLG Guidance require the Authority to invest its funds prudently, and to have regard to the security and liquidity of its investments before seeking the highest rate of return, or yield. The Authority’s objective when investing money is to strike an appropriate balance between risk and return, minimising the risk of incurring losses from defaults and the risk receiving unsuitably low investment income.

Strategy: Given the increasing risk and continued low returns from short-term unsecured bank investments, the Authority aims to diversify into more secure and/or higher yielding asset classes during 2015/16. This is especially the case for the estimated £5m that is available for longer-term investment. All of the Authorities surplus cash is currently invested in short-term unsecured bank deposits, and money market funds. This diversification will therefore represent a substantial change in strategy over the coming year.

Approved Counterparties: The Authority may invest its surplus funds with any of the counterparty types in table 2 below, subject to the cash limits (per counterparty) and the time limits shown.

The schedule of approved counterparties is underpinned by a detailed list of named counterparties. This list is held within Financial Services for treasury management operational purposes.

Table 2: Approved Investment Counterparties and Limits

Limits shown are maximum investments per counterparty

Credit Banks Banks Registered Government Corporates Rating Unsecured Secured Providers UK £ Unlimited n/a n/a n/a n/a Govt 50 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m AAA 5 years 20 years 50 years 20 years 20 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m AA+ 5 years 10 years 25 years 10 years 10 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m AA 4 years 5 years 15 years 5 years 10 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m AA- 3 years 4 years 10 years 4 years 10 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m A+ 2 years 3 years 5 years 3 years 5 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m A 13 months 2 years 5 years 2 months 5 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m A- 6 months 13 months 5 years 13 months 5 years £2m £2m £2m £1m £1m BBB+ 100 days 6 months 2 years 6 months 2 years BBB or £1m next £1m n/a n/a n/a BBB- day only 100 days £1m £2m £500,000 £1m None n/a 6 months 25 years 5 Years 5 Years Pooled £2m per fund funds

This table must be read in conjunction with the notes below 8

Credit Rating: Investment decisions are made by reference to the lowest published long- term credit rating from Fitch, Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s. Where available, the credit rating relevant to the specific investment or class of investment is used, otherwise the counterparty credit rating is used.

Banks Unsecured: Accounts, deposits, certificates of deposit and senior unsecured bonds with banks and building societies, other than multilateral development banks. These investments are subject to the risk of credit loss via a bail-in should the regulator determine that the bank is failing or likely to fail.

Banks Secured: Covered bonds, reverse repurchase agreements and other collateralised arrangements with banks and building societies. These investments are secured on the bank’s assets, which limits the potential losses in the unlikely event of insolvency, and means that they are exempt from bail-in. Where there is no investment specific credit rating, but the collateral upon which the investment is secured has a credit rating, the highest of the collateral credit rating and the counterparty credit rating will be used to determine cash and time limits. The combined secured and unsecured investments in any one bank will not exceed the cash limit for secured investments.

Government: Loans, bonds and bills issued or guaranteed by national governments, regional and local authorities and multilateral development banks. These investments are not subject to bail-in, and there is an insignificant risk of insolvency. Investments with the UK Central Government may be made in unlimited amounts for up to 50 years.

Corporates: Loans, bonds and commercial paper issued by companies other than banks and registered providers. These investments are not subject to bail-in, but are exposed to the risk of the company going insolvent. Loans to unrated companies will only be made as part of a diversified pool in order to spread the risk widely.

Registered Providers: Loans and bonds issued by, guaranteed by or secured on the assets of Registered Providers of Social Housing, formerly known as Housing Associations. These bodies are tightly regulated by the Homes and Communities Agency and, as providers of public services, they retain a high likelihood of receiving government support if needed.

Pooled Funds: Shares in diversified investment vehicles consisting of the any of the above investment types, plus equity shares and property. These funds have the advantage of providing wide diversification of investment risks, coupled with the services of a professional fund manager in return for a fee. Money Market Funds that offer same-day liquidity and aim for a constant net asset value will be used as an alternative to instant access bank accounts, while pooled funds whose value changes with market prices and/or have a notice period will be used for longer investment periods.

Bond, equity and property funds offer enhanced returns over the longer term, but are more volatile in the short term. These allow the Authority to diversify into asset classes other than cash without the need to own and manage the underlying investments. Because these funds have no defined maturity date, but are available for withdrawal after a notice period, their performance and continued suitability in meeting the Authority’s investment objectives will be monitored regularly.

Risk Assessment and Credit Ratings: Credit ratings are obtained and monitored by the Authority’s treasury advisers, who will notify changes in ratings as they occur. Where an entity has its credit rating downgraded so that it fails to meet the approved investment criteria then:

• no new investments will be made, • any existing investments that can be recalled or sold at no cost will be, and • full consideration will be given to the recall or sale of all other existing investments with the affected counterparty. Where a credit rating agency announces that a credit rating is on review for possible downgrade (also known as “rating watch negative” or “credit watch negative”) so that it may fall below the approved rating criteria, then only investments that can be withdrawn will be made with that organisation until the outcome of the review is announced. This policy will not apply to negative outlooks, which indicate a long-term direction of travel rather than an imminent change of rating.

Other Information on the Security of Investments: The Authority understands that credit ratings are good, but not perfect, predictors of investment default. Full regard will therefore be given to other available information on the credit quality of the organisations in which it invests, including credit default swap prices, financial statements, information on potential government support and reports in the quality financial press. No investments will be made with an organisation if there are substantive doubts about its credit quality, even though it may meet the credit rating criteria.

When deteriorating financial market conditions affect the creditworthiness of all organisations, as happened in 2008 and 2011, this is not generally reflected in credit ratings, but can be seen in other market measures. In these circumstances, the Authority will restrict its investments to those organisations of higher credit quality and reduce the maximum duration of its investments to maintain the required level of security. The extent of these restrictions will be in line with prevailing financial market conditions. If these restrictions mean that insufficient commercial organisations of high credit quality are available to invest the Authority’s cash balances, then the surplus will be deposited with the UK Government, via the Debt Management Office or invested in government treasury bills for example, or with other local authorities. This will cause a reduction in the level of investment income earned, but will protect the principal sum invested.

Specified Investments: The CLG Guidance defines specified investments as those:

• denominated in pound sterling, • due to be repaid within 12 months of arrangement, • not defined as capital expenditure by legislation, and • invested with one of:

o the UK Government, o a UK local authority, parish council or community council, or o a body or investment scheme of “high credit quality”.

The Authority defines “high credit quality” organisations and securities as those having a credit rating of A- or higher that are domiciled in the UK or a foreign country with a sovereign rating of AA+ or higher. For money market funds and other pooled funds “high credit quality” is defined as those having a credit rating of A- or higher.

Non-specified Investments: Any investment not meeting the definition of a specified investment is classed as non-specified. The Authority does not intend to make any investments denominated in foreign currencies, nor any that are defined as capital expenditure by legislation, such as company shares. Non-specified investments will therefore be limited to long-term investments, i.e. those that are due to mature 12 months or longer from the date of arrangement, and investments with bodies and schemes not meeting the definition on high credit quality.

A group of Banks under the same ownership will be treated as a single organisation for limit purposes. Limits will be placed with fund managers, investments in brokers’ nominee accounts, foreign countries and industry sectors as below.

Investment Limits: In order that available reserves will be put at risk in the case of a single default, the maximum that will be lent to any one organisation (other than the UK Government) will be £2 million. A group of banks under the same ownership will be treated as a single organisation for limit purposes. Limits will also be placed on fund managers, investments in brokers’ nominee accounts, foreign countries and industry sectors as below:

Table 3: Investment Limits

Cash limit Any single organisation, except the UK Central £2m each Government UK Central Government unlimited Any group of organisations under the same £2m per group ownership Any group of pooled funds under the same £2m per manager management Negotiable instruments held in a broker’s nominee £2m per broker account Foreign countries £1m per country Registered Providers £1m in total Unsecured investments with Building Societies £1m in total Loans to unrated corporates £1m in total Money Market Funds £2m in total

Liquidity Management: The Authority produces cash flow forecasts to determine the maximum period for which funds may prudently be committed. The forecast is compiled on a pessimistic basis, with receipts under-estimated and payments over-estimated to minimise the risk of the Authority being forced to borrow on unfavourable terms to meet its financial commitments. Limits on long-term investments are set by reference to the Authority’s medium term financial plan and cash flow forecast.

Treasury Management Indicators

The Authority measures and manages its exposures to treasury management risks using the following indicators.

Security: The Authority has adopted a voluntary measure of its exposure to credit risk by monitoring the value-weighted average credit score of its investment portfolio. This is calculated by applying a score to each investment (AAA=1, AA+=2, etc.) and taking the arithmetic average, weighted by the size of each investment.

Target Portfolio average credit risk score 5

Liquidity: The Authority has adopted a voluntary measure of its exposure to liquidity risk by monitoring the amount of cash available to meet unexpected payments within a rolling Three month period, without additional borrowing.

Target Total cash available within 3 months £2m

Interest Rate Exposures: This indicator is set to control the Authority’s exposure to interest rate risk. The upper limits on fixed and variable rate interest rate exposures, expressed as the amount / the proportion of net interest payable will be:

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Upper limit on fixed interest rate 75% 75% 75% exposure Upper limit on variable interest rate 100% 100% 100% exposure

Fixed rate investments and borrowings are those where the rate of interest is fixed for the whole financial year. Instruments that mature during the financial year are classed as variable rate.

Principal Sums Invested for Periods Longer than 364 days: The purpose of this indicator is to control the Authority’s exposure to the risk of incurring losses by seeking early repayment of its investments. The limits on the total principal sum invested to final maturities beyond the period end will be:

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Limit on principal invested beyond year £5m £4m £4m end

Other Items

There are a number of additional items that the Authority is obliged by CIPFA or CLG to include in its Treasury Management Strategy.

Policy on Use of Financial Derivatives: Local authorities have previously made use of financial derivatives embedded into loans and investments both to reduce interest rate risk (e.g. interest rate collars and forward deals) and to reduce costs or increase income at the expense of greater risk (e.g. LOBO loans and callable deposits).

The general power of competence in Section 1 of the Localism Act 2011 removes much of the uncertainty over local authorities’ use of standalone financial derivatives (i.e. those that are not embedded into a loan or investment).

The Authority will only use standalone financial derivatives (such as swaps, forwards, futures and options) where they can be clearly demonstrated to reduce the overall level of the financial risks that the Authority is exposed to. Additional risks presented, such as credit exposure to derivative counterparties, will be taken into account when determining the overall level of risk. Embedded derivatives, including those present in pooled funds, will not be subject to this policy, although the risks they present will be managed in line with the overall treasury risk management strategy.

Financial derivative transactions may be arranged with any organisation that meets the approved investment criteria. The current value of any amount due from a derivative counterparty will count against the counterparty credit limit and the relevant foreign country limit.

Investment Training: The needs of the Authority’s treasury management staff for training in investment management are assessed every year as part of the staff appraisal process, and additionally when the responsibilities of individual members of staff change.

Staff regularly have access to courses, seminars and conferences provided by Arlingclose and CIPFA.

The Treasury Management briefings include update sessions for members.

Investment Advisers: The Authority has appointed Arlingclose Limited as treasury management advisers and receives specific advice on investment, debt and capital finance issues. The quality of this service will be reviewed on an ongoing basis as part of the process of monitoring the Council’s investment portfolio.

Investment of Money Borrowed in Advance of Need: The Authority may, from time to time, borrow in advance of need, where this is expected to provide the best long term value for money. Since amounts borrowed will be invested until spent, the Authority is aware that it will be exposed to the risk of loss of the borrowed sums, and the risk that investment and borrowing interest rates may change in the intervening period. These risks will be managed as part of the Authority’s overall management of its treasury risks.

