Magherafelt District Council

MAGHERAFELT DISTRICT COUNCIL

MINUTES OF Proceedings of a Meeting of Magherafelt District Council held in the Bridewell, 6 Church Street, Magherafelt on Thursday, 8 April 2004. The meeting commenced at 2.00 pm.

Presiding: Miss K A Lagan

Other Members Present: R A Montgomery T J Catherwood P E Groogan O T Hughes J Junkin J F Kerr J A McBride Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea P H McErlean P McLean (joined the meeting at 2.15 pm) J J McPeake H E Mullan S O’Brien J P O’Neill G C Shiels

Officers Present: J J Tohill (Director of Finance and Administration) C W Burrows (Director of Environmental Health) W J Glendinning (Director of Building Control) T J Johnston (Director of Operations) Mrs A Junkin (Chief Executive’s Secretary) C McCarney (Manager, Magherafelt Area Partnership) – Item 13

Apology: Mr J A McLaughlin (Chief Executive)

Representatives from Other Ulster Farmers’ Union: Bodies in Attendance: Mr John Gilliland - President Mr Joe McDonald

Planning Service: Ms Denise Dickson (Planning Officer) Mrs Joan Bryson (Planning Officer)

1. MINUTES It was

PROPOSED by Councillor J F Kerr Seconded by Councillor J P O’Neill, and

RESOLVED: that the Minutes of the Meeting of the Council held on Tuesday, 9 March 2004 (copy circulated to each Member) be taken as read and signed as correct.

2. MATTERS ARISING Mr Tohill advised that there were no items as such OUT OF THE MINUTES arising out of the Minutes.

56/9/2003 2.1 He did advise that in connection with Item 17, paragraph 17.3, the Northern Ireland Housing Executive had been invited to attend the monthly Council Meeting to be held on 8 June 2004 to present the 2004/2005 District Housing Plan to Council, but the Housing Executive had declined to attend due to Civil Service policy. This policy meant that representatives could not attend during the run-up to the European Elections scheduled for 10 June 2004.

Noted.

2.2 Similarly Water Reform had declined to attend the June Council Meeting due to Civil Service Policy and also the Minister had delayed setting a date for the consultation period. It would possibly take place in late Summer. Water Reform agreed to attend a Council Meeting during the consultation period, whenever the dates were arranged.

Noted.

2.3 The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan referred to Page 39 of the Minutes and enquired if a meeting had been set up with CALM Community Association to consider environmental improvements.

2.3.1 In reply Mr Johnston stated that he had written to the Association, but there had been no response and therefore no meeting had been set-up.

2.4 Councillor R A Montgomery referred to Page 45, Paragraph 15.6 when he had queried the value of a Health Suite Concession Cards and the price difference between one purchased in Greenvale Leisure Centre compared to one purchased in Maghera Leisure Centre.

2.4.1 In reply Mr Johnston stated that this issue had been considered and the matter would be coming up in the Operational Services Report later in the meeting.

2.5 The Chairman then advised that Mr Gilliland, the President of the Ulster Farmers’ Union had been delayed in Belfast, but would address the meeting later. 3

3. PLANNING SERVICE Consideration was given to the following: MANAGEMENT BOARD 3.1 Application H/2003/0004/O - 184/4/2004 Miss T E Ferguson: Submitted letter of reply dated 26 March in reply to a submission made by the Council in connection with planning application H/2003/0004/O in the name of Miss T E Ferguson for a Bungalow and garage 60 metres South of 60 Ballynagarve Road, Magherafelt (copy circulated to each Member).

3.1.1 The letter stated that the Management Board considered that a dwelling on this site could not be successfully integrated into this rural area and would, if permitted, lead to an adverse change in the character of this part of the Countryside. In addition the proposal could not achieve satisfactory access arrangements.

3.1.2 The Management Board concluded that planning permission should not be granted. The applicant could appeal within six months from the date of the decision.

3.1.3 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor R A Montgomery, and

RESOLVED: that in the event of the application being forwarded to the Planning Appeals Commission it receives the full support of the Council.

3.2 Application H/2002/1164/O – Mr R J Mawhinney: Submitted letter of reply dated 15 March 2004 to a submission made by the Council in connection with planning application H/2002/1164/O in the name of Mr R J Mawhinney for a dwelling and garage, 30 metres North East of 30 Leitrim Road, Castledawson (copy circulated to each Member).

3.2.1 The letter stated that the Management Board considered that a dwelling on this site could not be successfully integrated into this rural area and would, if permitted, lead to an adverse change in the character of this part of the Countryside by reason of build-up and residential development.

3.2.2 The Management Board concluded that planning permission should not be granted. The applicant could appeal within six months from the date of the decision.

3.2.3 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor R A Montgomery, and

RESOLVED: that in the event of the application being forwarded to the Planning Appeals Commission it receives the full support of the Council.

3.3 Application H/2003/0026/O - Mr G McGuigan: Submitted letter of reply dated 24 March 2004 to a submission made by the Council in connection with planning application H/2003/0026/O in the name of Mr G McGuigan for a dwelling and garage at Dunlogan Road, approximately 100 metres South East of Junction with Moneyneany Road, Moneyneany, Draperstown (copy circulated to each Member).

3.3.1 The letter intimated that the Board considered that the proposal, if permitted, would represent an unacceptable form of development in this rural area and would be detrimental to the character and visual amenity of the Sperrins Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

3.3.2 The Management Board concluded that planning permission should not be granted. The applicant could appeal within six months from the date of the decision.

Noted.

3.4 Application H/2003/0202/O - Mr W Lamont: Submitted letter of reply dated 5 April 2004 to a submission made by the Council in connection with planning application H/2003/0202/O in the name of Mr W Lamont for a dwelling and garage at 80 metres South of 8 Island Road, Tobermore (copy circulated to each Member).

3.4.1 The letter intimated that the Board considered that the dwelling on this site could not be successfully integrated into this rural area and would, if permitted, lead to a change in the character of this part of the countryside.

3.4.2 The Management Board concluded that planning permission should not be granted. The applicant could appeal within six months from the date of the decision.

3.4.3 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, and

RESOLVED: that in the event of the application being forwarded to the Planning Appeals Commission it receives the full support of the Council.

3.5 Application H/2003/0510/O – Mr I Eakin Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea advised that the applicant’s agent had requested that the submission to be made in connection with this application be deferred for a further month. This was agreed to.

4. PLANNING SERVICE Submitted the Divisional Planning Service’s report dated 8 April 2004 (copy circulated to each 185/4/2004 Member).

4.1 The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan welcomed Ms Denise Dickson and Mrs Joan Bryson, Planning Officers, to the meeting.

4.2 New Applications:

H/2003/0086/F – Younger Homes Ltd The Planning Officer advised that one objection had been received regarding a Roads matter but it was not considered appropriate to the application. The Planning Opinion was still approval.

Noted.

H/2003/1497/F – Marald Prime Developments The Planning Officer advised that two objections had been received mainly in connection with a right-of-way and amendments to retain the right- of-way. The Planning Officer felt that this had been achieved and the opinion was approval.

Noted.

H/2004/0005/F – Mr Maguire The Planning Officer advised that one letter of objection had been received concerning loss of view, sunlight, privacy and depreciation of property. It was considered that these objections could not be sustained and the Planning Opinion was still an approval.

Noted.

H/2003/0781/O – Mary Phyllis & Angela Scullion The Planning Officer advised that one letter of objection had been received regarding the proximity to No.15 Ronan Court, loss of view, sunlight, privacy and depreciation of property. The Planning Officer stated that the Department was unable to sustain a refusal. The Planning Opinion remained approval. Noted.

H/2003/1039/O – Mr & Mrs T Tennant The Planning Officer advised that thirteen objections had been received regarding this application. She explained that a prior application was for three dwellings. The current application was for four dwellings. The main objections were overlooking, use of a private road, access to land, noise and nuisance/disturbance, and infrastructure deficiency to Boyne Road dwellings. The Planning Officer stated that both Roads Service and Environmental Health had been consulted on the issues of access and unsocial behaviour. The opinion remained approval.

Noted.

Councillor P McLean joined the meeting at 2.15 pm.

H/2003/1225/O – Mr L McErlean The Planning Officer advised that one objection had been received concerning the activity of felling of trees, the need for an Environmental Impact Study. 7

There was no sewage system connection in the locality and this would lead to an environmental issue. The Planning Officer explained that the Council’s Environmental Health Department had been contacted and they had raised no problem regarding this and an Environmental Impact Study was not required. The Planning Opinion was still approval.

Noted.

4.3 Applications where the Opinion is Refusal:

H/2003/0924/F – Mr J O’Neill Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 2.40 pm. Councillors Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea and J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/0959/F – Mr F McCloskey Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 12.40 pm. Councillor P E Groogan to attend.

H/2003/0993/F – Mr J Connolly Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 11.45 am. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1033/F – Mr & Mrs C Grey Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 10.00 am. Councillor P E Groogan to attend.

H/2003/1211/F – S Kearney Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 11.45 am. Councillors H E Mullan and J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1260/F – A Crawford Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 9.30 am. Councillor J J McPeake to attend.

H/2003/1270/F – Mr N McCann Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 1.50 pm. Councillor J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1277/F – Younger Homes Ltd Refusal.

H/2003/1399/F & H/2003/1426/L – M Reid Deferred. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested a site meeting.

Mr Tohill submitted a letter from Caroline Dickson Architects requesting that the Council defer this application in order that she could contact the Environmental Heritage Service.

On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor T J Catherwood, and

RESOLVED: that the Council defer this application to allow the applicant’s agent to contact the Environmental Heritage Service regarding these applications.

H/2003/0702/O – Mr A Dempsey Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 11.30 am. Councillors P E Groogan and R A Montgomery to attend.

H/2003/1023/O – Mr D Lynn Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 12 noon. Councillors Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea and T J Catherwood to attend.

H/2003/1066/O – Mr T Halferty Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 1.45 pm. Councillors J J McPeake and J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1094/O – Mr S Lennox Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 10.00 am. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1101/O & H/2003/1102/O – Mr R Mulholland Deferred. Site meetings to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 9.30 am & 9.45 am. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1109/O – Miss J Smyth Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 12.10 pm. Councillors Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea and P McLean to attend.