The total amount borrowed will not exceed the authorised borrowing limit of £3.5 million. The maximum period between borrowing and expenditure is expected to be one month, although the Authority is not required to link particular loans with particular items of expenditure.

Financial Implications

The budget for investment income in 2015/16 is £60k, based on an average investment portfolio of £12 million at an interest rate of 0.5%. If actual levels of investments and actual interest rates differ from those forecast, performance against budget will be correspondingly different.

Other Options Considered

The CLG Guidance and the CIPFA Code do not prescribe any particular treasury management strategy for local authorities to adopt. The Chief Financial Officer, having consulted the Cabinet Member for Finance, believes that the above strategy represents an appropriate balance between risk management and cost effectiveness. Some alternative strategies, with their financial and risk management implications, are listed below.

Alternative Impact on income and Impact on risk expenditure management Invest in a narrower range Interest income will be Lower chance of losses of counterparties and/or lower from credit related for shorter times defaults, but any such losses will be greater Invest in a wider range of Interest income will be Increased risk of losses counterparties and/or for higher from credit related longer times defaults, but any such losses will be smaller Borrow additional sums at Debt interest costs will Higher investment balance long-term fixed interest rise; this is unlikely to be leading to a higher impact rates offset by higher in the event of a default; investment income however long-term interest costs will be more certain Borrow short-term or Debt interest costs will Increases in debt interest variable loans instead of initially be lower costs will be broadly offset long-term fixed rates by rising investment income in the medium term, but long term costs will be less certain Reduce level of borrowing Saving on debt interest is Reduced investment likely to exceed lost balance leading to a lower investment income impact in the event of a default; however long-term interest costs will be less certain

Appendix A

Arlingclose Economic & Interest Rate Forecast October 2014

Underlying assumptions: . The UK economic recovery has continued. Household consumption remains a significant driver, but there are signs that growth is becoming more balanced. The greater contribution from business investment should support continued, albeit slower, expansion of GDP throughout this year. . We expect consumption growth to slow, given softening housing market activity, the muted outlook for wage growth and slower employment growth. The subdued global environment suggests there is little prospect of significant contribution from external demand. . Inflationary pressure is currently low and is likely to remain so in the short-term. Despite a correction in the appreciation of sterling against the US dollar, imported inflation remains limited. We expect commodity prices will remain subdued given the weak outlook for global growth. . The MPC's focus is on both the degree of spare capacity in the economy and the rate at which this will be used up, factors prompting some debate on the Committee. . Nominal earnings growth remains weak and below inflation, despite large falls in unemployment, which poses a dilemma for the MPC. Our view is that spare capacity remains extensive. The levels of part-time, self-employment and underemployment are significant and indicate capacity within the employed workforce, in addition to the still large unemployed pool. Productivity growth can therefore remain weak in the short term without creating undue inflationary pressure. . However, we also expect employment growth to slow as economic growth decelerates. This is likely to boost productivity, which will bear down on unit labour costs and inflationary pressure. . In addition to the lack of wage and inflationary pressures, policymakers are evidently concerned about the bleak prospects for the Eurozone. These factors will maintain the dovish stance of the MPC in the medium term. . The continuing repair of public and private sector balance sheets leave them sensitive to higher interest rates. The MPC clearly believes the appropriate level for Bank Rate for the post-crisis UK economy is significantly lower than the previous norm. We would suggest this is between 2.5 and 3.5%. . While the ECB is likely to introduce outright QE, fears for the Eurozone are likely to maintain a safe haven bid for UK government debt, keeping gilt yields artificially low in the short term. . The probability of potential upside risks crystallising have waned a little over the past two months. The primary upside risk is a swifter recovery in the Eurozone.

Forecast:

. Arlingclose continues to forecast the first rise in official interest rates in Q3 2015; general market sentiment is now close to this forecast. There is momentum in the economy, but inflationary pressure is benign and external risks have increased, reducing the likelihood of immediate monetary tightening.

. We project a slow rise in Bank Rate. The pace of interest rate rises will be gradual and the extent of rises limited; we believe the normalised level of Bank Rate post- crisis to range between 2.5% and 3.5%.

. The short run path for gilt yields is flatter due to the deteriorating Eurozone situation. We project gilt yields on an upward path in the medium term.

Appendix B

Existing Investment & Debt Portfolio Position

31/01/2015

Actual Portfolio

£m

Total External Borrowing Nil

Other Long Term Liabilities Nil

Total Gross External Debt Nil Investments:

Managed in-house

Short-term investments (14.5)

Long-term investments 0

Total Investments (14.5)

Net Debt (14.5)

Appendix C

North Dorset District Council

Prudential Indicators and MRP Statement 2015/16

Prudential Indicators 2015/16

The Local Government Act 2003 requires the Authority to have regard to the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local Authorities (the Prudential Code) when determining how much money it can afford to borrow. The objectives of the Prudential Code are to ensure, within a clear framework, that the capital investment plans of local authorities are affordable, prudent and sustainable, and that treasury management decisions are taken in accordance with good professional practice. To demonstrate that the Authority has fulfilled these objectives, the Prudential Code sets out the following indicators that must be set and monitored each year.

Estimates of Capital Expenditure: The Authority’s planned capital expenditure and financing may be summarised as follows. Further detail is provided in the capital programme report approved by Council on 19 February 2015.

2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Capital Expenditure Revised Estimate Estimate Estimate and Financing £’000 £’000 £’000 £’000 General Fund 181 786 519 461 Total Expenditure 181 786 519 461 Capital Receipts (181) (786) (519) (461) Government Grants 0 0 0 0 Reserves 0 0 0 0 Revenue 0 0 0 0 Borrowing 0 0 0 0 Leasing and PFI 0 0 0 0 Total Financing (181) (786) (519) (461)

Estimates of Capital Financing Requirement: The Capital Financing Requirement (CFR) measures the Authority’s underlying need to borrow for a capital purpose.

31.03.15 31.03.16 31.03.17 31.03.18 Capital Financing Revised Estimate Estimate Estimate Requirement £m £m £m £m General Fund 0 0 0 0 Total CFR 0 0 0 0

The CFR is forecast to remain at £0m over the next three years as there will be no capital expenditure financed by debt. 19

Gross Debt and the Capital Financing Requirement: In order to ensure that over the medium term debt will only be for a capital purpose, the Authority should ensure that debt does not, except in the short term, exceed the total of capital financing requirement in the preceding year plus the estimates of any additional capital financing requirement for the current and next two financial years. This is a key indicator of prudence.

31.03.15 31.03.16 31.03.17 31.03.18 Debt Revised Estimate Estimate Estimate £m £m £m £m Borrowing 0 0 0 0 Finance leases 0 0 0 0 PFI liabilities 0 0 0 0 Total Debt 0 0 0 0

Total debt is expected to remain at zero during the forecast period.

Operational Boundary for External Debt: The operational boundary is based on the Authority’s estimate of most likely (i.e. prudent but not worst case) scenario for external debt. It links directly to the Authority’s estimates of capital expenditure, the capital financing requirement and cash flow requirements, and is a key management tool for in- year monitoring. Other long-term liabilities comprise finance lease, Private Finance Initiative and other liabilities that are not borrowing but form part of the Authority’s debt.

2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Operational Boundary Revised Estimate Estimate Estimate £m £m £m £m Borrowing 0 0 0 0 Other long-term 0 0 0 0 liabilities Total Debt 0 0 0 0

Authorised Limit for External Debt: The authorised limit is the affordable borrowing limit determined in compliance with the Local Government Act 2003. It is the maximum amount of debt that the Authority can legally owe. The authorised limit provides headroom over and above the operational boundary for unusual cash movements.

2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Authorised Limit Revised Estimate Estimate Estimate £m £m £m £m Borrowing 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500 Other long-term 0 0 0 0 liabilities Total Debt 3,500 3,500 3,500 3,500

Ratio of Financing Costs to Net Revenue Stream: This is an indicator of affordability and highlights the revenue implications of existing and proposed capital expenditure by identifying the proportion of the revenue budget required to meet financing costs, net of investment income.

Ratio of Financing 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Costs to Net Revenue Revised Estimate Estimate Estimate Stream % % % % General Fund -0.84 -1.13 -0.97 -0.98

The trend above reflects the anticipated investment income and is negative as the Council has no finance costs in respect of borrowing, finance leases or its minimum revenue provision. As at 31 March 2014, investments totalling £4.5 million were held, much of which represent balances and reserves, with the balance being held for cash flow purposes.

Incremental Impact of Capital Investment Decisions: This is an indicator of affordability that shows the impact of capital investment decisions on Council Tax levels. The incremental impact is the difference between the total revenue budget requirement of the current approved capital programme and the revenue budget requirement arising from the capital programme agreed on 19 February 2015.

2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 Incremental Impact of Capital Estimate Estimate Estimate Investment Decisions £ £ £ General Fund - increase in 0 0 0 annual band D Council Tax

Whilst this is an indicator that must be considered when taking decisions on borrowing, it doesn’t necessarily follow that council tax will actually increase by the amount shown in the indicator. In reality, due to the pressures on the Council’s budgets, any net cost of borrowing will have to be offset by savings in other budgets, therefore the impact on the taxpayer in cash terms would be zero.

Adoption of the CIPFA Treasury Management Code: The Authority adopted the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy’s Treasury Management in the Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition in March 2015.

Appendix D

Annual Minimum Revenue Provision Policy Statement 2015/16

Where the Authority finances capital expenditure by debt, it must put aside resources to repay that debt in later years. The amount charged to the revenue budget for the repayment of debt is known as Minimum Revenue Provision (MRP), although there has been no statutory minimum since 2008. The Local Government Act 2003 requires the Authority to have regard to the Department for Communities and Local Government’s Guidance on Minimum Revenue Provision (the CLG Guidance) most recently issued in 2012.

The broad aim of the CLG Guidance is to ensure that debt is repaid over a period that is either reasonably commensurate with that over which the capital expenditure provides benefits, or, in the case of borrowing supported by Government Revenue Support Grant, reasonably commensurate with the period implicit in the determination of that grant.

The CLG Guidance requires the Authority to approve an Annual MRP Statement each year, and recommends a number of options for calculating a prudent amount of MRP. The following statement incorporates options recommended in the Guidance.

The Authority expects that its General Fund Capital Financing Requirement will be nil/negative on 31st March 2015 and in line with the CLG Guidance it will therefore charge no MRP in 2015/16.

AGENDA ITEM 10 NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL

COUNCIL – 27 MARCH 2015

REPORTS FROM MEMBERS ON OUTSIDE BODIES

Citizen’s Advice Bureau (“CAB”) – Councillor Stayt

A report will be tabled at the meeting.

Cranborne Chase and West Wiltshire Downs AONB Partnership Panel – Councillors Walsh and Skipwith

Report by Deirdre Skipwith Partnership Panel meeting held on Thursday 13th November 2014.

Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) - 2015/2016 Linda Nunn reported that Her Majesty’s Treasury will no longer allow DEFRA to sign MOA’s with any AONB, or to commit to redundancy agreements. DEFRA has announced it will be awarding the same grant for 2015 -16 as for this financial year. With a General Election looming no decisions can be made beyond that time. A tri-partite meeting has been held between DEFRA, Natural England and the National Association of AONBs. It was agreed that DEFRA will send a letter to the host authorities outlining its continuing commitment to grant funding to AONB Partnerships. The redundancy issue does need to be addressed within an agreement with Local Authority Partners, with the possible following options:

1. to keep the current MOA wording, removing the DEFRA redundancy clause. 2. use the current Partner Agreement at the back of the MOA and include Local Authority annual contributions and an agreement on redundancy arrangements. Wiltshire Council expressed it would prefer the same agreement between the two AONBs, Cranborne Chase and North Wessex Downs. The potential redundancy payments for all members of staff were noted. Cllr de Rhe Philipe reminded the Panel that all LAs are in a difficult position with their budgets. Neither option has any legal standing, but recommends using the Partner Agreement.