H/2003/1110/O – Mr S Smyth Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 12.30 pm. Councillors Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea and P McLean to attend.

H/2003/1113/O – A Getty Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 11.50 am. Councillor G C Shiels to attend.

H/2003/1116/O – Mr G Bolton Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 1.30 am. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1123/O – Mr S & E Garvin The Planning Officer advised that this application had been withdrawn.

H/2003/1126/O – A Dougan Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 1.15 pm. Councillors J A McBride and J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1129/O – Mr S Bryson Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 2.45 pm. Councillors P E Groogan and J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1131/O, H/2003/1132/O, H/2003/1134/O & H/2003/1135/O – Mr R Paul Deferred. Site meetings to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 2.00 – 2.45 pm. Councillors G C Shiels and Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1138/O – P Hughes Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 2.00 pm. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1149/O – Mr J Martin Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 1.30 pm. Councillor O T Hughes to attend.

H/2003/1152/O – Mrs I Hinfey Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 10.40 am. Councillor J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1155/O – Mr C McLernon Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 3.00 pm. Councillors J A McBride and P E Groogan to attend.

H/2003/1159/O – Mr J Johnston Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 2.20 pm. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor R A Montgomery to attend.

H/2003/1169/O – S McKeever Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 11 am. Councillor J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1170/O – Mr J Doyle Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 11.30 am. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1171/O – A Dougan Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 1.15 pm and 1.30 pm. Councillor J A McBride and J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1187/O – Mr C McBride Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 1.00 pm. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor P E Groogan to attend.

H/2003/1194/O – Mr S Ward Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 9.50 am. Councillor J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1200/O, H/2003/1201/O, H/2003/1202/O, H/2003/1212/O & H/2003/1215/O – Mr A Mawhinney Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 from 10.00 – 11.40 am. Councillors O T Hughes and P H McErlean to attend.

H/2003/1217/O – E Gallagher Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 12.20 pm. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1221/O – D Lyle Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 9.30 am. Councillors R A Montgomery and G C Shiels to attend.

H/2003/1235/O – Mr P McCullagh Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 3.00 pm. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1238/O – Mr I Evans Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 9.30 am. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1245/O & H/2003/1246/O – Mr M & N Downey Deferred. Site meetings to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 11.30 am – 12.10 pm. Councillor J P O’Neill to attend.

Councillor G C Shiels and Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested that a meeting be organised for the objectors, if the opinion was changed to an approval.

This was agreed to.

H/2003/1247/O – Mr J Diamond Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 12 noon. Councillors O T Hughes and P H McErlean to attend.

H/2003/1255/O – Mr W Love Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 10.20 am. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1258/O – Mr D Watterson Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 2.50 pm. Councillor R A Montgomery to attend.

H/2003/1261/O & H/2003/1262/O – Planning Direct Ltd Deferred. Site meetings to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 11.15 – 11.45 am. Councillors Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea and T J Catherwood to attend.

H/2003/1265/O – Mr J Bradley Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 2.00 pm. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor J F Kerr to attend.

H/2003/1269/O – Mr J Martin Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 11.40 am. Councillor J Junkin to attend.

H/2003/1273/O – P McEldowney Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2003 at 10.45 am. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor J A McBride to attend.

H/2003/1274/O – Mr L Diamond Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Monday, 19 April 2004 at 10.10 am. Councillors P H McErlean and O T Hughes to attend.

H/2003/1275/O – Mrs A O’Donoghue Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Friday, 23 April 2004 at 12.15 pm. Councillor J Junkin to attend.

H/2003/1276/O – Mr J Harkin Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 10.00 am. Councillors J F Kerr and H E Mullan to attend.

H/2003/1283/O – G Gordon Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Tuesday, 20 April 2004 at 10.45 am. Councillors J Junkin and T J Catherwood to attend.

H/2003/1291/O – Mr T O’Kane Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 1.30 pm. Councillors J A McBride and Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1293/O – Mr W Wylie Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 3.20 pm. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1317/O – Mr J Barclay Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Thursday, 22 April 2004 at 2.10 pm. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea to attend.

H/2003/1321/O – C Heron Deferred. Site meeting to be arranged for Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 11.00 am. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor J A McBride to attend.

4.4 Applications Deferred from Previous Meeting:

H/1999/0283 – R Hogg & Sons Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor G C Shiels.

H/2002/1099/O – Mr M Toal Approval.

H/2003/0122/O – Mr S Hughes Councillor J A McBride requested three weeks to withdraw or refusal issued.

H/2003/0162/F – Mr J Gallagher Approval.

H/2003/0216/O – Mr S O’Neill Deferred for an office meeting on the request of Councillor J A McBride.

H/2003/0226/O – Mr P McCann Deferred for one month on the request of the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan.

H/2003/0295/O – Mr T Rainey Deferred. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0396/O – A Palmer Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea.

H/2003/0397/O – A Mullan Refusal. Councillor O T Hughes stated that this application was being forwarded to the Planning Appeals Commission.

H/2003/0457/O – Mr L Cassidy Refusal. Councillor O T Hughes stated that this application was being forwarded to the Planning Appeals Commission.

H/2003/0466/O – C McCann Deferred for one month. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan stated that this application was to be withdrawn. 14

H/2003/0468/O – Mr P Birt Approval.

H/2003/0501/O – Mr J McKeever Deferred for further information on the request of Councillor P H McErlean.

H/2003/0566/O – Mr K McCloskey The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan stated that this application was to be withdrawn.

H/2003/0593/O – Mr H Graham The Planning Officer requested that this application be deferred to allow for amendments to the drawings.

H/2003/0611/O – Sean & Eamon Garvin The Planning Officer advised that this application had been withdrawn.

H/2003/0629/F – Mr I Millar Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor J Junkin.

H/2003/0661/O – Mrs B McAllister Approval.

H/2003/0665/O – Mr J McGurk Deferred for an office meeting on the request of Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea.

H/2003/0671/O – Mr P Duggan Approval.

H/2003/0677/O – Mr D McGrogan Deferred. Councillor J A McBride requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0690/O – Mr J Dillon Councillor P H McErlean requested three weeks to withdraw or a refusal issued.

H/2003/0714/O – Mr G Scullion Approval.

H/2003/0742/O – Mr V Conway Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor P E Groogan.

H/2003/0765/O – Mr G Gordon Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor J P O’Neill.

H/2003/0769/O – S Dougan Deferred. Councillor S O’Brien requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0801/O – Ms H Glass Approval.

H/2003/0820/O – Mrs Glendinning Approval. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested an office meeting for the objectors.

H/2003/0835/O – M Birt Deferred for one month on the request of the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan.

H/2003/0848/O – Mr W Bradley Deferred for one month on the request of the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan.

H/2003/0852/O – J McCann Deferred. Councillor O T Hughes requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0872/F – Mr B McGuigan Approval.

H/2003/0881/O – Mr L Madden Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor J P O’Neill.

H/2003/0890/O – Mr S O’Hagan Approval.

H/2003/0893/F – Mr H Heaney Councillor O T Hughes requested three weeks to withdraw or a refusal issued.

H/2003/0909/O – H & T McGlone Approval.

H/2003/0920/O – Mr C McMullan Approval.

H/2003/0921/O – Mr S Murphy Deferred for a rescheduled site meeting. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan and Councillor P E Groogan to attend.

H/2003/0929/O – Mrs J Mullan Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea.

H/2003/0932/O – Mr C Young Deferred. Councillors S O’Brien and J A McBride requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0949/O – A Dougan Approval.

H/2003/0962/O – Mr Loughlin Approval.

H/2003/0966/O – Mr D Crilly Approval.

H/2003/0971/O – Mr E McGuigan Deferred. Councillor J A McBride requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0972/O – T Kerr Deferred. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0976/O – J J Diamond Deferred. Councillors J A McBride and J J McPeake requested an office meeting.

H/2003/0978/O – Mr E Mulholland Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor P H McErlean.

H/2003/0990/O – P Carmichael Approval.

H/2003/1012/O – A Fulton Approval.

H/2003/1017/O – Mr P O’Connor Deferred. The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan requested an office meeting.

H/2003/1018/O – Mr M Murphy Approval.

H/2003/1025/F – Mr G Ward Deferred for one month on the request of Councillor P H McErlean.

H/2003/1048/O – Mr E J O’Kane (Senior) Deferred. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested an office meeting.

H/2003/1073/O – Mr E Higgins Deferred. Councillor O T Hughes requested an office meeting. 17

H/2003/1074/O – D Patterson Deferred. Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested an office meeting.

H/2003/1077/O – Mr B Birt Deferred. Councillors O T Hughes and P H McErlean requested an office meeting.

H/2003/1085/O – Mr D O’Connell Deferred. Councillor J A McBride requested an office meeting.

H/2003/1128/O – Mr J Henry Approval.

H/2003/1136/O – E Bryson Councillor J A McBride requested three weeks to withdraw or refusal issued.

H/2003/1185/F – A Booth Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested three weeks to withdraw or refusal issued.

H/2003/1214/O – Mr J McPeake Approval.

H/2004/0075/O – Mr P Mackle Approval.

4.5 Applications Deferred from Previous Meeting and Still Under Consideration:

The Chairman enquired if any member wished to ask for information on any of these applications.

H/2002/0556/F – Mr Stockman Councillor R A Montgomery enquired about the problem with trees and a suggested reduced scheme.

H/2002/0597/F – Mr R Hastings Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea stated that he was still waiting on a response from Roads Service regarding the proposed new access.

H/2002/0805/F – F P McCann (Developments) Councillor J F Kerr enquired about this application. The Planning Officer agreed to contact him.

H/2002/0846/O – Mr P Watters Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea complained about the delay from 2002 within the Department (Headquarters) regarding this application. He said that the situation was so bad that the applicant could take legal action against the Department.

H/2002/0890/F – Mr A Speers Councillor G C Shiels enquired aobut this application and the access difficulties and if they had been resolved by Roads Service.

The Planning Officer, Ms D Dickson stated that the officers had not brought any of the applicants’ files with them to the meeting.

It was suggested that if Members had queries they should contact the Planning Office and make arrangements to discuss these matters.

H/2002/1150/O – Mr D Laverty Councillor J A McBride said that this application required attention but added that there was an illness in the family.