The Vice Chairman stated that it is good news the DEFRA funding remains the same, with no 5% cut as in previous years.

1. The Panel considered a Partner Agreement to be an acceptable way forward in the absence of a signed MoA with DEFRA. That document to go back to the Steering Group to get agreed wording, by email correspondence. 2. The Local Authorities on the Partnership Panel to consider signing the Partner Agreement put forward by 1st April 2015

Budget Local Authority contributions for 2015/16 remain the same as this financial year. The process of Panel members returning to their respective authorities with these contribution figures so they can be agreed by their Council’s, was clarified. Caution was expressed on what would happen if any partner refused to pay part of their contribution.

The Chairman James Stanford, is standing down after 5 years. Three candidates have already expressed an interest in the position.

Trustees are also required for the setting up of the Charitable Incorporated Organisation (CIO), and these positions to be advertised at the same time. The Trustees are totally independent of the Partnership Panel but could attract similar candidates.

Delivery Plan Richard Burden - Landscape and Planning Officer, has been busy dealing with:

• NDDC housing allocation in Shaftesbury • Solar farms: Littledown and Bake Farm in particular. • National Grid undergrounding scheme • Hampshire County Council oil and gas (fracking) seminar • C13 closure, its impacts and works at Dinah’s Hollow • Sewerage treatment works at Sixpenny Handley • Large housing development west of Warminster

Dark Night Sky Reserve status. This is being applied for. It generally takes about two years and is difficult to get. It is a prestigious award given to only a handful of destinations that can prove they have an outstanding quality of night sky. They must also pledge to reduce light pollution to enhance the quality of this amazing asset. The award is given by the International Dark Sky Association (IDA), a United States based non-profit organisation founded in 1988. Its mission is "to preserve and protect the night-time environment and our heritage of dark skies through quality outdoor lighting."

The Panel agreed that Richard Burden should formally object to the wind turbine at Thoulstone on landscape and visual grounds.

David Blake, Project Development Officer, briefed the meeting on: • The Sustainable Development Fund • Stepping Stones • Foundations of Archaeology project • Big Chalk Integrated Project (EU LIFE) • Corporate fundraising • A bid to Wessex Water for funding to the Farmland Bird Project for the next five years.

Tracy Adams spoke on the Common Agricultural Policy, the New Environmental Land Management Scheme and Greening - Under new EU regulations, known as Greening, farmers must ensure 5 per cent of their land is set aside as an Ecological Focus Area (EFA), instead of being used for farming. Panel members expressed their concerns over these government changes, and the potential problems, for farmers.

Anne Carney spoke on the Heart of Wessex (HoW) bid. The HoW bid is for around £1.9 million. The original HoW bid area included the whole of the AONB together with a sizeable area within South Somerset District. During the process of developing the Local Development Scheme, North Dorset made the decision to also apply for Leader funding and developed a proposed Northern Dorset Local Action Group (LAG). This included the southern third of the AONB, in Dorset. DEFRA do not welcome overlapping bid areas, hence discussions began over the areas to be covered. After considerable discussion, the AONB reluctantly decided to agree to the southern third going into the Northern Dorset LAG bid area. To have submitted overlapping areas would have led to a competitive process, with one or other of the bids failing. This way, all the communities of the AONB will have an opportunity to be in receipt of Leader funding.

Linda Nunn will send the AONB Management Plan to the Secretary of State for formal approval.

Dorset AONB Partnership Board – Councillors Walsh and Skipwith

Report by Deirdre Skipwith Partnership Panel Meeting Thursday 20th November, 2014.

Jim White and Robert Lasseter were unanimously elected as chairman and vice chairman.

Planning 114 individual consultation responses have been made since April. Major projects include: - Navitas Bay offshore windfarm - West Dorset and Blandford Hill wind farms - 12 consultations relating to field scale solar farms - 30 consultations relating to housing

The Team continue to support communities taking forward Neighbourhood Plans.

The National Association for AONBs and National Parks England are beginning to work together to raise awareness of the importance of "England's Finest Landscapes".

Projects The South Dorset Ridgeway Landscape Project is now into its second year of delivery with a very positive feedback from the HLF who have given a 65% grant which amounts to nearly £2 million. There has been much public engagement mainly through Ridgeway Responses with about 3000 people asked for feedback - there has been great enthusiasm and much participation with events.

Wild Purbeck - now in its third and final year of being funded by Natural England. Jurassic Coast Transport Group is collaborating with First Bus to audit walking routes between bus stops and the South West Coast Path.

Drawing Inspiration will be funded by Fine Family Foundation to facilitate landscape monitoring by community volunteers. Photographic equipment will be purchased for high- resolution panoramas.

Further exhibitions and school resources are being prepared.

Dorset Food and Drink. This very successful project now has 115 business members. Chefs Mark Hix and James Golding (the latter of the Pig Hotel Group) have come on board as Dorset Food and Drink Ambassadors. Further partnerships may happen.

The Dorset Fingerpost Project has considerable support. Over 100 fingerposts are being refurbished by local groups, businesses, parishes and local communities. Four DCC members have committed their Members' Allowance to their wards for fingerpost restoration. Vandalism of fingerposts was discussed and whether any relevant insurance could be obtained. Traditional materials are evidently less susceptible to vandal damage. The Team is working with DCC to explore new ways to insure the posts.

National Grid Visual Impact Provision Plans to reduce the visual impact of electricity infrastructure in nationally protected landscapes across England and Wales are gathering momentum. Three sections of transmission lines in the Dorset AONB near the Osmington White Horse and villages of Martinstown and Askerswell, have been identified as having a significant landscape and visual impact. There are twelve sections of transmission lines in eight AONBs and National Parks that have been shortlisted. The Project will make use of a 500 million allowance made available by Ofgem until 2021. A range of engineering measures could be implemented including the replacement of existing overhead lines with underground cables, the re-routing

3 of existing lines, through to the screening of substations or overhead lines from public viewpoints.

Budget The Partnership Board approved the budget headlines. Income £289,364 (Local Authority and DEFRA) Core - Maximum eligible core costs are £245,733. Efforts have been made to minimise the core expenditure while maintaining essential core functions. It could come down to £245,433.

The team was asked to remain realistic about the chances of attracting funds from the Dorset LEP as the projects described were possibly not high on the LEP's list of priorities.

Dorset Cultural Strategy The Cultural Strategy will set out key areas of delivery for the cultural sector, and can be used as a document to aid bidding for funds to deliver its aims. It will be a five year strategy - the last one finished in 2014. The draft strategy recognises the role culture can shape our landscape for the better, and its role in engaging and enthusing people about the natural environment.

District Councils Network – Councillor Croney

Planning The DCN responded to Governments stepping onto the property ladder consultation in early February.

Following announcements of the new SuDS regime the DCN has been with colleagues from the LGA to try and ensure that the burdens of the new regime are properly reflected and understood. With letters to Brandon Lewis MP and Elizabeth Truss MP to highlight concerns and the consequences of the new regime. Specifically: • Delays in the processing of applications and/or • Lack of detailed attention to SuDS and adoption arrangements at the application stage • Inadequate enforcement by LPAs of failing SuDS in development • Increased risk of flooding as a result.

Financial Independence The DCN welcomed the report of the Independent Commission on Local Government Finance. The core of the commission’s proposals that power, funding and ultimately taxes should be devolved to a local level echoes the views of the DCN and members. DCN have been lobbying for some time on many of the points raised by the commission and previous submissions to them have reflected that.

The DCN had a positive meeting with colleagues from HM Treasury. The subject for discussion was the continuing issue of centrally set fees and charges, particularly planning and licensing. HM Treasury suggested some action that DCN could take to support their case. One of these was to carry out a survey to help identify the level of subsidy that exists when fees are set centrally. DNC are currently finalising the questionnaire and will be circulating this shortly.

The DCN submitted representation for the Budget and Autumn Statement. It covers 7 areas: • Welfare assistance • Business rates • New Homes Bonus • Council tax bands

• Fees and charges • Multiyear settlements • Minimum revenue provision

The DCN has submitted responses to both the business rates administration and avoidance consultations.

Dorset Community Safety Partnership (DCSP) – Cllr Jefferson

Last autumn the Dorset Community Safety Partnership approved the proposed re-organisation of community safety across the County, Bournemouth and Poole areas and recommended the proposal for adoption by all statutory members of the partnership through their own decision making processes.

On 19th January Cabinet approved the new arrangements with the recommendation that representation from Districts and Boroughs on the new pan Dorset Community Safety and Criminal Justice Board be increased. At the February meeting of the Dorset Community Safety Partnership it became apparent that concerns about representation were shared by other local authorities and that Weymouth and Portland Borough Council had rejected the proposal. In these circumstances it was decided to postpone any further consideration of possible new working arrangements until the Community Safety Partnership meeting next June.

The Community Safety Partnership received a new Strategic Assessment for 2015 – 2016 and accepted new proposed priorities which are aligned with the priorities of the Bournemouth and Poole partnerships. A delivery plan is currently being formulated to address these priorities. The priorities for next year will be :-

• Public place violent crime • Alcohol related violent crime • Serious sexual offences • Domestic Abuse • Reducing Offending • Anti-social Behaviour

At the end of the meeting the Chair, Councillor Ray Nottage of Christchurch Borough Council, announced his decision to step down from his position and a new Chair will be elected by statutory partners at the June meeting.

Police and Crime Panel ( PCP ) – Cllr Jefferson

A verbal update will be given at the meeting.

DAPTC (Dorset Association of Parish & Town Councils) – Councillor Pothecary

The minutes from the meeting of the DAPTC are attached to this report.

CPEND (Community Partnership Executive, North Dorset) – Councillor Pothecary

The minutes from the meeting of CPEND are attached to this report.

Dorset County Council Health Scrutiny Committee – Cllr Batty-Smith

In May I was re-appointed Vice-Chairman of the Committee. I attended all four full Committee meetings, plus nine Task and Finish meetings and three briefings.

The Work Programme had several main elements:-

1. SCRUTINY TASK AND FINISH GROUPS.

Quality Accounts.

Formulate commentary on Quality Accounts from Dorset County Hospital NHS Trust (DCH) and Dorset Healthcare University Foundation NHS Trust (DHT). Both of these are annual ongoing processes carried out by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman. a. DHT has a new Chairman, Chief Executive, a number of non-executive Directors and a revised Governor structure. The changes have been reviewed by Scrutiny on a quarterly basis and have shown a steady improvement. The Trust is now out of special measures with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and we understand that the Waterston Mental Health Ward at Forston Clinic has a clear report in the most recent inspection - this after over 2 years 'in the red'. There is every indication that this improvement will continue.

The three priorities for the Dorset Healthcare Trust were Patient Safety, Clinical Effectiveness and Patient experience.

The main problem in Patient Safety is staffing. It is still difficult to obtain permanent nursing staff in the area due principally to the high cost/availability of housing, thus causing employment of Agency staff and lack of continuity. A notable improvement has been a reduction of 50% in hospital acquired pressure ulcers. The number of complaints has shown a slight increase, due in part, at least, to improved recording of complaints.

b. DCH is initiating a simpler, more direct strategy with regard to integrating with the community and acting as a healthcare 'Hub'. This also is being monitored on a quarterly basis. The efficiency of the Pathology Department had been questioned, as a result of which DCH had requested a specialist Pathology company to review its procedures and make recommendations. As a result of this the service was put out to tender, with the Pathology company as one of those tendering. The Committee questioned the propriety of this , considering that an unfair advantage may have been gained. A Task and Finish Group was appointed, which I chaired, to review the tendering process. Our judgement was that there had been no actual advantage gained since, prior to bidding, every bidder has access to the same information.