H/2002/1155/O – Mr J Kirk The Planning Officer agreed to contact Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea on this application.

H/2003/0089/O – J O’Kane The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan stated that there were special circumstances around this application. Councillor J F Kerr stated that more information would be brought forward.

H/2003/0130/O and H/2003/0158/O – Planning Direct Limited The Planning Officer agreed to contact Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea on these applications.

H/2003/0315/O – Mr F Mackle Councillor J A McBride queried this application. There were two applications and an alternative scheme had been proposed.

H/2003/0345/O – A Diamond Councillor J P O’Neill enquired about this application. The Planning Officer stated that there were access issues.

The Planning Officer advised that site meeting had been arranged for the following applications:-

H/2003/0657/O Patsy Duggan Monday, 19 April 2004 at 10.30 am

H/2003/1021/O Mary Kelly Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 10.15 am

H/2003/0921/O Sean Murphy Wednesday, 21 April 2004 at 12.10 am

H/2003/1067O D Seffen Friday, 23 April 2004 at 3.30 pm

H/2003/0430/O – S O’Hagan Councillor J A McBride enquired about this application. The Planning Officer was to check.

H/2003/0556/O – Mr P Hughes Councillor P E Groogan enquired about this application. The Planning Officer was to check.

H/2003/0581/O – Mr G Boyle Councillor O T Hughes enquired about this application. The Planning Officer was to check.

H/2003/0847/O – Mr M McGurk Councillor P E Groogan enquired about this application. The Planning Officer was to check.

Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea suggested that any Councillor who had a query should fax their query to Mrs Joan Bryson.

The Chairman agreed that any member who had a query on any of the applications should contact the Planning Officers.

4.6 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor J P O’Neill, and

RESOLVED: that the Council concur in the opinions expressed in the Planning Manager’s report dated 8 April 2004 subject to the above conditions and amendments.

4.7 Submitted copy of a letter from Upperlands Community Development Ltd sent to the Planning Service in objecting to a planning application in the name of William Clark & Sons Ltd and stating that from the applicant’s file, which they viewed, the Planning Service had determined that this application was not required to be accompanied with an Environmental Statement.

4.7.1 The letter further intimated that there was clearly detrimental environmental aspects at stake, if this application was approved. The Community Development group believed that it would only be correct that an environmental impact study should be carried out and requested that the Planning Service reconsider its decision (copy circulated to each Member).

4.7.2 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor T J Catherwood, and

RESOLVED: that Mr Tohill write to the Planning Service advising that the matter had been considered by Council and that it fully supported the Community group’s request for the Planning Service to reconsider its decision not to undertake an Environmental Impact Study.

4.7 Revised Planning Application Pack Submitted letter from the Principal Planning Officer, Modernising Planning Unit 1 advising that the Department of the Environment had published a revised up-to-date Planning Application Pack, including a revised Form P1, Notes on Completion of P1 and accompanied Explanatory Notes on Applying for Planning Permission, Approval of Reserved Matters and other Planning Consents, all of which were available from 8 March 2004.

Noted.

4.8 Mr Tohill enquired about the current position with the Council’s application for a skip site at Castledawson.

4.9 The Planning Officer replied that Planning Headquarters were involved because of the environmental issues and as they had no details with them it would be easier if an officer of the Council could contact the office. 21

5. ULSTER FARMERS’ The Chairman welcomed Mr John Gilliland UNION PRESENTATION President of the Ulster Farmers’ Union, staff from from the local offices and representatives from the 791/4/2004 local farming community to the meeting.

4.1 Mr Gilliland thanked the Council for his invitation. He explained the role of the Ulster Farmers’ Union within the District Council’s area and set it in context with the use of a powerpoint presentation.

4.2 There were 2,558 people employed on farms in the Magherafelt area, 125,568 acres farmed, 74,218 cattle, 138,044 sheep and a number of pigs.

4.3 Mr Gilliland stated that the current state of the industry within Northern Ireland was that 54,400 people were employed of which 4.8% were of civil employment, and under 10% in agri-food industry, and 78.7% of Northern Ireland land area was used for farming (70% of which was less favoured area). He said that the average age of farmers was 55+ and their deep concern was the issue of succession on many farms.

4.4 The reality was that the total income from farming had risen by 37% to £177m in 2003 but in the previous year the farm income was down £155m. The average net farm income was still only £8,300 which was not the minimum wage. Farming was thus still in a vulnerable situation in Northern Ireland.

4.5 Mr Gilliland explained the farming trends over the past nine years in Northern Ireland and stated that during the years 1998 – 2001 there had been a massive drop in income. Mr Gilliland pointed out that bad weather affected more than one year in farming.

4.6 He said that there were five challenges, uncertainty, EU enlargement, World Trade Organisation, the food chain and animal welfare.

4.7 Mr Gilliland went on to explain that he had travelled to Mexico in 2003 to the World Trade talks when the European Union was under pressure to make concessions on agricultural trade, which would have been severely damaging to the local farming industry.

He had also travelled to Luxembourg in June 2003 when the CAP reform agreement had been secured and this lifted the uncertainty surrounding the future of the agricultural industry.

4.8 Mr Gilliland explained that the most radical feature of the CAP reform was the decoupling of subsidies from production and their replacement by one payment per farm, known as the ‘Single Payment’. Member States would implement decoupling in the arable, beef and sheep sectors from 1 January 2005 however there was a provision for Member States to delay decoupling for up to two years until 1 January 2007 where specific agricultural conditions prevailed. Decoupling of the Dairy Premium did not take place until 2007, when dairy reform was complete.

4.9 Mr Gilliland pointed out that the disadvantages were, that the Single Payment was paid on the number of hectares farmed regardless of the situation in the market place. The link with subsidies had been broken in Luxembourg. The eleven new Member States with 500 million more people brought a new market on the Eastern side of Europe with only one-third of the current wealth. This created another challenge.

4.10 Mr Gilliland stated that the CAP Reform had to satisfy the taxpayer and allow the farmer every chance to be successful in the market place. Farmers were hungry for information and within 2½ weeks the Ulster Farmers’ Union had organised 10 meetings for 5,000 farmers in Northern Ireland so they could learn how to reshape their business.

4.11 Mr Gilliland said that the Ulster Farmers’ Union had a good story to tell, it positively addressed public opinion and this was used to persuade the Government, retailers and other to change what they did. Mr Gilliland said that rural farming was one reason for Northern Ireland’s spectacular landscape, a new tourism initiative. Farmers cared for 80% of Northern Ireland’s land area.

4.12 Mr Gillilalnd said that to highlight farmgate prices and educate the public, a Market Stall had been set up outside Tesco’s in Royal Avenue, Belfast on one occasion and provided the necessary information that all profits were one-sided and stacked up against the farmer, the producer.

Mr Gilliland said that he commended the farming industry for its resilience amidst these challenging times and requested that the Northern Ireland housewife supported Northern Ireland Produce. He said that farmgate prices were minimal and others were reaping the reward for the farmers’ hard labours. There was a future for farming but many challenges had to be met and conquered. He said that bureaucracy had to be targeted, as had the food importers, including the public sector, that is, schools, etc. The UFU had formed an alliance with Friends of the Earth about food on the use of local produce. He explained the concept of food miles, that is, the number of miles from “gate to plate” and stated that food quality could best be controlled when there were short food miles.

4.13 Mr Gilliland also stated that the Ulster Farmers’ Union worked with many environmental groups, one of which was the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds.

4.14 In conclusion, Mr Gilliland assured the farming community that he would continue to do all within his power to present their case proudly across the world. The said that Northern Ireland had a first class product but every talent must be used to present it to the world market.

4.15 Members’ Questions:

Councillor J F Kerr thanked Mr Gilliland for his presentation of the work of the UFU and giving the Members a global view of the farming industry which appeared to be in crisis. He said that the family owned farm was unique in Europe and there was also the social element. He said that was why Councillors in considering the Area Plan felt that the rural way of life had to be protected.

Councillor Kerr said that if the farming industry did not receive intervention, this way of life could disappear. He also referred to the Nitrates Directive.

Mr Gilliland in reply said that the Nitrates Directive had been on the statute books since 1991. He said that this would have a huge effect on many farm businesses. It could cost local farmers over £230 million to construct enough slurry storage capacity to comply with the proposals which were unrealistic.

Southern Ireland had a nitrates problem whereas Northern Ireland had a Phosphates problem. He explained the concept of eutrophication and discussed how nitrates and phosphates impacted on the issue in Northern Ireland. He commented on the specific circumstances of Lough Neagh and how Northern Ireland had, by default, become embroiled in the consequences of the Nitrates Directive. He said that whilst the industry was prepared to meet its environmental responsibility, the Nitrates Directive was being forced on the industry in a very short time. He had tried to persuade Europe that they were going in the wrong direction but the UFU’s legal advice was that they could not win a court case on the matter. He pointed out that there was insufficient land in Northern Ireland on which to spread slurry, a primary source of nitrates. In Denmark slurry was exported. More ideas were required on how to get around this problem. This could lead to 20% reduction in milk production and everyone needed to be made aware of the situation.

Councillor Kerr stated that this would impact on everyone.

Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea referred to the many problems facing the farming community. He said that rules should be applied equally in Europe and particularly with the expansion of Europe in the near future. He referred to the drop in farmgate prices and enquired how the farmer could get control of the price rather than the supermarket. He mentioned the pressures of diversification and enquired if there was any help from Government and if banks were sympathetic and encouraging the farming community.

In response, Mr Gilliland spoke of the distortion across member states of the European Union and of the two-tier standard with the coming on board of new member states. These countries did not have the machines or tools to cross-comply and this was a grave concern. He said that sterling’s strength against the euro was another complicating factor. He said that sterling started to rise but then came down again. However, the food prices in the supermarket did not come down. He said that farmers found it hard to manage in the current climate. Mr Gilliland gave examples of Supermarkets dictating to the farming industry their prices and their terms and conditions.

Mr Gilliland said that the UFU were fighting a number of different fronts. Diversification was necessary as a consequence of not being globally competitive. He referred to the Government’s Rural Wealth Regeneration Policy where there were three elements, environment, social and economic and wealth creation. He said that the Banks were nervous about funding diversification projects. However, they had provided some £550million to support the industry and had supported it well.

Councillor P H McErlean stated that most of the rural farming issues were covered in the new CAP proposals. He felt that nitrates had been taken care of through the Countryside Scheme. He stated that the IACS form was slow to complete but that there would be a great impact from 2005.

Mr Gilliland explained that the farmer needed to be careful, the Countryside Scheme would not sort out the issues of nitrates. He explained about the completion of the IACS form and the fact that many farmers were confused, particularly dairy farmers. Mr Gilliland spoke of the import of Brazilian beef sold in supermarkets. He said that there was more beef production in Brazil than in the whole 25 member states of the EU.

Councillor J J McPeake thanked Mr Gilliland for his informative presentation. He said that he wondered what form the rural landscape would take after de-coupling, would it be a wilderness with imports of meat from Argentina and Brazil. He referred to the ten new entrants to the European Union, to the Waterways North and South of Ireland, the IACS form, etc and enquired what was the future for farming.

Mr Gilliland explained that there would be fundamental change and de-coupling was a mechanism to allow this change. There were three different visions for industry.

1. Invest in Product Innovation 2. Maximise strengths of the NI farming industry particularly in the area of animal genetics and health management 3. Using agricultural techniques and products to further the waste management initiative

Northern Ireland had a future but it would be a different future to what farmers had previously known.

Mr Gilliland explained that the UFU worked outside Northern Ireland, it had a good track record for coming together to promote the agricultural industry. He spoke of the many alliances and coalitions made to overturn decisions on farming. He spoke of the many working relationships and partnerships made through farming both North and South of Ireland.

Councillor J Junkin enquired about the change in the global picture in farming in Northern Ireland.

Mr Gilliland replied by outlining the many issues which were impacting on Northern Ireland agriculture, such as electricity from oil, electricity from gas, fuel security, fuel diversity and R & D Technology (research and development of an innovative service, product or technology). He said that there were barriers to be broken for example, public perception of bio-diesel, but there was potential for a cocktail of options to be open to Northern Ireland agriculture. There was scope for feasibility studies under R & D, and a cocktail of different options all progressing change. There was a vibrant rural community where agriculture was central. He said that local authorities had taken the lead in creating energy from waste and referred to his willow biomass operation of some 45 hectares on his own farm. He said that a number of Councils including Cookstown were particularly progressive on a number of fronts.

Mr Gilliland and Members of the Ulster Farmers’Union retired from the meeting at 4.00 pm.

5. BUILDING CONTROL The Director of Building Control presented the DEPARTMENT Department’s report for the period 3 March to 8 April 2004 (copy circulated to each Member). 210/4/2004 5.1 Mr Glendinning stated that during the period of the report forty-seven applications had been recommended for approval. There were no rejections. One application was cancelled, MA/2034/0058 – Oakwood Door Design, Unit 12 Station Road Industrial Estate, Magherafelt.

This company was moving from the Industrial Estate to Creagh Industrial Estate. There were no requests for extension of time.

5.1.1 Eighty-three applications had commenced on site and seventy-two applications were found to be complete in accordance with Building Regulations.

5.2 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor T J Catherwood, and

RESOLVED: that the report as submitted be adopted.

6. NAMING AND Mr Glendinning explained that a request had been NUMBERING OF received from Mr Patrick O’Neill, Moneygran STREETS Road Kilrea to change the postal number of his dwelling house, which was adjacent to the filling station and numbered 158A. The postal number of the filling station was No.158.

6.1 Mr Glendinning advised that these numbers were running sequence on the roadway and after careful consideration it was in order to have the address of Mr O’Neill’s dwelling house changed from No.158A to No.158 Moneygran Road, Kilrea and the Filling Station to No.160. He recommended that the Council adopt the change of postal numbers. Mr O’Neill the owner of both properties was happy with the arrangment.

6.2 On consideration, it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor P H McErlean, and

RESOLVED: that the Council adopt the recommendation of the Director of Building Control and change Mr O’Neill’s dwelling house postal number from 158a Moneygran Road, Kilrea to 158 Moneygran Road, Kilrea and the filling- station postal number from 158 to160.

7. ENTERTAINMENTS Submitted the following applications for LICENCES Entertainments Licences which were recommended for renewal: 28

E. 7 The Tower Community Centre 49 St Lurach’s Road, Maghera - St Lurach’s Woman’s Community Group

E. 31 St Malachy’s GAC 55 Brough Road, Castledawson – Mr Phillip Bradley

E. 42 St Patrick’s College – Assembly Hall 25 Coleraine Road, Maghera – Mr S McElwee

E.101 St Trea’s GAA Hall Shore Road, Ballymaguigan – Mrs Maureen Henry

E.146 Slaughtneil Community Hall 18 Halfgain Road, Maghera – Mr Bernard Kearney

7.1 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor P F Groogan, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the applications as submitted be renewed.

8. ENVIRONMENTAL Mr Burrows submitted the report for March HEALTH DEPARTMENT 2004 (copy circulated to each Member). The following matters were taken into consideration:- 196/4/2004 8.1 Food Safety Northern Ireland) Order 1991 Mr Burrows advised the Council that on 12 March 2004 a visit was made by an officer of the department to a local catering establishment to undertake a routine food hygiene inspection as part of the planning inspection programme.

8.1.1 An inspection of the first floor facility revealed that-

1. The ceiling of the kitchen and hallway was in poor structural repair owing to a recent problem with the external flat roof causing the ceiling to partially collapse. 2. The floor covering throughout the kitchen was in a poor state of repair 3. Surfaces, equipment and utensils were found to be in a poor hygienic condition indicating lack of routine cleaning. 29

4. There was evidence of mouse droppings in a cupboard storing utensils (alleged not to be in use) and in a cupboard containing the electric meter.

8.1.2 Mr Burrows explained that the evidence of mouse droppings was immediately brought to the attention of the food handler who disposed of the utensils into a waste bag and began to clean and disinfect the cupboard. Closer examination revealed that the backing of the utensils cupboard had come away, revealing the cavity wall. A considerable gap was also noted around the electric meter. There were no other signs of infestation noted within the kitchen.

8.1.3 On completion of the inspection, the findings were discussed with the manageress of the business in the absence of the proprietor, whereby it was acknowledged that the facility was not of a suitable standard. A request was made by the manageress for a period of time to be given in order to improve the standards. The manageress was advised of the seriousness of the findings and that assistance would be sought from a senior officer.

8.1.4 Mr Burrows reported that a further visit was made to the premises on 12 March by two officers from the department, and photographs collected of the kitchen facility as evidence. On closer examination mouse droppings were observed in the hot press adjacent to the kitchen. Such findings indicated that there was a mouse infestation, due to the poor structural repair. The standard of cleaning within the ground floor of the premises was generally poor, however, there was no sign of infestation.

8.1.5 Mr Burrows stated that based on the findings of the investigation, it was considered by the investigating officer that an imminent risk of injury to health existed. The proprietor offered to voluntarily close the first floor kitchen facility which was accepted by the officers as an alternative to an emergency prohibition notice being served.

8.1.6 Mr Burrows advised that in accordance with the Council’s Emergency Prohibition Procedure, document No FC/PRO/C008 if an authorised officer was satisfied that the health risk condition was fulfilled, that is there was an imminent risk of injury to health, then action could be taken to close the premises, prohibit the use of a process, etc. However, an authorised officer may accept voluntary action on the part of the proprietor if it would be at least as effective as serving an emergency prohibition notice provided written confirmation of the proprietor’s offer was received. The proprietor must also undertake not to re-open the premises without the specific permission of the department. A voluntary closure agreement was drawn-up and signed by the manageress on behalf of the proprietor and the investigating officer.

8.1.7 Mr Burrows stated that the premises concerned had been periodically monitored to ensure that the voluntary closure agreement was being complied with and currently remained closed to the public as works were being undertaken to remove the imminent risk. A formal letter had been issued in respect to matters and a “Minded to” notice served for lack of a Hazard Analysis system and appropriate monitoring procedures.

8.1.8 Mr Burrows stated that given the seriousness of the offence, the co-operation and previous history of the party concerned, and the frequency of the operation (a day per week), it was recommended that a formal caution be issued to the proprietor. This course of action was subject to the proprietor’s agreement and admission of the alleged offence. Non-acceptance of the formal caution would result in legal proceedings being instigated.

8.1.9 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor J Junkin, and

RESOLVED: to adopt the Director of Environmental Health’s recommendation and that a formal caution be issued to the proprietor.

8.2 Public Health (Ireland) Act 1878 Mr Burrows advised that an application had been received from Mrs Ulain McKee, 1 Lester Gardens, Magherafelt, landlord, to have a dwelling at 15 Riverside South, Castledawson, inspected.

8.2.1 An inspection of the property revealed that the following matters were considered prejudicial to the health of the occupants of the dwelling:

1 Penetrating dampness to the dwelling via decayed and ill-fitting windows to the bathroom, first floor bedrooms (3 No) and kitchen (at sink and at rear wall including wall panel).

8.2.2 Mr Burrows recommended that the Council consider issuing a Statutory Abatement Notice on the owner requiring her to carry out the following remedial work within six months.

1. Replace the windows to the bathroom, first floor bedrooms (3 No) and kitchen (2 No including wall panel).

8.2.3 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor J F Kerr, Seconded by Councillor J P O’Neill, and

RESOLVED: that the Council issue a Statutory Abatement Notice on the owner requiring her to carry out the recommended remedial work within six months.

8.3 Environmental Health Enforcement Policy Mr Burrows in referred to his report stated that Magherafelt District Council was the enforcing authority for Environmental Health legislation. This enforcement role had been delegated to the staff of the Environmental Health Department. The Council’s aim was to provide a better environment for its citizens both for the present and the future. Much of this would be achieved through education by providing advice and regulating the activities of others. Securing compliance with legal regulatory requirements using enforcement powers, including prosecution, was an important part of achieving this aim.

8.3.1 Mr Burrows in his report outlined the aim and scope of the policy and in addition to this generic policy, officers had been issued with a range of more specific enforcement guidelines and procedural documentation to support them in their enforcement decisions, which they were required to follow. He further pointed out that the Council had adopted the Central and Local Government Concordat on Good Enforcement.