However, there were a number weaknesses in the system, such as openness, communication with stake-holders, public perception etc. These were acknowledged by DCH and will be borne in mind in any future situations. As a matter of interest, no contract was awarded and the pathology remains with DCH after some extra funding.

2. JOINT HEALTH SCRUTINY. a. Move of in-patient oncology services from Bournemouth Hospital to Poole Hospital.

I represented DCC on this Committee. The present system is that both Poole and Bournemouth have day and in-patient oncology services. This results in the stretching of available specialist services and nursing to the limit. The proposal was to limit Bournemouth to day treatment - chemotherapy etc. - and treat all in-patients at Poole (plus the Poole day

6 patients). This would enable increased patient care to be carried out because of the concentration of staff.

Concerns were raised about the travel for family members who wished to visit but the advantages of the change prevailed and it was approved unanimously.

b. Fertility - Assisted Conception Policy.

It was recommended that Dorset Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) commission one cycle of Assisted Conception Treatment. It also agreed that a second course of Treatment could be provided at the same cost as that paid by the NHS

3. REPORTS TO COMMITTEE.

There have been submissions and presentations to the Committee from:-

- Care Quality Commission. - Clinical Commissioning Group. - Healthwatch

4. LONG-TERM REVIEW.

Non-emergency Patient transport service.

When this was transferred from South-West Ambulance to E-Zec Medical as the provider there were widespread problems. These arose principally from inaccurate information being given to E-Zec Medical at the bidding stage and therefore they were under-resourced. There has been a marked improvement but much still needs to be done. A progress report is to be given in May 2015.

Should anyone require further more-detailed information on any of these subjects please contact me after Council.

Stour Valley & Poole Partnership (SVPP) Joint Scrutiny Panel – Cllr David Milsted

The SVPP Scrutiny panel has so far met four times this year, with a fifth meeting scheduled in April. The SMT of the Partnership attends every meeting, along with Mark Williams (Scrutiny Officer) and Sandra Deary (Panel Clerk).

Having extended to include Poole members at the beginning of the year, membership has expanded to a maximum of 12 (up to 3 per authority) with a minimum attendance of one member per authority. Poor attendance at the first two meetings meant that as Chairman it was necessary to write to the Chief Executive at Poole BC requesting support. Since then meetings have been well attended. This Council’s representatives (D Milsted, J Somper, and E Butler) have been assiduous in their attendance.

Members from all four local authorities have worked well as a team and it is a good model for future partnership and commissioning Scrutiny panels, eg Dorset Waste Partnership. The Panel’s Terms of Reference require it to be proactive and to contribute to policy-making prior to decisions being taken. It has done so on a number of occasions this year.

The main focus of the Scrutiny panel has been the monitoring of the project plan for the delivery of the new extended partnership to include Poole, and so has included regular updates on the implementation of IT, options for office accommodation, the Workforce Reorganisation Programme, and new policies and procedures.

Other work has included reviewing the SLA for the Customer Access Team which will result in our staff being TUPEd to Poole, the SVPP budget for 2015/16, the draft business plan, the handling of complaints and compliments for the new partnership, and regular updates on performance.

The SVPP’s budget is sensitive to in-year policy changes and sudden influxes of work from the Department of Work and Pensions. With this is mind, the Scrutiny Panel will in 2015-16 receive a quarterly report on budget out-turn, with separate reports on any quarterly budget variation (plus or minus) of 5% or more.

Treads – Councillor John Tanner

Throughout its history, innovation has been the key for continued success to meet the changing needs of your people.

In February a new key worker was appointed following the departure of the previous incumbent. The trustees consider this will further enhance the project’s reputation, moving the work forward to assist young people in the manner expected by the funders. Volunteers have completed two courses with flying colours on the subjects of introduction to youth work and motivational strategies.

As one would expect from a forward looking organisation, social media is playing an increasingly important role, there are over 100 Twitter and Facebook followers. Young people seem to be using these facilities to initially ask for help/information from the workers at Treads.

CAHMS (children & adolescent mental health service) have now left the building. This was to be expected as the number of staff grew from 4 to 13. The person in charge also wanted the team to work out of Blandford Hospital. This of course has been a financial disappointment. The Job Club and First Dorset Credit Union continue to use the building at no cost.

Treads currently take part in partnership working with the following organisations. The Blandford School, Victim Support, Continuum (Advice and Information Pilot Group) Funded by Dorset County Council.

Key problem.

NEETS – not in education, employment or training, now affecting those eighteen plus due to changes in government policy and not those sixteen plus as previously.

Referrals are made to Treads by Spectrum, Dorset Families Matter, The Community Mental Health team and Social Services. This demonstrates Treads is viewed by other organisations to be providing a professional service.

Funding.

In addition to various councils and individuals supporting this project, Treads actively bids for extra funds.

At present a bid for funding has been written to provide equipment, books, furniture for a teens club especially for young people with autistic spectrum conditions. In short Treads is continually evolving to meet the changing needs of young people in Blandford and the surround area.

OUTSIDE BODIES REPORT TO COUNCIL MARCH 2015

Dorset Association of Parish and Town Councils Northern Area Committee

Minutes of the AGM held at The Pavilion, Okeford Fitzpaine on Thursday 16th October 2014

1. Present:

Cllr Haydn White Blandford Forum Town Council CllrJackie Stayt Blandford Forum Town Council Cllr Simon Firbank (Chairman) Bourton Parish Council Cllr Danny L Bourton Parish Council Cllr Tim Hill Charlton Marshall Parish Council Cllr Harold Gaplin Durweston Parish council Cllr Mike Jones Iwerne Minster Parish Council Cllr Crawford May Lydlinch Parish Council Cllr Mike Burt Okeford Fitzpaine Parish Council Cllr Debbie Mackenzie Pimperne Parish Council Cllr Jim Bird Shroton Parish council Cllr Ian Lee South Tarrant Valley Parish Council Cllr Doris Chard The Stours Parish Council CllrJohn Parker The Stours Parish Council

In attendance: Pam Higgins Secretary Northern Area, DAPTC Mr Stephen Hill General Manager, NDDC Cynthia Starkey Chief Executive DAPTC Steven Howard Highways, DCC

Apologies Cllr Mrs Val Pothecary North Dorset District Council Cllr Tony Bishop Stalbridge Town Council Cllr David Walsh Gillingham Town council

2. Minutes of the meeting held on 16th July 2014. The minutes of the meeting held on 16th July 2014 had been previously circulated. No issues were raised. The minutes were then signed as a true record of the meeting.

3. Chairman’s Report The chairman had no report to give to the committee.

4. Reports from Representatives

The Standards Board Cllr Stayt – nothing to report.

CPEND Cllr Burt reported the committee is due to meet and will send a report for circulation.

Travellers & Gypsies Cllr Parker reported there had not been any meetings or forums recently. The following question was raised – should NA DAPTC be more involved in the consultation? The reply from Stephen Hill – It is a Dorset wide consultation on all sites in the county. This has been reviewed with new guidance to ensure new sites are identified in North Dorset (Conygar Coppice was highlighted). Cllr Parker will attend the next meeting and report at the next meeting.

Blandford Leisure Centre Cllr Hill reported he is attending a meeting on 29th October and would send a report for circulation.

5. Election of Chairman for 2014/15 Cllr Firbank proposed Cllr Parker, this was seconded by Cllr Stayt. Carried

6. Election of Vice Chairman for 2014/15 Cllr White proposed Cllr Burt, this was seconded by Cllr Bird. Carried.

7. Election of Four representatives to the DAPTC Executive It was agreed the Chairman and Vice Chairman attended. Cllr White proposed Cllr Jones, this was seconded by Cllr Stayt. Carried Cllr Lee proposed Cllr Firbank, this was seconded by Cllr Burt. Carried.

8. Election of Representatives to other boards/committees Standards Board – Cllr Stayt and Cllr Bishop Gypsies & Travellers – Cllr Parker and Cllr Burt CPEND – Cllr Burt and Cllr Parker Rural Enterprise Partnership – This is not ‘winding up’. Hugh de Long will keep the committee informed of any changes.

It was suggested a list of meetings the Chairman attends is published. If he is unable to attend then others can offer to attend for him.

9. DAPTC CE Report At the previous meeting DAPTC had been asked if they could ‘kick start’ a discussion regarding the problems on the A350 and C13. The CE (CS) approached Steve Howard (SH) from Highways, DCC and he offered to come along to talk to members at this meeting. These are his comments: - The Highways team are aware of the issues regarding this situation and are working hard to try to resolve the problems. Information regarding any progress can be found on www.dorsetforyou.com/dinahs-hollow

They have four ‘Work Steams’

1. The Tactical team who check the signs relating to the road closures/diversions in the vicinity. They also work with the police to ensure traffic follow the signs to keep the closed areas clear. 2. The Working team are looking for a way to stabilise the bank. Bore holes for soil samples have been taken and are in the process of being analysed. Two reports are due, one for the bank and one for the area near the Church. The experts will advise the best way to deal with these issues by end of November. 3. The Research team looking to see what can be done to make life better for the residents in Melbury Abbas. Ideas have been put forward and a report is due soon. 4. NDDC involvement – Deborah Croney (NDDC) has been looking for ‘new’ money for new infrastructures to achieve the above. She has been working with Bob Walter, MP, to see if any Government money is available.

Millions of money is needed to solve this problem which DCC does not have. The time scale for re-opening the road at the moment is end of Spring 2015.

A discussion took place and the following points were raised. Q -Cllr Burt highlighted the fact that EU money had been available a few years ago, but as DCC didn’t have any plans in place they couldn’t take advantage of it to improve the A350. A - SH – No EU money now. But DCC were putting its weight behind two new routes to alleviate the traffic – A37 to Yeovil, M5 and A338 Bournemouth to Fordingbridge. Cllr White pointed out that Blandford had lost business due to lack of improvement to A350. Q – Cllr Jones had concerns as this is an AONB and being blighted by noise and pollution. The narrow roads are being used as rat-runs and are being eroded away by traffic cutting into edging/hedges to get past each other. The time-scale keeps getting pushed back. A – SH - this is out of his control. Q – Cllr Stayt asked why the feasibility study on the slopes was taking so long. A – SH - The banks are not owned by DCC, so are having to work with the land owners.

The Chairman thanked Steve for coming to the meeting and to keep this committee informed of any progress. Steve offered to come to the next meeting if required. He also reminded everyone to check the webpage regularly. DAPTC - CS thanked Steve for filling her in on the situation and coming to the meeting to explain it to the members. CS went through her report for Sept/Oct. A discussion regarding Highways Maintenance Efficiency Programme (HMEP) Strategic Peer Review followed and the following points were raised. CS – The review is low-key eg. pot holes procedures and road maintenance. Chairman – Through DAPTC could the members draw up their own paper to present to Highways? Cllr Burt – Could Highways come out with their plans for Parishes to comment on? Cllr Fairbank – Could this committee attend a meeting with Deborah Croney when the plans for new/future infrastructures are in place or could she come to talk to members about it at a future meeting? Chairman – The members would like to know where the routes are to the A37 and A338. There must be a strategy somewhere! Cllrs Haydn and Stayt thanked CS for the Planning Training which was extremely good. A reminder DAPTC AGM takes place on 8th November 2014 – theme this year – Emergency Planning. CE Report attached to minutes.