8.3.2 Mr Burrows referred to the Principles of Enforcement, Proportionality, Consistency, Transparency, Targetting and Accountability undertaken by the department’s officers. He highlighted other issues within the report.

8.3.3 Mr Burrows pointed out that it was neither possible nor necessary to investigate all issues of non-compliance with the law uncovered in the course of preventive inspection, or in the investigation of reported events such as accidents and complaints. The Council will use its discretion and have regard to the aforementioned principles in deciding whether an investigation should be initiated and in deciding the level or resources to be committed. He outlined the factors which would be taken into account.

8.3.4 With regard to prosecution, the use of the criminal process to institute a prosecution was an important part of enforcement. A prosecution would not commence or continue by the Council unless it was satisfied that there was sufficient, admissible and reliable evidence that the offence had been committed and that there was a realistic prospect of conviction.

8.3.5 In case of Health and Safety legislation it was the authorised officers who had the power to take legal action. In other matters the power of decision rested with the Council.

8.3.6 Regarding public access to information, Mr Burrows stated that the policy would be made freely available to all members of the public on request.

8.3.7 Mr Burrows stated that the Environmental Health Enforcement Policy would be reviewed as necessary to ensure that it satisfied legal requirements and customer’s expectations of the service, and as a minimum every two years.

8.3.8 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor J Junkin, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: to adopt the Council’s Environmental Health Enforcement Policy.

8.4 Air Quality Management Mr Burrows stated that the First Stage Review and Assessment of Air Quality report was produced in February 2001. The report circulated to each Member highlighted that the following pollutants required to be considered at the Second Stage Review and Assessment. They were:

• NO from traffic sources • SO from domestic sources • PM from road traffic and domestic • sources

8.4.1 Mr Burrows stated that Appendix 1 to the report contained the reports of the Second Stage Review and Assessment for the outstanding issues. He said that these reports would be sent to the Environment and Heritage Service for scrutiny of the data obtained and recommendations made.

8.4.2 In reply to Councillor J F Kerr, Mr Burrows stated that the levels in this area would not require a Third Stage Review.

Noted.

8.5 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor J F Kerr Seconded by Councillor P H McErlean, and

RESOLVED: to adopt the remainder of the Environmental Health Report which was the information of Members.

9. OPERATIONAL Submitted report by the Director of Operations for SERVICES the month of March 2004 (copy DEPARTMENT circulated to each Member).

322/4/2004 Development Services:

9.1 Proposed New Regional Tourism Partnerships (RTP) Mr Johnston reported that a meeting organised by the Northern Ireland Tourist Board, to discuss the new Regional Tourism Partnerships, was held in Mahon’s Hotel, Irvinestown on Thursday, 16 March. This meeting was attended by representatives from Fermanagh, Omagh, Cookstown, Dungannon, Strabane and Magherafelt Councils.

9.1.1 At the meeting the Tourist Board presented a verbal update on how they envisaged the workings of the new Regional Tourism Partnerships and the level at which they believed they should operate within the tourism hierarchy. They stated that in their opinion the Regional Tourism Partnership should operate at a level immediately below the Northern Ireland Tourist Board. This would however be a level above that of the marketing body such as Sperrins Tourism. The new Regional Tourism Partnerships would be given the power to lobby Government and distribute funding at a local level.

9.1.2 At the meeting a number of Councils objected to these proposals, and suggested that it was another unnecessary layer of bureaucracy. However, the Tourist Board felt that it was necessary. They also stated that no one Council area could be a Regional Tourism Partnership, for example, Fermanagh and that to avail of funding Councils had to be a member of one of these Regional Tourism organisations.

9.1.3 The Tourist Board concluded the meeting by requesting that the officers consult with their respective Councils, basically to seek approval to join one of these Regional Tourism Partnerships. Mr Johnston suggested that the Council had little option but to agree to this request as it would seem that the Tourist Board was intent on following this route. He further suggested that it should be subject to clarification regarding a number of issues such as commitment, costs, rules, etc.

9.1.4 Councillor R A Montgomery enquired as to which Regional Tourism Partnership the Council was proposing to join.

9.1.5 In reply, Mr Johnston said that he was suggesting the North West Regional Tourism Partnership.

9.1.6 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor J F Kerr, Seconded by Councillor J J McPeake, and

RESOLVED: that Magherafelt District Council would join the North West Regional Tourism Partnership, subject to clarification regarding a number of issues such as commitment, costs, rules, etc.

9.2 Mr Johnston then went on to advise the meeting that he had enclosed for Members’ consideration an ‘Action Plan for the Integrated Management of Water Based Infrastructure and Activities on the Lower Bann River’ and also a copy of the Council’s Community Support Plan.

Noted.

Community Relations:

9.3 Capital and Revenue Costs for Magherafelt And Maghera CCTV System Mr Johnston reminded the Members that at a meeting of the Council held on Tuesday, 10 April 2001, the Council had agreed to Magherafelt and Maghera CCTV Partnership’s request for the Council to pay 10% of the Capital Costs associated with the installation of CCTV Cameras in Maghera. He reported that there had been a significant delay in getting the Maghera CCTV system up and running, however it was presently being installed and therefore the Partnership was requesting Magherafelt Council to pay the amount of £16,817 into their bank account to allow the project to be completed.

9.3.1 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor T J Catherwood, and

RESOLVED: that the Council would pay £16,817 into the CCTV Partnership’s account to allow the project to be completed.

9.3.2 Mr Johnston went on to advise that the Council would also be aware that at the meeting of 10 April 2001 the Council supported a motion to provide revenue costs of £47,000 per annum for a period of three years to employ two part-time civilian monitors working twenty hours per week each to carry out this monitoring work. He reported that four candidates had been interviewed for the job. It seemed that one candidate was excellent but he wanted to work a forty hour week. The issues regarding monitoring were further discussed at a meeting of the Partnership on 9 March 2004. At this meeting acting Sergeant Billy Stewart of the PSNI produced a report which indicated a case for thirty-five hours per week live monitoring. The data clearly identified that the peak periods of incidents were Friday, 4 pm – 4 am; Saturday 4pm to 4 am and Sunday 4 pm to 3 am. It was however envisaged that by increasing the thirty-five hours monitoring to forty hours per week the additional five hours would allow the person doing the live monitoring to do administrative work. Based on the proposals the revenue costs for Magherafelt and Maghera CCTV system for the first three years would now be £46,810 for year 1, £49,261 for year 2 and £51,638 for year 3. The CCTV Partnership was therefore requesting that the Council’s April 2001 approval of £47,000 revenue cost per annum for a period of three years should be changed to reflect these figures.

9.3.3 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor T J Catherwood, and

RESOLVED: that the Council approve the total revenue costs of £46,810 for year 1, £49,261 for year 2 and £51,638 for year 3 as contained in the report.

9.4 Sudden Death of Festival Queen Mr Johnston concluded the Community Relations Report by advising the Members of the sudden death of Miss Anita McCloy, the Magherafelt Festival Queen 2003. He stated that she had died peacefully in India on Wednesday, 24 March 2004 and she was just 19 years of age. This had come as a tremendous shock to all.

He stated that she would be sadly missed and he was sure that the Council would wish to send condolences to the family.

9.4.1 The Chairman, Miss K A Lagan, stated that the death had indeed come as a shock to everyone. She had sent a wreath on behalf of the Council and had attended the funeral in her capacity as Chairman.

9.4.2 It was accepted that the Chairman’s actions had represented the Council on this sad occasion.

Mr Johnston stated that the next section of the report was Leisure Services.

Leisure Services:

9.5 Mr Johnston said that because of the early date of the meeting the figures had been estimated based on the first three weeks of the month. He stated that they were estimating a total income for Leisure Services for March 2004 at just over £70,000. Obviously a certain amount of caution required to be exercised, however he felt that this figure was realistic and significant considering the huge boost the total income had received last year with the opening of the new Maghera Leisure Centre.

9.6 Mr Johnston stated that the next nine paragraphs of the report were for information.

9.7 Senior Citizen 10 Sessions Card He then referred to Paragraph 5 on Page 5 where he had reported that during the month they had received a customer suggestion requesting that the Council consider introducing a Senior Citizen 10 Session Card at a price of £7. This was basically 70p per session X 10. It was thought that this would reduce the need for Senior Citizens to carry money and Mr Johnston recommended approval.

9.7.1 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the Council introduce a Senior Citizen 10 Session Card at a price of £7 per card.

9.8 Scale of Charges for Leisure Services 2004-2005 Mr Johnston then advised that they had addressed the issues raised in Council regarding Scale of Charges for Leisure Services 2004–2005. He reported that officers had also to make some very minor adjustments to this approved Scale of Charges to enable the programming of the tills for half-sessions. The amendments and minor adjustments were identified by dots on Appendix 2 - Scale of Charges 2004/2005.

9.8.1 It was

PROPOSED by the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the Council approve the amended Scale of Charges as submitted by the Leisure Services Department.

9.9 Jellybean Machines Mr Johnston stated that the final item in Leisure Services was a request from NIMBA (Northern Ireland Mother and Baby Action Group) to install Jellybean machines in Council premises for which NIMBA would receive a monthly donation. Mr Johnston stated that he was sure that all would agree that it was a worthy cause, however he believed that it was another case where the Council would have to be careful not to set a precedent for others to follow. There were in fact numerous worthy causes that could come forward with similar requests and he felt that the Council could be forced to install all types of vending machines to accommodate these requests. He also pointed out that the Caterer’s lease stated that she had the exclusive right to sell for consumption at the Centre hot and cold meals, snacks, refreshments and confectionery to members of the public using the Centre. Mr Johnston believed that to agree to this request from NIMBA would be a breach of this lease.

9.9.1 In view of these statements he recommended that the Council do not agree to NIMBA’s request.

9.9.2 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor R A Montgomery, and

RESOLVED: that the Council would not agree to NIMBA installing Jellybean machines in the Leisure Services facilities.

Mr Johnston stated that the final section of the report was Technical Services.

Technical Services:

9.10 Mr Johnston reported on the usual list of vandalism, illegal dumping, fallen animals, maintenance and bulky household refuse collection.

9.11 Bus Shelters Mr Johnston advised that he had enclosed for the Council’s consideration a letter from Adshel regarding the provision of bus shelters at a number of locations throughout the Council District. The proposals would allow Adshel to replace two of the Council’s existing shelters in Tobermore and Castledawson with advertising shelters, similar to those already erected on the Glenshane Road, and erect three additional advertising shelters in Magherafelt. Mr Johnston stated that the significance of these proposals was, that for every advertising shelter erected Adshel would also erect and maintain a non-advertising shelter in an area defined by the Council. He suggested that basically the proposals contained in the letter would allow Adshel to erect five advertising shelters in areas of their choice, provide the Council with five non-advertising shelters to be erected in areas of the Council’s choice, and it would release two of the Council’s existing shelters for use in other locations, all free of charge. Mr Johnston stated that when the cost of a single bus shelter was considered, which was currently at least £3,000, he therefore recommended that the Council agree to the proposals contained in the letter from Adshel.

9.11.1 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor J F Kerr, Seconded by Councillor J Junkin, and

RESOLVED: that the Council would agree to the proposals as contained in the letter from Adshel, that is, it would allow Adshel to replace two existing bus shelters in Tobermore and Castledawson, to erect three additional advertising shelters in Magherafelt on the condition that for every advertising shelter erected by Adshel they would also erect and maintain an non-advertising shelter in an area defined by the Council. All shelters to be provided at no cost to the Council.

9.12 Animal By-Products Regulations (NI) 2003 Mr Johnston stated that these new regulations were introduced on the 3 December 2003 and would have major implications for a number of services delivered by the Council. These new Regulations set high standards for the treatment and disposal of all waste containing animal by-products and effectively bans the landfilling of all raw or uncooked animal by-products such as animal carcases, processed animal remains, eggs, etc. He stated that whilst the Regulations were effective immediately, the ban did not currently extend to kitchen and restaurant waste which was classed as “catering waste”. This waste had been issued with an exemption until 31 December 2005 when it too would be banned from landfill.

9.12.1 The Regulations also banned the burial of fallen animals on private land or farms, however, DARD and the DoE both said that they would allow this practice to continue until the “Fallen Stock Scheme” for the collection of fallen animals was in place in the Autumn of 2004. Mr Johnston thought that the Council might be able to avail of the “Fallen Stock Scheme” for the fallen animals it currently took to landfill, once it had been introduced, but there was currently no indication of the likely cost to the Council for enrolment in this scheme. He stated that the Regulations did not extend to wild or pet animals which could still be buried or landfilled. Mr Johnston went on to say that the Regulations also set stringent conditions on the methods that would be used to treat animal by- products collected as part of the Council’s composting scheme.

Mr Johnston felt that this underlined the Council’s need to research suitable technologies for the processing of the brown bin material.

9.12.2 In the light of these new Regulations, Mr Johnston recommended that the Council should:

‹ no longer accept any animal by-products at its landfill site ‹ develop another avenue for the disposal of fallen animals collected by the Council; and ‹ continue the search for suitable technology to process the brown bin material.

9.12.3 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor J Junkin Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the Council would no longer accept any animal by-product at its landfill site, unless covered by the Regulations, develop another avenue for the disposal of fallen animals collected by the Council, and continue the search for suitable technology to process the brown bin material collected as part of the Council’s composting scheme.

9.13 The End-of-Life Vehicle Directive Mr Johnston said that this Directive set out very specific targets for the use of recycled material in the manufacture of vehicles, the design and operation of facilities for reprocessing End-of-Life Vehicles and the recovery and recycling of materials salvaged from the End-of-Life Vehicles. He suggested that this directive could have huge implications for Councils who had a statutory responsibility for the collection and disposal of abandoned vehicles within their area.

9.13.1 ELV’s had under the Regulations to be reprocessed, de-polluted and dismantled in approved and licensed facilities. He felt that this would greatly increase the cost of disposing of abandoned vehicles collected by the Council, to as much as £100 to £200 per vehicle.

9.13.2 Mr Johnston reported that the Environmental Heritage Service had acknowledged the additional burden that this new legislation would place on local authorities.

Mr Johnston informed the Council that the EHS had announced an additional £875,000 to the Waste Management Grant-aid Scheme for 2004/2005. This money would be ring-fenced to assist local Councils with their additional costs of disposing of abandoned vehicles. He advised that negotiations were still ongoing with EHS to finalise the distribution of these funds and he advised that he would keep the Council informed as more information became available.

9.13.3 Councillor J F Kerr stated that he had received a number of complaints regarding the brown bins. The complaints ranged from the bin being too big, the instructions advising that the bin should be lined with newspaper and the waste then thrown into the bin. This meant that the waste broke up and made a mess of the bin. Others complained that lids did not fit tightly on the bins and they were concerned about smell, and that the bins provided should be smaller and shallower.

9.13.4 Mr Johnston, in reply said that the complaints they were receiving from the processor of this waste was mainly about the content of the waste placed in the bin. He explained that in order not to contaminate the contents (that is, use plastic bags) the instructions stated that the bin should be lined with newspaper and the garden and kitchen waste disposed in the bin for the Council’s composting scheme. It was acceptable if the contents of the bin were broken up. Brown bins were collected fortnightly, so there should be no real problems with smell.

9.13.5 Councillor J Junkin added that the fact that the bin lids did not fit tightly was an advantage in that fresh-air was allowed to circulate in the bin and keep foul smells down.

9.13.6 Councillor J Junkin further enquired if the Council still collected abandoned vehicles.

9.13.8 Mr Johnston replied stating that the Council would still take away an abandoned vehicle but in future it may have to charge for doing so, if an owner could be identified. He further said that there was a Working Group of which Mr John Murtagh was a member, that was considering the way forward on recycling abandoned vehicles. He said that the matter would be fully discussed within the group and he would report back to Council.

9.14 Official Opening of new Recycling Centre Mr Johnston said that the new Recycling Centre in the Council Depot, Magherafelt had actually opened to the public on Monday 5 April 2004, however the official opening was now scheduled for the 25 May 2004. He hoped that the opening would promote a waste awareness and recycling day, particularly for local schools, and officers were currently contacting local schools to guage their interest and support for such events. Mr Johnston went on to say that he hoped that all Members would keep this day free in their dairies to attend the opening of this major new facility.

Noted.

9.15 Schools’ Recycling Grant Scheme Mr Johnston advised that as part of the Wake Up to Waste Campaign the Environmental Heritage Service was trying to encourage Councils to provide recycling facilities in the local Schools and Colleges. £400,000 had been ring-fenced by the Environmental Heritage Service to support the Councils in the role out of these new facilities and Magherafelt District Council had been allocated £9,448 for the year 2004/2005 to participate in this scheme.

9.15.1 Mr Johnston pointed out that the Council already offered paper recycling facilities to all the schools in the District but this scheme required that in addition to paper the schools were now offered recycling facilities for plastic bottles, cardboard and steel and aluminium cans. He suggested that these were basically the same materials that were recycled in the Council’s domestic blue bin scheme and the inclusion of the schools in the scheme should be fairly straightforward. He was therefore recommending that the Council proceed with the Schools’ Recycling Scheme by integrating the schools into the Council’s blue bin collection routes.

9.15.2 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor P E Groogan, and

RESOLVED: that the Council would participate in the Schools’ Recycling Scheme by integrating the Schools and Colleges into the existing blue bin recycling scheme. 44

9.16 By-laws Prohibiting the Consumption of Intoxicating Liquor Mr Johnston concluded the Operational Report by advising the Council that the By-laws Prohibiting the Consumption of Intoxicating Liquor in the approved schedule of streets and roads within the 30 mph throughout the District had been confirmed by the Department of Social Development as coming into operation on 1 April 2004.

Noted.

9.17 Mr Johnston sought permission to raise an additional item and this was agreed to.

9.18 Road Nameplates to include Townland Names Mr Johnston advised the Members that he had received correspondence from a number of Councillors regarding a proposal from Ballinascreen Historical Society. This Society was interested in the preservation of local history, traditions and culture and was of the opinion that the townland names still represented a vital element in rural life. To this end they were asking that Magherafelt District Council supports the campaign by ensuring that townland names were included in all new road nameplates. Mr Johnston stated that he was recommend that the Council agree to this proposal.

9.19 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor P E Groogan, Seconded by Councillor R A Montgomery, and

RESOLVED: that the Council would include townland names on all new road nameplates.

9.20 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor J P O’Neill, Seconded by Councillor T J Catherwood, and

RESOLVED: that the report as submitted be adopted.

10. SELECT LIST Submitted report prepared by the Director of REPLACEMENT Building Control on applications received from the JETTY, NEWFERRY Main Contractors and Electrical Contractor for inclusion in a select list for the contract of a 928/4/2004 replacement jetty and associated landscaping at Newferry, Bellaghy (copy circulated to each Member).

10.1 Main Contractors: Whitemountain Quarries Ltd, Belfast Brogan Construction, Omagh Graham Construction, Dromore Earney Contracts Ltd, Lisburn Farrans (Construction) Ltd, Belfast Alexander (Civil Engineering) Ltd, Omagh

It was agreed that all six contractors listed were very capable in executing the works.

10.2 Electrical Engineers: Premier Electrics Ltd, Magherafelt H M Electrics Ltd, Maghera Young Electrical Contractors Ltd, Londonderry O’Neill Electrics Ltd, Dromore Braid Electrical Services Ltd, Ballymena Barrett Electrical Contracts Ltd, Omagh Savage Electrics, Stewartstown J F Little Electrical, Dungannon WKK Electrical Services, Belfast DMG Electrics Ltd, Comber Mac Electrics, Armagh Dowds Electrical, Ballymoney Alexander Bonar, Ballymena

The above Electrical Contractors are the most capable of executing the electrical street lighting.

10.3 Mr Glendinning recommended that the above contractors be accepted by the Council as being capable of carrying out the works

10.4 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the contractors included in the report be accepted as being capable of carrying out the contract for the replacement jetty and associated landscaping at Newferry, Bellaghy.

11. PAYMENT OF Submitted Statement of Expenditure setting out ACCOUNTS payments to be made during the month of April 2004 (copy circulated to each Member). 4/2004 11.1 The schedule provided for £700,921.79 out of the Revenue Account and £186,235.60 out of the Capital Account.