10. District Council matters Stephen Hill gave his report which is attached to the minutes.

11. Members Items

Iwerne Minster PC Cllr Jones – CPEND meeting on 17th October – re Broadband

Shroton PC Cllr Bird highlighted the difficulty in recruiting new Cllrs. Do other PC’s have the same problem and if so do they have any ideas how to address this? Chairman – a paper from Norfolk is being published about this issue. Cllr Firbank – Co-erce if you can.

Charlton Marshall PC Cllr Hill reported that money can be negotiated from Solar Renewable Energy Company’s.

The Stours PC Todber – Cllr Chard highlighted the issue of the Travellers/Gypsies camped illegally in their village. The PC is concerned about the lack of sanitation. It also has concerns for the residents who are trying to sell their properties. The Local Authority has a responsibility for tackling these issues. Stephen Hill told the members Environmental Health’s main concern is access to fresh water is made available. The Clerk – the process in responding to planning applications has changed. instead of entering the Council’s name you are required to enter a name instead. Stephen Hill said Clerks who use a Council email address make it easier for the planning officers to register the comment as Council.

Blandford TC Cllr White is on the committee for NALC, Larger Councils. They are attempting to get the Government to stop Business Rates on public toilets and Chapels in cemeteries. A campaign has begun to stop this.

Okeford Fitzpaine PC Cllr Burt – Unitary Authorities – Scrutiny Committee – Deborah Croney would look favourably to this, but other councils were dragging their feet. He asked if this could be made public – she is considering it. Blandford Fly – concerns about NDDC not spraying as they think the fly has ‘gone away’. Stephen Hill said this isn’t happening until 2016. He will send the portfolio regarding this.

12. The dates and venues for next year to be decided. The next meeting will take place on th 13 January 2015 at the Pavilion, Recreation Ground, Okeford Fitzpaine, DT11 0RL at 7.00pm

With no further business the meeting closed at 9.05pm. The Chairman thanked everyone for attending.

Dorset Association of Parish and Town Councils Northern Area Committee

Minutes of the meeting held at the Pavilion, Okeford Fitzpaine on Tuesday 13th January 2015

1. Present:

Cllr Haydn White Blandford Forum Town Council Cllr Tim Hill Charlton Marshall Parish Council Cllr Mike Jones Iwerne Minster Parish Council Cllr Crawford May Lydlinch Parish Council Cllr Mrs Val Pothecary North Dorset District Council Cllr Mike Burt Okeford Fitzpaine Parish Council Cllr Derek Andews Pimperne Parish Council Cllr Scott Norman Stourpaine Parish Council Cllr Doris Chard The Stours Parish Council CllrJohn Parker The Stours Parish Council

In attendance: Pam Higgins Secretary Northern Area, DAPTC Mr Stephen Hill General Manager, NDDC

Apologies

CllrJackie Stayt Blandford Forum Town Council Cllr Simon Firbank Bourton Parish Council Cllr Danny Lawes Bourton Parish Council Cllr David Walsh Gillingham Town Council Cynthia Starkey Chief Executive DAPTC Cllr Jim Bird Shroton Parish Council Cllr Ian Lee South Tarrant Valley Parish Council Cllr Tony Bishop Stalbridge Town Council Cllr Peter Partridge Stourpaine Parish Council Cllr David Godden Winterborne Stickland Parish Council

2. Minutes of the AGM held on 16th October 2014. The minutes of the meeting held on 16th October 2014 had been previously circulated. It was proposed by Cllr Jones (IMPC) and seconded by Cllr Hill (CMPC) the minutes were a true record of the meeting. All agreed.

3. Any Matters Arising The Travellers and Gypsies – see item 5.

4. Chairman’s Report The Chairman report had been circulated with the agenda. The Chairman gave an update with the following: -

NDDC Budget Workshop re the grant from Central Government to cover reduced Council tax for those on benefits should be passed on to Town & Parish Councils – The proposal for NDDC to give some funding to Town & Parish Councils will be decided at Full Council Cabinet meeting on 30th January 2015. Local Government Financial Settlement - Government Consultation – NALC has asked Councils to respond to the consultation paper regarding this issue. As the consultation closes on 15thJanuary members were urged to respond a.s.a.p. The chairman will check the link to the website address and the secretary will send to members. NALC has issued a guide which is in the DAPTC CE report to area meeting. (attached with minutes) A point was raised regarding links sent in emails/information by staff at NDDC. Please would the staff check the link works before sending it! Stephen Hill will take this point back to NDDC.

Northern Dorset LAG The chairman gave an update of how this is progressing. As the information given had not been made public at the time of the meeting, members were asked to ‘keep it to themselves’ for the present but they could contact the lead programme manager to register an interest in becoming a member.

Groups/members will have to register before they can attend a meeting. A pot of money from DEFRA will be available for projects – small and large economic developments. Sarah Harbige is the Lead Programme Manager of North and South LAG based in Dorchester. She will have an assistant plus two managers (1 for the north and 1 for the south). Her contact details are: - Tel: 01305 228699, email [email protected]

5. Reports from Representatives

The Standards Board Nothing to report.

CPEND Nothing to report.

Travellers & Gypsies Nothing to report.

Rural Enterprise Partnership This is still a body but ‘sleeping’ at the moment.

Overview & Scrutiny Cllr Burt will attend a meeting regarding housing in Shaftsbury. Scrutiny Committee - the outcome of the survey of Spectrum householders regarding the effect of the bedroom tax – how it has affected them – is available on the Dorset for You website. Stephen Hill will check the minutes when they are available.

DAPTC The new Chairman of DAPTC is Cllr Haydn White of Blandford Town Council. DAPTC Annual Conference takes place on 25th February 2015 at Kingston Maurward.

6. District Council matters Stephen Hill gave his report which is attached to the minutes. Liz Goodhall is retiring in February. It was agreed the Chairman sends a letter of thanks for her support to this Committee.

7. Extraordinary Meeting A350/C13/North/South route The issue of the A350/C13 corridor was discussed. A meeting between DCC and Melbury Abbas is due sometime this month (January).

It was agreed to contact Deborah Croney again requesting a meeting in February for an update. To meet on either a Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday evening as an option. It was suggested inviting someone from DCC who is responsible for strategic issues concerning the north/south network (Mike Harry was mentioned). Cllr Mike Jones told the members compulsory orders by local authorities doesn’t cover land owned by the National Trust.

8. Members Items

Iwerne Minster PC Cllr Jones – With the Parish Council elections due in May, his concern was how do you get people interested in becoming a Cllr?

Charlton Marshall PC Cllr Hill highlighted Solar Renewable Energy’s responsibility of contributing to local enterprises.

Stourpaine PC Cllr Norman brought to the committee’s attention the issue of the school bus being withdrawn from Stourpaine. There hadn’t been any consultation by DCC with the school, parents or the Parish. A letter was sent out to parents in December stating the bus was being withdrawn in February. It was proposed by Cllr Burt and seconded by Cllr Hill this committee write a letter to DCC showing their disproval of this decision. All agreed.

The Stours PC Todber – Cllr Chard reported the Travellers/Gypsies are still in their village and the problems are getting worse. It was highlighted that if they are moved on one day there is nothing to stop them moving back on the site the next day. An injunction will be needed so they cannot move back after eviction. They are due to leave in March. Cllr Parker highlighted the proposal for the redevelopment of an open barn in his Parish. The issue of permitted development needs to be highlighted. He suggested John Hammond be invited to give a presentation about permitted development. A letter will be sent.

NDDC Stephen Hill told the members reported the Local Plan has been sent to the Inspectorate. The planning inspector, David Hogger, has indicated the enquiry could begin in early March. The enquiry will run for several days and will be for people who commented on the consultation. He will then issue a statement if the plan is ‘sound’. If any amendments need to be made it may not be approved until July.

Okeford Fitzpaine PC Cllr Burt regarding Local Elections - reported he had looked at various sites saying ‘is it worth having a Parish Council as they can’t do any good’. Even District Councils don’t always take them seriously. With the Neighbourhood Planning it gives the community a greater power so should show that residents can have power over their surroundings. As money is short in County and District Councils Parishes can take services over from them if they wish to keep the service available.

9. Date and place of next After discussion it was proposed by Cllr Crawford and seconded by Cllr Burt the next meeting be brought forward due to the local elections in May. It was agreed to have the meeting on 1st April 2015 at the Pavilion, Recreation Ground, Okeford Fitzpaine, DT11 0RL at 7.00pm

With no further business the meeting closed at 8.50pm. The Chairman thanked everyone for attending.

SAIL GOVERNANCE MEETING 16th October 2014

Attendees: Sue Warr(Chair), Linzi Holt, Elaine Ryan, Hilary Evans, Liz Cragg, Neil Short, Val Pothecary, Kate Underhill.

1. Apologies: Andrew Archibald, Di Lawrence, Rachel Partridge.

Action: SW to start process to find a replacement attendee for Pat Lewis Action: YB take Tim Archer off the invite list

Agenda Item Points of Interest/Actions Action 2. Minutes of last Follow up secure data sharing with Vikki Shearing. LH meeting and matters arising The issue of blank forms at Falls Prevention Events would be addressed by Wayfinders being briefed, and to insist on phone numbers being provided.

VP offered to publicise the event in Gillingham and asked SW to VP/SW provide info of dates.

Magna have agreed to provide some funding for next year, but haven’t yet provided any this financial year.

The online form is ongoing – agreed that everyone needs the link for their own web pages from Chris Angell.

Positive response from the GP SAIL pilot.

Progress additional questions for form, i.e. loneliness and isolation SW (confirm where referrals would go), Police wording, mental health,

some rewording had been suggested; Pam & Jean contact number

has changed. The online form will need to reflect these changes, SW to oversee.

Wessex Water are talking actively to groups of people

Find out what CAB (via Caroline Buxton) do with enquiries about SW financial advice, who do they refer people to?

3. Monitoring and SW asked if the group would support a refresh/relaunch to remind SW Stats everyone we’re still here and to reinvigorate referrals.

A celebrity endorsement for a relaunch/Super SAIL should be SW/LH considered.

SW reported that there was minimal outcome analysis at the moment but that NDTI were working on evaluating the economic value of SAIL.

4. Finance and LC discussed the shortfall in funding, reporting that letters were sent LH/LC Budget out on 24/10/13. LH agreed to jointly draft an email from Darran Gunter to request funding again.

SW asked if using the Better Care funding would be appropriate SW instead of the three Local Authorities. The group decided this would be simpler. SW will follow this up with Ali Waller, and cc LH.

5. Updates to form As noted at point 2. KU to email current version of the form, and essential notes and LGA flyer with the minutes 6. Sherborne area Ultimately SW would like evidence that SAIL is reducing GP visits and GP SAIL pilot medications bill. 7. East Dorset GP As above involvement 8. Home Safety There are currently 16 published core events, with other places to Falls Prevention be confirmed. Events 2014/2015 9. AOB LH informed the group that DFRS had successfully bid for some funding to run a project on making people with dementia safer in their homes.

LH asked for an update on the SAIL bus, and agreed to discuss its’ LH/SW usage and value, and cost effectiveness with SW outside of the meeting. Date and time of Thurs 22nd January 14.00 – 16.00 hrs next meeting Poole Fire Station

N.B. The SAIL governance meeting planned for the 22nd January 2015 was cancelled.