11.1.1 It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the Statement of Accounts as submitted for April be approved.

12 FINANCIAL Consideration was given to the following letters of CONTRIBUTIONS request for financial contributions:

56/4/2004 12.1 Derry and Antrim Driving Club Ltd: Submitted letter from the Chairman, Derry and Antrim Driving Club seeking financial assistance (copy circulated to each Member).

On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor P H McErlean, Seconded by Councillor J Junkin, and

RESOLVED: to make a contribution of £200.

12.2 Irish Indoor Bowling Association: Submitted letter dated 9 March 2004 from the Honorary Secretary, Irish Indoor Bowling Association (copy circulated to each Member) requesting that the Council reconsider its decision made in line with its current policy and award £200 towards the participation of two players, residing in the Council’s area, in the British Isles Short Mat Bowling Championships, represented Ireland. At the World Short Mat Bowling Championships in Carmarthen, Wales, another player living in the Magherafelt Council area, had been selected to take part.

12.2.1 The letter further intimated that the figure of £200 donated by the Council had remained unchanged for a number of years and asked that the Council also reconsider the amount currently paid.

12.2.2 On consideration it was agreed that the allocation of £200 to the Irish Indoor Bowling Association for the year 2004/2005 remain unchanged, and that the contribution made at the previous Council Meeting was granted to cover all the activities of the bowlers living in the District who participated in bowling affiliated to the Irish Indoor Bowling Association.

12.3 Mr Tommy Johnston: Mr Tohill explained that Mr Johnston’s request was effectively addressed in the contribution of £200 to the Irish Indoor Bowling Association at the previous Council meeting. Consequently the request was merely for noting (copy circulated to each Member).

Noted.

12.4 Lavey Community Playgroup: Submitted letter from the Playgroup Leader dated 15 March 2004 (copy circulated to each Member) requesting financial assistance for staff training. The letter intimated that at the beginning of May there was an opportunity for two staff members to avail of further High/Scope training, implemented by the group for five years, to train at the International High/Scope Conference in the USA.. The Group had received £1,000 which would fund one member of staff and the group was seeking financial help with the expenses of the other member.

12.4.1 Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea asked Mr Tohill if this request fell within the remit of the Council.

12.4.2 Mr Tohill in reply advised that this request for staff training should really be financially supported by the North Eastern Education and Library Board as it was an educational programme and the Council had no obvious legal authority for funding the request.

12.4.2 Councillor J J McPeake spoke of the work carried out by the group and their significant achievements. He said that he understood that two-thirds of the finance required for the event had been received. He spoke of the benefits brought back to the area by those who would be attending.

12.4.3 Councillor J Junkin stated that whilst he appreciated that this programme was of benefit to the community, nevertheless he felt it would be “opening a wide door” for may others.

12.4.4 Councillor R A Montgomery felt that by sending two staff to the Conference in the USA would be of benefit to the area.

12.4.5 Councillor J J McPeake requested that the request be deferred for further consideration by the Chief Executive.

12.4.6 On consideration it was agreed that the request would be deferred for further consideration by the Chief Executive.

12.5 County Londonderry Football Association: Submitted a letter from the County Londonderry Football Association, which since 1992 had been responsible for preparing and entering two teams of young footballers from the County in the Northern Ireland Milk Cup Tournament. The letter requested a financial contribution to defray costs associated with the preparation and presentation of the teams in a professional manner (copy circulated to each Member).

On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, and

RESOLVED: that a contribution of £400 be made, the same amount paid in 2003.

12.6 Magherafelt & District Cage Bird Society: Submitted request from Magherafelt & District Cage Bird Society for financial assistance with their Annual Bird Show (copy of letter circulated to each Member).

12.6.1 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor P McLean, and

RESOLVED: that a contribution of £200 be made to the Magherafelt & District Cage Bird Society. 49

12.7 Magherafelt & District Road Safety Committee: Submitted letter from the Secretary, Magherafelt & District Road Safety Committee seeking financial assistance for their Primary School Quiz which took place in the Primary Schools in the area (copy circulated to each Member).

12.7.1 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor T J Catherwood, Seconded by Councillor J A McBride, and

RESOLVED: that the Council make a contribution of £600 to the Magherafelt & District Road Safety to sponsor the Primary School Quiz.

12.8 Mr Laurence Hastings: Submitted letter from Mr Laurence Hastings, Head of Leisure Services, seeking financial assistance with his expenses in representing Ireland in the Over 40’s Squash Team for the Home Internationals 2004 to be held in Glamorgan, Wales.

12.8.1 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor J Junkin, and

RESOLVED: that the Council make a contribution of £200.

12.9 Body Gym, Upperlands: Submitted a request for financial assistance with the Ulster Power Lifting Championships which would be held on Saturday, 24 April 2004 in the Body Gym, Upperlands.

12.9.1 Mr Johnston explained that the original application had been submitted for the Council’s Community Relations Programme but could not be funded from the Council’s Community Relations Programme, as the grant-aid application did not open until 22 April 2004 and applications could not be funded retrospectively.

12.9.2 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor R A Montgomery, and

RESOLVED: that the Council make a contribution of £200 to the Body Gym, Upperlands towards the organising of the Ulster Power Lifting Championships to be held on Saturday, 24 April 2004.

13. ECONOMIC Submitted the following requests for funding: DEVELOPMENT 13.1 New Business Start Programme: 4/2002 Mr Chris McCarney, MAP, explained that over the two years the Council had entered a partnership with LEDU (now Invest NI) to manage the Business Start-up Programme. The new approach had been very successful in Magherafelt. The new Business Start Programme included mentoring, training and grant assistance of up to £1,000. The total cost including management costs was £2,000 per case (copy of report circulated to each Member). The funding breakdown was –

Invest NI £1,300 Council £700.

13.1.1 Mr McCarney stated that the Council reclaimed 50% of its expenditure from DETI so that the net cost to the Council was £350 per case. Mr McCarney said that original projections predicted 210 start-ups over the four years from 2001/02 to 2004/05 with a gross cost to Council of £147,000 (net £73,500). He further stated that the Council had previously increased the Business Start budget from £147,000 to £226,800.

13.1.2 Mr McCarney explained that this application was to obtain formal approval to draw down funding from the increased budget of £226,800. He stated that the programme had delivered 230 (as opposed to 210) business starts in 31 months (as opposed to 48) and analysed the new starts by industry sector. He said that Invest NI proposed to contract a new programme from 1 September 2004 and he was seeking permission to draw down a maximum of £52,500 (gross) to support a further 75 business start-ups until 31 August 2004.

13.1.3 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr, and

RESOLVED: that the Council grant £52,500 to NI Business Start Programme to support business start-ups until 31 August 2004.

13.2 Career Support Programme: Mr McCarney explained that the Council had provided £15,060 grant assistance in December 2002 to Magherafelt Area Business Education Partnership (MABEP) to help achieve the following aims:

• Highlight the employment opportunities available for skilled tradesmen • Make students aware of opportunities for continuing education and obtaining qualifications in the workplace • Highlight the real opportunities for self- employment through a vocational or technology career choices • Help motivate teenage boys to achieve their potential from the education system. • To increase the level of core employability skills required for the world of work including leadership, enterprise, teamwork and communication skills.

These aims were to be achieved over a two year programme but the Council initially only awarded funding for one year and wished to have a report on the first year’s activities before approving funding for year 2. The original programme of activities were

• Project 1 - Career Role Models • Project 2 – Quality Work Placements • Project 3 – Young Enterprise/Mini Companies • Project 4 – Science and Technology Workshops.

13.2.1 Mr McCarney stated that Mr Gerry Lynch, previously Manager of Community Education in NEI and a trainer on the Business Start Programme was recruited as Project Officer for MABEP. The first twelve months of the project was near completion and much time had been spent in getting systems and infrastructure in place. 52

Mr McCarney stated that MABEP’s achievements in year one included:

• Agreement established with Limavady Borough Council that Gerry Lynch as Project Officer spent two days per week in Limavady • Securing of funds from Peace II to establish a website and publish career role models promoting vocational career routes. • Commissioned Muldoon & McAllister of Garden Street in Magherafelt to develop the website • Developing of 20 quality work placements in 12 local businesses • Recruitment of 12 vocational career role models who will appear on the website • Student bursaries promised from 5 businesses for up to £5,000 in total. • A successful Vocational Career event in St Pius X attended by 600 pupils • Careers insight day in NEI attended by 500 pupils

Mr Lynch had also reached an agreement with Magherafelt Business Forum to help local businesses take a strategic approach to recruiting school leavers. Mr McCarney outlined the specific outputs for year 2:

• Launch of the website which will provide resource materials for schools and act as a promotional tool for local businesses • Organise two events to promote vocational careers • 25 Career Role Models listed on the website • Development of 50 quality work placements • Increased number of students choosing AVCEs and Modern Apprenticeship by 30% • Generation of £4,000/year directly from schools and businesses • Development of a local programme to promote enterprise and problem solving skills in young people

He also stated that he hoped that in the near future it could be arranged for Mr Lynch to address the Council on this project.

13.2.2 Mr McCarney recommended that the Council grant £17,150 to continue this project to promote Vocational Career Routes for a second year.

13.2.3 Councillor J F Kerr commented that the career advice given to many students in schools was poor and it was good that there was an outside body undertaking this work. He said that employers were crying out for young people to be made available.

13.2.4 Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea also welcomed the work already done and that which had still to be carried out.

13.2.4 On consideration it was

PROPOSED by Councillor J F Kerr, Seconded by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, and

RESOLVED: that the Council grant £17,150 to continue this project to promote Vocational Career Routes for a second year.

13.2 Magherafelt District Council – Community Support Plan: Mr McCarney referred to the Community Support Plan (copy circulated to each Member) as introduced in Mr Johnston’s Operational Services Report. He stated that the District Council and Magherafelt Area Partnership had worked with Lestas Consulting to produce this Community Support Plan. It was hoped that it would strengthen local communities, increase participation and promote social inclusion through the stimulation and support of community groups, community activity and local advice services.

Noted.