Superfast Broadband in North Dorset Community Partnerships Executive for North Dorset (CPEND) Council Chamber, Nordon, NDDC offices, Blandford Friday 17th October 2014

Present: Steve Adamson (DT11 Forum), Cllr Pauline Batstone (Lydden Vale), Mike Burt (Okeford Fitzpaine), Richard Choat (COUBA), Ryder Cowan (Stours PC), Simon Firbank (DAPTC), Deanne Foot (Durweston PC), John Goode (Tarrant Monkton & Launceston PC), Mark Hebditch (Three Rivers Partnership), Mike Jones (Iwerne Minster PC), Steve Keenan (Kington Magna PC), Scott Norman (Stourpaine PC), John Parker (Stours PC), Allan Peters (SturQuest), Cllr Val Pothecary (NDDC), Ian Lee (South Tarrant PC), Charlotte Moody, Elizabeth Sellen (Milton Abbas PC), Mike Lawson (Marnhull PC), Jim Hayward (Digital Champion), Mike Scott (Steria), David Shepherd (Sturminster Community Learning Centre), Chris Spackman (Sturminster Neighbourhood Plan Group), Ian Watson (Iwerne Minster PC), Chris Wildey (Buckhorn Weston PC), Malcolm Wilson (Hazelbury Bryan PC), Keith Yarwood (Stourpaine), Stephen Hill, John Hammond, Hugh de Iongh & Susan Sullivan (all NDDC).

1. Apologies. Cllr Hilary Cox (DCC), Clive Carter (Shaftesbury Chamber of Commerce), David Griffin-Shephard& John Parker (Shaftesbury District Task Force), Andrew Cattaway (DCC), Simon Thompson (DCA)

2. Superfast Broadband Nic Nicol welcomed all to the meeting. He introduced the Dorset Superfast Broadband team, comprising:  Dugald Lockhart, Project Lead, Superfast Dorset  Paul Coles, Regional Director, BT Group  Grant Munn, Programme Manager, BT Group  Andrew Cadman, Senior Project Manager, Openreach  Penny Syddall, Senior Communications Officer, Superfast Dorset

Superfast Broadband presentation The Superfast team gave a presentation of the roll-out of superfast Broadband in North Dorset. The Powerpoint presentation is available at https://www.dorsetforyou.com/398134 (note: it is at the bottom of this webpage under ‘Minutes of CPEND Meetings’, in two parts as it is a large document). The main points of the presentation were as follows:

Phase 3 of the Dorset Superfast broadband programme is focusing on North Dorset, improving internet speeds to communities in the telephone exchange areas of Blandford, Bourton, Child Okeford, Fontmell Magna, Gillingham, Hazelbury Bryan, Marnhull, Milton Abbas, Shaftesbury& Sturminster Newton. Work on this phase has already started, and is anticipated this phase will be completed by Easter 2015. Much of the towns of Blandford, Shaftesbury and Gillingham have already been upgraded through private sector investment.

This will provide improved speeds of a target of more than 24Mbps, with a minimum level of at least 2Mbps. In many areas of the roll-out elsewhere in Dorset, higher speeds than 24Mbps have been

achieved. This programme works by mainly implementing Fibre to the Cabinet (FttC), i.e. with fibre- optics from the exchange to the cabinet, speeds are increased, but the section to the premises remains the existing telephone wire, which limits the overall speeds which can be achieved. This programme is also implementing some Fibre to the Premises (FttP), which achieves much higher speeds, but is significantly more expensive to install.

Because of the complexity of the engineering and technical work in the roll-out, and the need for flexibility, the programme doesn’t set out an exact timetable. However, the Superfast Broadband team will hold open meetings in an area as works starts, there will be updated information available on the website at www.dorsetforyou.com/superfast, and everyone is encouraged to register to receive an email when your area has been upgraded and a fibre-optic based service available.

There will be further Phases, with the target that by September 2016, 95% of premises across Dorset, Bournemouth & Poole will have access to superfast broadband at at least 24Mbps, and 100% with access to at least 2Mbps. The map at http://mapping.dorsetforyou.com/superfast/availability/map gives more information on the phasing & timing and is updated periodically.

There are some areas which will not get Superfast Broadband through the current programme, but the programme as a whole will deliver a step change in availability and connectivity for the vast majority in North Dorset.

Once the infrastructure has been put in place, it is available for all broadband providers to use; it is not restricted to BT.

Superfast broadband is only the infrastructure, and is of no benefit if not used. There is a programme to stimulate demand, increasing useage and uptake of the faster broadband. On the business side, this is through Superfast Business support programme, and Dorset Business Women Go Digital. On the community side, it is through Digital Champions, digital inclusion work, etc. The greater the uptake, the more the programme can re-invest to achieve more.

Superfast Broadband is funded by a combination of funding from Local authorities (NDDC and DCC for the North Dorset area), Central government and private sector investment by BT.

3. Questions. Following the presentation, there were wide ranging questions. For the minutes, these are clustered into similar issues, as follows:

Setting priorities How are priorities on which communities to start with made, e.g. Sturminster &the North Dorset Business Park. DL outlined that the aim was primarily to achieve the highest number of properties across Dorset as quickly as possible. If there is a large community, and there are significant problems in connecting, e.g. as was the case with Bridport, the programme will try and link that community up early.

Delivery of the programme will significantly increase availability to businesses as well as the community in general.

MH suggested there should be a strong focus on business estates & premises to support economic growth, a view reflected by many others at the meeting. DL said that in their experience take up wasn’t significantly high on business parks & commercial areas. He is also fully aware of the North Dorset Business Park issue.

Proportionality of roll-out There were figures of the numbers of premises that would receive superfast broadband at different stages, e.g. 9,000 & 17,000, but no overall figure of existing premises to be able to say what proportion of premises are benefiting. DL agreed to provide the total number of existing premises – this has previously been provided to the district council.

Community influence on the programme Can local communities influence the programme? Not in terms of the roll-out, but can help with working on local difficulties. Can communities come up with their own solutions, e.g. microwave point to point. Some communities are working direct with BT, with the possibility of looking at very local solutions.

Managing expectations & information How to manage expectations; in some places there may be genuine technical limitations and limitations on the overall budget, so how can the Parish Council manage expectations? DL suggested to use the postcode mapping tool to look at a very local level, and if its not clear, then contact the Superfast Broadband team for more detailed info. Best if contact is through Parish Council rather than individuals so the information is then available to the whole community. At a practical level, if a cabinet is being worked on, then that cabinet is likely to come on-stream in the next few months.

As Cabinets are set up by the technicians, the guys doing the work are constantly being asked about when the service will start locally, but they don’t always know. Is there a solution to this? The OpenReach answer is that this is a problem, as the technicians won’t always know, and the best way to keep up to speed is by using existing communication, i.e. postcode checker, email update, local meetings organised by the SuperFast Broadband team

Uptake. If you have superfast Broadband provided to your premises, your service will not automatically improve. Consumers need to contact their ISP to change to the higher service, which will normally be a monthly uplift of £4-5. The Openreach infrastructure means that any ISP provider can provide a premises with a service, so when an area is enabled with superfast Broadband, providers normally contact all premises in the area to offer their services if people want to upgrade. Uptake rates nationally are around 17%, for the Dorset commercial broadband programme are around 19% and in some of the newly enabled areas in Dorset this is above 30% already.

Trailway Broadband project & Stourpaine SN said that through the Trailway Broadband programme, Stourpaine and other villages along the Trailway could have had 100 mbp, and instead, under the Superfast Broadband programme, part of his parish of Stourpaine gets some superfast soon, and the second gets very little much later. He is deeply disappointed by this.

Areas not being served by the Superfast programme. How will the ‘not have’ areas (originally termed white areas, now yellow on the map) be tackled. DL outlined two ways:  Pushing the boundaries of what can be done within the existing programme, which in other areas has achieved more than originally anticipated in some areas  The County Council are going through a procurement process at the moment for further work focused on the ‘not have’ areas, although this will not ultimately serve every property if very isolated

New development New development, e.g. Gillingham, will this be served? DL clarified that the programme is for existing premises only and not new premises, which have no automatic right to have superfast broadband infrastructure. The decision is for the developer to make, and land use planners should encourage developers to provide the infrastructure as essential, although unfortunately it is not statutory for broadband to be included as infrastructure in new development.

Technical queries  SA asked how the programme measures the speeds delivered. DL explained that the programme works to the national framework, which has an agreed approach in the framework of what we measure & how. The actual speed may vary for a number of reasons, some internally to the premises, some external, e.g. other use in the immediate area.  Buckhorn Weston has exchanges across in Somerset, does this create any problems? No, the programme work to the technical solution, so will work to the exchange which serves the area best, if within the County or across the boundary.  What are the solutions if there are no cabinets in very rural areas? There is an Exchange Only (EO) solution, with fibre-optic lines from an exchange along the poles to a new cabinet in the very rural area. Or building additional cabinets and rearranging the existing copper network.  TV white space. TV white space can be used for specific purposes, e.g. machine to machine, but not good enough for general use.  Improving transmission on existing copper wire, GFast technology. There is some research on this, with levels of 700mb in the lab, but not to the level where it can be used in the field. This same technology can be applied to aluminium wire as well.  Mobile phone coverage, there is a way in which aerials can be linked into cabinets, providing 3 &4G at a local level. This is for individual mobile phone companies to decide whether to do or not.  Will there be less telephone poles? Unlikely

Schools. Are schools being prioritised? Schools had improved service provided through the Dorset Public Sector Network, where superfast broadband is available schools can take a service. The Superfast Broadband programme works closely with DCC IT Services in maximising the benefit to the wide area network.

4. Close Nic Nicol thanked the Superfast Broadband team for their presentation, and thanked all for attending.

AGENDA ITEM 11 NORTH DORSET DISTRICT COUNCIL

COUNCIL MEETING

27 MARCH 2015

CABINET REPORT FOR FEBRUARY AND MARCH 2015

Leader - Councillor Deborah Croney

PORTFOLIO HOLDER’S REPORT

Tri-Council Update Matt Prosser has now been appointed to the post of Chief Executive for the three councils and is currently undertaking a senior management structural review. He will announce his Senior Management Team in late April. Matt has been spending time with all three councils and has been meeting with staff informally over the past few weeks.

Councillors are now beginning to meet regularly through the Joint Shared Management Committee. Dr Lesley Rowan has been commissioned to provide guidance on change processes and areas of focus for both Councillors and staff.

A workshop for Members was held in February. The purpose of this workshop was for the three groups of elected members to:

1. Reaffirm work done to date on the tri-partnership political vision 2. Review the tri-partnership political mandate – from the members perspective - and co- determine a set of high level partnership principles to guide member involvement 3. Determine how the three groups of members will collectively engage the wider tri- partnership member group post -election.

The workshop was very positive with valuable outcomes. This work will be reviewed later this month.

Infrastructure Act On Thursday 12 February 2015 the Infrastructure Bill was given Royal Assent and is now an Act of Parliament. The LGA argued successfully for the inclusion of the section on route strategies and for a provision to ensure that community benefit schemes for fracking are put on a statutory footing.

The Act enabled the creation of Highways England as an arms-length company which will be more accountable to Parliament and to road users, according to the Department for Transport (DfT).

The Highways Agency is responsible for the construction and maintenance of England's strategic road network, made up of motorways and major trunk roads. It is currently an executive agency which is part of the DfT. From April, it will be converted into a government- owned corporation with its own five year 'roads investment strategy' budget, similar to the model already in use on the railways.

The new Highways England will be responsible for delivering the Government’s roads investment strategy, worth £15 billion, delivering more than 100 schemes over the next5 years. Highways England will be held to account by a strategic roads network monitor, operated by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR), which will publish information on its performance and have the power to take action if it does not comply with the conditions of its license. Passenger Focus, which represents the interests of public transport passengers, will be rebranded as Transport Focus and carry out an expanded role on behalf of motorists, cyclists, walkers and business users of the strategic roads network.

Other measures contained in the act will make it easier to take forward infrastructure projects of 'national significance', give local communities the right to buy a stake in renewable energy projects and modernize the Land Registry.

The Infrastructure Act will also establish a set of national standards on what amounts to 'allowable solutions'; enabling developers of new homes that meet the 'zero carbon homes' obligation to offset a certain amount of carbon emissions through cost effective off-site abatement measures. It will also enable surplus and redundant public sector land and property to be sold off more quickly, and introduce a new 'deemed discharge' provision on planning conditions for projects that have already been granted planning permission. The LGA will now monitor the commencement of the Act.

LGA Update Budget Submission Ahead of this month’s budget the LGA has made a submission to the Treasury setting out what we think is needed for local government. The submission, which can be read here highlights the pressures on social care, emphasises the case for place-based budgeting, the importance of multi-year settlements and ensuring that there is further devolution of decision- making to the local level.

The Independent Commission on Local Government Finance has produced its final report Financing English Devolution. The report sets out plans for a 10 year programme of devolution that would see more than £200 billion in annual public expenditure being controlled by groupings of local authorities. Under the plans, Whitehall would have a much reduced role in local services like housing, planning, social care, transport and local government funding.

The Commission’s vision is for a finance system that: • Promotes self-reliance and self-sufficiency • Encourages entrepreneurialism and innovation • Promotes local decision-making on service delivery • Is transparent in how it works and in the division of responsibilities between central and local government • Maintains support for the most vulnerable.

Key reforms include greater freedom over jobs, housing and care, a single budget for public services in an area and a devolved model of taxation based on new arrangements for Scotland. This would include reform of council tax and business rates along with devolution of some existing national taxes like income tax and VAT.

CABINET DECISIONS WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

Cabinet on 9 February 2015 considered the following item within this portfolio: Cabinet recommended the Medium Term Financial Plan 2016/17 to 2020/21, the Revenue Budget 2015/16 and the Capital Programme 2015/16 to 2019/20 to Council.

Cabinet also made a number of recommendations to Council regarding the establishment of the Tri-Council Partnership including the principles set out in the Heads of Terms for the Collaboration Agreement, Membership of the Shared Services Joint Committee and also recommended that Council accept an offer from Weymouth & Portland Borough Council to make Matt Prosser available in order to take on the duties of the Head of Paid Service and Chief Executive of North Dorset District Council.

Cabinet on 23 February 2015 considered the following item within this portfolio:

Cabinet recommended to Council the approval of the Treasury Management Strategy Statement and Investment Strategy 2015/16, and the adoption of the CIPFA Treasury Management in Public Services: Code of Practice 2011 Edition.

PORTFOLIO HOLDER DECISIONS MADE WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

On 26 February 2015 I approved amended fees with regard to local land charges to enable the recovery of legitimate costs.

Deputy Leader and Access and Affordable Housing – Councillor Graham Carr-Jones

PORTFOLIO HOLDER’S REPORT

LICENSING Over the past 2 years the Licensing Service has undergone a transformation from the original slow paper laden administrative system to a new Lean and fast digital by default service. From a soft launch of just using the service for our taxi clients, the Public Access digital system is now used for every area of licensing. The Team have gone from a 100% paper application to system to now receiving over 80% of applications online. Further to this, the Team now communicate instantly with the majority of its clients. On a recent news release, 223 taxi drivers were notified of an upcoming change to the DVLA counterpart licences. Of the 223 clients informed 183 (82%) were emailed and received an instant communication. This work has also been the basis for helping implement “Agile” and “SMART” working practices for which the Licensing Team is at the forefront. They have been able to achieve this by making a paperless IT driven system, maximising the use of technology and coming up with innovative ways to work.

In relation to the changes to the way licensing works and the way in which our customers (both internal and external) interact with the council, the Licensing Team have been nominated for two awards, they are:

• Local Government Chronicle (LGC) Awards – award nomination category “Driving Efficiency Through Technology” • The Management Journal (MJ) Awards – award nomination category “Delivering Better Outcomes”

HOUSING

The review of the Allocations Policy came into force on 17th December 2014. These are the results of the re-registration taking into consideration the above changes.

The Housing Register currently (28 February 2015) is as follows:

Emergency – 0 Gold – 54 Silver – 192 Bronze – 300 Ineligible – shared Ownership 32 Total –578 live applications – New policy implemented 17th December 2014

A further 72 applications are pending waiting for further information.

The numbers on the register this month has increased; we have received 107 new on line applications throughout the month of February. 65 of these have been processed and 42 remain outstanding, dated 18 February 2015.

Homeless information

We had 70 approaches from households requiring housing advice during February 2015

Homelessness applications for February 2015 were 5

6 homeless decisions were made in February 2015 of which:- 4 were accepted, 2 were found not homeless, 0 was found Non Priority Need, 0 applications was withdrawn 0 found to be intentional.

There was 0 household in B&B at the end of February 2015.

CABINET DECISIONS WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period.

PORTFOLIO HOLDER DECISIONS MADE WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period.

Community and Regeneration – Councillor Val Pothecary

PORTFOLIO HOLDER’S REPORT

DEMOCRATIC SERVICES

IER The response received from the Household Notification Letters (HNLs) sent to all households in the District has been very positive, and the team has been able to ensure that the Register used for the forthcoming elections is as up to date as possible.

Elections All councillors should now have received the requested electoral information for their Wards.

Councillor Open Day On 18th February the Returning Officer, the Democratic & Electoral Services Manager and a number of councillors facilitated an “Open Day” to enable prospective District and Parish Council candidates to come and ask questions about the electoral process and the work of a District or Parish Councillor. The event was fairly successful and was attended by 18 prospective candidates.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

North Dorset Economic Growth Fund The Fund continues to receive a regular stream of applications and the Growth Board considered six new funding requests of £2,500 and over on 16th March.

Grants totalling £19,357.00 have been approved to date, excluding the six new applications.

Surveys The Retail survey in Gillingham is expected to be completed by the end of March and is it planned to commence a similar survey for Blandford in April.

COMMUNITY PLANNING

Rural Transport The North Dorset Travel Working Group workshop held on 4th February at Nordon was considered to be very successful and a lot of information was shared. Please see the following summary of the minutes:

Purpose of meeting: To take an overview of travel and transport issues in the North Dorset area. It is not intended to duplicate the work done by TAGs.

TAG updates DT11 TAG: Nic Nicol. There had been considerable public input into the timetabling and routing as part of the DCC Public Transport review, working with John Cummings. A combined public & community transport leaflet had been developed with Chris Chandler and widely circulated; due to be updated soon. Young Person’s keycard; DT11 Forum had been campaigning for this 90 day non-continuous keycard, and DCC will be introducing soon. DT11 Tag works closely with Margo Kirk & Bus2Go Also helping with the issue of the Durweston School Bus

Shaftesbury & Gillingham TAG: Derek Beer. This TAG has around 20 people from parishes, operators, officers, etc. One of the strong points has been the involvement of operators, so issues can be sorted out there & then. Also has a good link with SW Trains re Gillingham station. TAG mailing list & contacts needs updating.

Main issue is letting people know what is available; many assume no bus service as default, so Derek promotes what is available.

Big issue is in the new developments in Shaftesbury, where the roads have not been adopted, so bus operators not keen to use un-adopted roads, although Section 106 funding available to run routes in the new developments. John Cummings & others are working on this.

Gillingham station improvements, Derek Beer hopes to work with Gillingham Town Team on improving the station, primarily through greater investment by Network Rail.

Sturminster area Travel Forum: Pauline Batstone. Problem with the X8/X10 access to Poole for students. School transport generally, particularly with raising the age for school/training, with no extra financial support. Supporting the Wheels2Work moped scheme.

Stalbridge area: Tony Bishop Work on disseminating travel information from Stalbridge Hub, working with Chris Chandler. Informal car scheme, proposals to develop, but problems with safeguarding, so not progressed.

Difficulty in recruiting any volunteers for the local community car scheme. Looked at moving the bus stop to outside the Hub, but problems re the car park area.

DT9 TAG: Helen Reed Covers the Sherborne area, also including the Caundle villages, and Stalbridge. Does medical journeys only, and Nordcat acts as the call centre. Currently 20-30 journeys a month

Public Transport John Cummings provided a summary of the main recent changes. There is ongoing fine tuning, particularly linking in with transport to school. The current contracts with operators run until July 2016.

Within DCC, Passenger & School Transport teams (inc SEN transport) are combining into one team.

There is a big issue about Safe Routes to School, and the risks involved in walking on rural roads, Durweston is another local example.

Community Transport Community Car Schemes: Erica Pretty. DCC Country Car Scheme support had been withdrawn, and most schemes were converting to the Neighbourcar model.

A minibus directory had been developed, along with contacts for drivers. MIDAS training is available for anyone.

Dementia Awareness. Some training being provided for volunteer drivers

Nordcat: Helen Reed. Nordcat now has 2 no. Berlingos which can take a passenger in a wheelchair. Can be hired with or without driver, & only car licence needed to drive. Ring & Ride service is still growing steadily.

Dorset Community Transport: Tim Christian DCT is continuing to support Bus2Go. There are around 100 groups registered with DCT for use of the buses with driver outside of peak times.

Bus2Go: update from Tim Christian Our area is the Blandford area, but now starting to operate in the Dorchester area with Magna HA. Bus2Go will probably develop more in the Shaftesbury/Gillingham area as the next phase. Bus2Go is moving into offices at the Signpost HA offices at the Sunrise Business Park by Blandford.

Wheels2Work: Nic Nicol This has been set up as a CIC, and works on the basis of a mix of grant, and individual client loans through the First Dorset Credit Union. There are 8 clients using mopeds to date, and a further 4 waiting. Information and case studies on the website at http://www.rdw2w.co.uk/case-studies.php

Non-Emergency Medical Transport Dorset Direct has the facility to provide info on Community Car schemes, with a single phone point of contact, but this is providing no more information than is already available on the website. Funding for this service was supposed to have run out, but the service may continue. The position re Hospital Transport may all be caught up in the Dorset CCG review. Some wondered whether a review of medical and Hospital Transport was needed, as DCA did with a conference some years back. Pauline Batstone to raise with DCA to see if any wider interest.

Funding Dorset Community Foundation (DCC funding) has a funding round currently open, & community transport is a priority theme. Travel Dorset has a fund which is officially closed, but contact Chris Hook if you have project ideas. There is a £25k Community Transport allocation, set up following the reduction in bus subsidy funding. This has not yet been significantly committed, and there have been cases where ideas have been put forward to resolve local issues, but have not been supported from this allocation. The Working Group felt that this allocation should be used creatively to achieve the right outcome, and it was agreed that Hugh de Iongh would liaise with Pauline Batstone (as a DCC Councillor) and John Cummings to contact Jan Stephenson on this basis.

Future Meetings It was agreed that this format was useful, and that 6 monthly would avoid too many meetings but maintain some momentum. Hugh de Iongh to arrange for late September/early October.

CABINET DECISIONS WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

Cabinet on 23 February 2015 considered the following item within this portfolio:

Cabinet considered an update report for Community Planning Activity for the period August to November 2014.

PORTFOLIO HOLDER DECISIONS MADE WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period. 8

Development Policy – Councillor David Walsh

PORTFOLIO HOLDER’S REPORT

New Communities Group (NCG) meeting 23rd February

Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) The TCPA's New Communities Group (NCG) was originally set up in 2009 by the TCPA and the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) as the Eco-development Group. However in 2013 it was rebranded to become the New Communities Group. Its members are local authority planning departments and development trusts delivering exemplary large-scale new developments. HCA's Advisory Team for Large Applications (Atlas) is also a member and provides ongoing support to the local authorities. North Dorset District Council and also Gillingham Neighborhood Plan Group have utilised this resource working very closely with Atlas especially with regards to concept planning.

The group helps develop the local authority's proposals for large scale strategic development and encourage a sharing of knowledge and best practice through seminars, workshops, study visits, parliamentary meetings and newsletters. Together the group is providing innovative local leadership for plans delivering over 65,000 new homes.

The members of the NCG are:

1. Broadland District Council, Norfolk 2. East Hampshire District Council, Hampshire 3. Cherwell District Council, Oxfordshire 4. Cornwall Council, Cornwall 5. Wokingham Borough Council, Berkshire 6. Fareham Borough Council, Hampshire 7. South Cambridgeshire District Council, Cambridgeshire 8. Kettering Borough Council, Northamptonshire 9. Bournville Village Trust, Lightmoor Village, Telford 10. North Dorset District Council, Dorset 11. Ashford Borough Council, Kent

As you will see, the members of the Group are very different and some of their developments are huge in comparison with some looking to build 15,000 houses in a single scheme.

I was determined at this meeting with the Housing Minister, Brandon Lewis MP that I would push for answers to three questions that we thought needed raising and as things always seem to follow the same format. I sat in the first seat, enabling me to speak first, asking:

• What was the future of the “Large Sites Infrastructure Fund” and would more money be released once the fund was committed, because the Southern Extension of Gillingham would require the fund to kick start development? (The money takes the form of a loan and so once developments are built out, loans are repaid and that same money recycled by loaning to the next). I was informed by the Minister that more money would be available through the fund for applications made before 2018.

• My second question was whether the support funding for Neighbourhood Planning from CLG would continue?

The answer that I received, I should have expected, for: though it depended greatly on the outcome of the election, all parties had shown their commitment to Neighbourhood Planning.

• The last issue that I was able to raise in the short meeting was the need for planning for future health accommodation needs. This important issue is being raised in all areas set for future development. The Southern Extension generates a need for 2.5 GP’s, a dispensing pharmacy, and a dentist. However, the health sector is both difficult to engage with and seems to have no medium to long term plan. The Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) is trying to identify current patient needs. However, within the NHS there seems to be a lack of forward planning to link current patient needs with future service delivery and the future accommodation needs that will be generated.

The LPA understands that this is not an uncommon problem but, needs to understand now what the future health accommodation needs will be in order to secure private sector contributions towards infrastructure, so that the right facilities can be planned for to support the delivery of housing. This raises the question as to whether the link between housing and health accommodation infrastructure delivery is sufficiently explicit to enable the organisations to operate to promote delivery.

We need good quality and timely engagement from NHS England when seeking to shape the delivery of facilities in partnership with new development – understanding what is a legitimate bid for developer support & what is funded by NHS, what we should be seeking to secure for sites that may only release health facilities in 5-8 years’ time, what health provision may look like when the site has to deliver & how to secure that flexibility when defining Legal agreements now (i.e. do you want a specification for a building the consortium construct, agreed so long in advance of hand over, alternatively, if the Legal agreement is not precise how to you secure delivery, how do you accommodate need for changes in space requirements to meet changing health delivery at the surgery level? A plea for committed & coordinated engagement from NHS England & the various trusts involved in local service delivery.

When I raised these issues with the Minister, representatives from the other areas who had previously said that they did not have problems with Infrastructure, realised that they suffered from exactly the same problem. Firstly Brandon Lewis said that he intended to get every department associated with housing/development, starting with health, together around a table to work together looking at what communication was needed from them all to bring forward best development of strategic sites. Realising how important this is, it has been decided to hold a separate session at the TCPA for members of the NCG to look into this issue.

The Essential Local Authority Building Control South West (LABC SW) Business Planning and Service Delivery Workshop and AGM

I attended with Stuart Lucas, Building Control Officer a business planning workshop for Building Control services, which was intended to cater for a range of attendees from Building Control Officers through managers, directors, Members (Portfolios). It was to be used as a springboard to developing an improved marketing strategy for the service. There were some excellent presentations looking at all aspects of Building Control giving updates on regulations and new processes/procedures.

The workshops were run by LABC SW. There were good opportunities for networking; Building Control Officers that I met were from all over the South West as this event was very well supported, all seemed to voice the same issues, which gave way to very useful debate and exchanges of ideas and experiences.

We looked at promoting and improving the service, benefitting both Local Authorities and its service users. It is not easy to market such a service but we have come back with fresh ideas from the brainstorming sessions which will be implemented. We continue promoting Partnership Working which builds an ever stronger client base of those choosing to use our Building Control services even when working outside the North Dorset area. This council has previously agreed that we can carry out Plan checking for clients on work outside our district, however the LABC have recently extended the Partner Authority Scheme to provide cross- boundary working. This would enable partner businesses to request their local authority partner would also undertake site inspections (in addition to plan checking) on developments taking place in other local authority areas, in return for appropriate fees. I will be taking a report to Cabinet outlining this.

One way that we promote our services is by holding awards and this really does work because I know that people in our communities, especially those new to the area look highly upon those Builders and Architects that have been recognised and awarded by Local Authorities.

To go one step further Stuart Lucas has been invited by the LABC to be a judge on the forthcoming SW Regional Awards judging panel. This is recognition of Stuart’s depth and breadth of experience in the Building Control Service and an accolade for this council: Congratulations to Stuart. The North Dorset Awards evening will be held on the 20th March, from which the category winners will be nominated to the SW Regional awards.

CABINET DECISIONS WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

Cabinet on 23 February 2015 considered the following item within this portfolio:

Cabinet considered a response prepared by the Development & Economy Manager to a consultation document prepared by the Department of Communities and Local Government (“DCLG”) entitled “Building More Homes on Brownfield Land” in respect of the use of Local Development Orders. Cabinet supported the response prepared by the Manager that would be sent to the DCLG as the view of the District Council.

PORTFOLIO HOLDER DECISIONS MADE WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period.

Environment & Leisure – Councillor Michael Roake

PORTFOLIO HOLDER’S REPORT

Joint Committee Dorset Waste Partnership 11 March 2015 The Financial Report to the Joint Committee shows the latest prediction for the over spend for 2014/2015 will be £2.8m - this includes more than £1.3m on hired vehicles.

An action plan was agreed to urgently improve the governance and financial management of the Dorset Waste Partnership.

Nigel Mattravers and Len Attrill, both from consultants WYG, will be providing support to the senior management team in delivering this action plan. Nigel will cover day-to-day Director duties including leading the SMT and Len will work closely with the Operations team.

The action plan bringing together the recommendations of the three reviews recently undertaken as follows:

• Internal audit led by the South West Audit Partnership, commissioned by the DWP senior management team.

• Efficiency review by Local Partnerships (co-owned by the Treasury and Local Government Association), commissioned by the Management Board.

• Strategic review by consultants WYG, commissioned by the Chief Executives of partnership councils.

The Actions agreed by the Joint Committee: Dorset Chief Executive's Group has considered the need for changes to the governance model and greater clarity of roles and responsibilities. This will be discussed at the next meeting of the Management Board in April.

Action: To be implemented by 30th June 2015 Financial support and visibility is now in place and this will happen as a matter of course through the Management Board and the Joint Committee.

Action: For implementation immediately All Joint Committee reports with financial implications to be considered by the Management Board. Papers for the Management Board will be circulated with five working days’ notice to enable sufficient scrutiny and challenge.

Joint Committee reports to have financial implications clearly stated. Chair of the Joint Committee to always be briefed on any major financial expenditure or issues emerging at the earliest opportunity.

The Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Dorset Waste Partnership will be attending future Management Board meetings.

Action: For implementation immediately Performance management data within the DWP is considered to be robust. Further performance management profiles and trends will be reported to the management Board and the Joint Committee on the results of 2014/15 and regularly thereafter.

Action: To be implemented by the 30th June 2015 The savings plan will be reviewed to ascertain what can be brought forward.

Action: To be implemented by the 30th June 2015. Further focused audit activity by SWAP will assess the range of potential control risks to support the DWP Director in establishing / testing the controls in place.

Action: For implementation immediately Some vehicle monitoring information is available. Monitoring of all resources at the depots will be significantly improved.

Action: To be implemented by the 1st April 2015. The Finance and Commercial Manager and the Treasurer with input from the SMT. The finance team at the Host Authority have an improvement plan to ensure effective financial management is cascaded throughout the organisation.

Action: To be implemented by the 30th April 2015. Following the overspend of the vehicle hire by the Dorset Waste Partnership, Jonathan Mair Dorset County Council’s monitoring officer is preparing a report to go to DCC Cabinet as the host authority the report will be covering DWP procurement contracts for vehicle hire and consultancy.

Since the Dorset Waste Partnership commenced its rollout April 2011, merging both collection and disposal across Dorset merging 12 different systems into one countywide service. The Dorset Waste Partnership has some significant achievements it can demonstrate including:

The current out services covers 90% of Dorset, the total roll out will be completed later this year when the Bridport facility opens in the late summer 2015.

Achieved savings of £1.3 per annum across the 12 authorities in the first three years.

Recycling rate 62%

Customer satisfaction 95%

Savings from treatment contracts: £2.4m

Secured funding from the DCLG of £14.2m for a joint MRF with Bournemouth Borough Council.

Reduced landfill from 40% to less than 20%

Changes since commencement not within the control of DWP: Global recyclate value reduced.

Landfill tax increase by 72% it is now £82:60 per tonne it is likely to increase year on year.

Treatment cost have increased varying between 17% - 27%

Increased waste arisings,- for every 1% increase in volumes the impact is £110k

CABINET DECISIONS WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period.

PORTFOLIO HOLDER DECISIONS MADE WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

On 3 February 2015, in the interest of good asset management and to facilitate the Ranger Service presence in North Dorset, I took a decision to continue to lease St Leonards Chapel to Dorset County Council on the same terms and conditions as the previous lease for a term of 5 years at a rental of £3,000 per annum.

On 23 February 2015 I revised the Stray Dog Policy and procedures to align them more closely with those extant procedures used by West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Borough Council, reducing the number of stray dogs taken to kennels and reducing the number of stray dogs returned to owners without charge.

Safety and Health – Councillor Gary Jefferson

PORTFOLIO HOLDER’S REPORT

North Dorset Crime and Anti-social Behaviour The North Dorset Partnership Co-ordinating Group chaired by Inspector Rob Chalkley continues to meet monthly with a view to problem solving and managing local cases on a multi-agency basis.

Although there has been a small increase in crime nationally over the past year crime levels in Dorset have fallen by 4% in the first 10 months of this year compared with 2013-14. In North Dorset crime has fallen by 7% or 131 crimes. This fall is reflected in most crime types although in common with national and county wide trends there has been an increase in public place violent crime. In North Dorset this increase is just below the Dorset County average. The main sites of public place violent crime in North Dorset are the night time economy centres in Gillingham. Assaults causing injury are down by 1% and domestic abuse incidents down by 9%. However domestic abuse crimes are up by 9% reflecting an increase in the number of incidents where an arrest is made. This is further confirmed by a 24% increase in positive outcomes for domestic abuse crimes.

There has been a 12% decrease in Anti-social Behaviour incidents across the district compared with the same period last year although the Partnership Co-ordinating Group is becoming aware of an increase in the number of cases that on analysis involve individuals and households known to a number of agencies and which are best dealt with by a multi-agency response.

There has been a 27% decrease in serious acquisitive crime compared with a 20% decrease across the County although within this is a small increase in domestic burglaries. Finally I would like to bring to your attention a high profile police campaign to protect the elderly from telephone fraud called Op Luna. Publicity and posters have been sent out to all town and parish councils in Dorset and will be circulated to NDDC Members.

CABINET DECISIONS WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period.

PORTFOLIO HOLDER DECISIONS MADE WITHIN THIS PORTFOLIO

None for this period.