21. CONSULTATION The following consultation documents were DOCUMENTS submitted:

195/8/2003 a) Letter and Consultation Paper on the implementation of Directive 2001/42/EC – The Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive published by The Planning Service seeking a response not later than 3 June 2004 (copy circulated to each Member).

54 b) Letter and Consultation Document from the Health and Safety Executive Northern Ireland – Proposals for an Approved Code of Practice: Explosives at Quarries seeking comments by 31 May 2004 c) Letter and Draft Local Government Pension Scheme (Management and Investment of Funds) (Amendment) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2004 prepared by the Department of Environment, Local Government Division seeking comments by 21 May 2004 (copy circulated to each Member). d) Letter and Consultation Document prepared by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment seeking comments on proposals to establish a new legal vehicle for social economy enterprises – the Community Interest Company by 4 June 2004. e) Document prepared by the Department for Employment and Learning “Further Education Means Business” for people, communities and the economy in Northern Ireland seeking comments before 30 June 2004. f) Letter re Use of Irish Language in Courts in Northern Ireland prepared by the Civil Policy Branch seeking comments by Wednesday, 31 March 2004 (copy circulated to each Member).

Mr Tohill explained that this document had been delayed due to the fact that it had been incorrectly addressed. g) Submitted letter from the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Investment in connection with a Proposed Insolvency Order: Disqualification from serving as a Councillor on the grounds of insolvency seeking comments by 30 April 2004 (copy circulated to each Member).

It was agreed that if any Member or party grouping wished to make comments on any of these documents they should forward them to the Chief Executive who would then arrange to have them sent on to the appropriate body.

15. POETRY EVENING Consideration was given to the nomination of SOMME HERITAGE of delegates to attend a Poetry Evening at the CENTRE Somme Heritage Centre on Friday, 23 April 2004 7.30 pm. 268/4/2004 The fee was £5 per person. It was agreed that anyone wishing to attend should contact the Chief Executive.

Councillor G C Shiels indicated that he wished to attend and requested that he and any other interested Councillor be furnished with the relevant information.

16. WATER SERVICE Submitted the following:

280/4/2004 16.1 Letter and Notice of Intention served under the Water and Sewerage Services (NI) Order 1973 describing the works proposed by the Department of Regional Development in connection with the Castledawson WWTW Foul Sewer scheme as they affect the Council’s property (copy circulated to each Member).

16.1 Letter in connection with internal Water Service organisation changes to be implemented on 4 April 2004 (copy circulated to each Member).

16.2 The contents of both documents were noted.

17. WATER (NORTHERN Submitted letter dated 5 March 2004 and copy of IRELAND) ORDER an application made by Quinn Car Dismantlers for 1999 consent to discharge effluent to an underground stratum under the Water (Northern Ireland) Order 280A/4/2004 1999 from 72 Gorteade Road, Swatragh, seeking the Council’s comments (copies circulated to each Member).

17.1 On consideration it was agreed not to make any comments on this application.

18. FUEL POVERTY Submitted letter dated 2 April 2004 from Professor J D Watson (Director, Public Health Medicine) and Mr Stephen Murray (Chairperson, Fuel Poverty Steering Group), Northern Health and Social Services Board regarding the development of a Fuel Poverty Strategy by the Northern Investing for Health Partnership (copy circulated to each Member). 56

18.1 The letter defined fuel poverty and the misery of living in cold, damp homes and the significance of the problem.

18.2 The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan stated that the Council’s Fuel Poverty Working Group had been formed to undertake the work of helping to resolve these issues at a local level.

18.3 She said that the Group had met Ms Majella McCloskey from NEA NI and she had been attending the meetings as had Mr Stephen Murray from the Northern Investing for Health Partnership. She said that the group was now a flagship for other areas.

18.4 Councillor R A Montgomery enquired if the Officers could verify the situation as to whether the Council could help fund the Fuel Poverty Working Group.

18.5 The Chairman asked enquired if there was any further information regarding the Council funding the work of the group “in kind”.

18.6 Mr Tohill reminded the Members that the Council had previously received legal advice that it should not fund a specific fuel poverty project because it did not have the legal authority to incur the relevant expenditure. He said that although he was not fully aware of the legality of the Council funding this group his initial reaction was they probably would not have the legal authority to do so. However he said that he would contact the Local Government Auditor to verify the situation and the officers would report back to the next meeting of the Council.

19. ROADS SERVICE Submitted the following:

279/4/2004 19.1 Copy of letter and Form of Notice of Traffic Sensitive Streets within the Magherafelt District (copy circulated to each Member). Any objections to these proposals should be notified to the Network Maintenance Manager within 35 days of the date of formal notification (copies circulated to each Member).

Noted.

19.2 Copies of letter, Statutory Rule and map in connection with Route C557 Knocknakielt Road, Maghera (Abandonment) Order (Northern Ireland) 2004 (copies circulated to each Member).

Noted.

20. NORTHERN IRELAND Submitted letter dated 3 March 2004 and report HOUSING EXECUTIVE in connection with Latent Demand Testing in the Culbane/Ballynease area (copy circulated to each 90/4/2004 Member).

20.1 The report set out the results of all the areas tested and, where appropriate, the follow up action which the Housing Executive planned to take.

20.2 Councillor P H McErlean commented that unfortunately many of those questioned who had expressed a real preference to reside in the area had now decided to live in the Bellaghy area. Therefore the results were potentially inaccurate.

Noted.

21. NOTICES OF MOTION 21.1 In accordance with his Notice of Motion Councillor J J McPeake proposed:

“That this Council calls on Minister Ian Pearson to review his recent decision to give over the RIR barracks site solely for the building of a school, and that we call on him to allow more time for the development of the design centre proposal.”

The Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan felt that all the issues raised in this motion had been incorporated in the next motion put forward in her name and supported by her party grouping.

Much discussion took place between members of the two party groupings as to whether either motion was acceptable, one would be withdrawn or an amendment made.

It was suggested that the first motion should be incorporated into the second motion at point 1.

Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea enquired under which Standing Order the Motions could be amalgamated.

Mr Tohill replied that as the first Motion in the name of Councillor J J McPeake had not be seconded that Motion was not actually under debate. Therefore that Motion could be withdrawn. As regards the amalgamation of the two Motions, Mr Tohill stated that this would amount to an amendment, which would have to be dealt with under Standing Order 9.6 which stated that motions could be amended when they were under debate. Such amendments could either:

• leave out words, • leave out words and insert or add others; • or insert or add words.

Mr Tohill explained that as he saw it, the issue was really who could propose the amendment. He said that the Chairman, as the Proposer of the original Motion, could not propose an Amendment to the initial Motion, nor could she second it. He stated that procedure would dictate that the Amendment would be voted upon and, if carried, it would become the substantive Motion. He said that this would have the effect of denying the Chairman the opportunity of either proposing or seconding the final Motion and this seemed contrary to what the meeting wanted to achieve.

Further discussion took place on whether the Members wished the Motions to be amalgamated and who could propose the amendment.

The Chairman adjourned the meeting for five minutes in order to allow the party groups to consider the situation.

When the meeting resumed, Councillor J J McPeake stated that he was withdrawing his motion in favour of the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan’s motion:

In accordance with her Notice of Motion, the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan proposed:

“Magherafelt Council

• Recalling that Chancellor Gordon Brown, in launching the Reinvestment and Reform Initiative said … “We want these sites (ex- army bases and prisons) to symbolise peace and prosperity and become the engine of economic and social regeneration in local areas.” 59

• Determined that, in the Chancellor’s words, “barracks and prisons of the past (will be) replaced by business and prosperity for the future” • Recalling that in the immediate aftermath of the Chancellor’s Initiative, the Council invited expressions of interest from the Magherafelt community. • Bearing in mind that the Council unanimously proposed that the army base site be used to accommodate the Controlled Primary School along with the Business Forum’s proposal for Woodworking Design and Training Centre. • Bearing in mind that Magherafelt Controlled Primary School is in urgent need for new premises • Concerned to accommodate the needs of the Controlled Primary School with the general needs of the whole Magherafelt Community 1. Rejects the Minister’s decision to devote the entire site to the relocation of the Controlled Primary School. 2. Takes the view that rejection of the proposal to accommodate the Woodworking Design and Training Centre along with the Controlled Primary School on the army base site, is contrary to the interests of the general community, and may put in jeopardy the future of important furniture manufacturing industry in the district and beyond 3. Rejects the advice being given by INI that the Design Centre Proposal is not viable and calls for an independent review of that advice 4. Demands that the Minister puts his decision “on hold”, and that he receives a delegation from the Council to discuss a more acceptable way forward which conforms to the Chancellor’s intentions and the overall purpose of RRI.”

The motion was seconded by Councillor J J McPeake.

In support of her motion, the Chairman, Councillor Miss K A Lagan stated that the original and unanimous proposal of the Council was to devote roughly half of the RIR base to the relocation of the primary school, which they were wholly in favour of facilitating, and the other half to a Centre of Excellence in Woodworking Design and Training.

The Woodworking Centre was of huge significance to Magherafelt for the important furniture manufacturing industry in Mid-Ulster and would stabilise and expand employment in that sector by keeping the industry ahead of the market. This was more in accordance with the Government’s Strategy on Skills and Training. She referred to the newspaper article “Army Base Sale raises hopes for economy”. The Chairman said that they could not afford to experience job losses in the industry as they had already experienced in the textile industry. That was the reason why she could not accept the Minister’s decision and why the Council was demanding that he put his decision “on hold” in order to enter into urgent discussions with the Council so that the Centre was not lost to the District. She said that this was the kind of project which the Chancellor, Gordon Brown MP had in mind when he launched the “Reinvestment and Reform Initiative”, in that such premises as barracks and prisons would be replaced with business and prosperity in the future.

Councillor J J McPeake stated that he fully supported the initiative that military bases of the past be replaced by businesses for the future, but the Minister, Ian Pearson was not listening. All that was being provided for was a primary school and not economic development. He said that in the Magherafelt District there were thirty woodworking firms employing several hundreds of people. There was a chronic shortfall for more of these jobs. The establishment of the design and training centre would be a tremendous boost to the area and further afield bringing benefits to the District and other ancillary services.

Councillor McBride said that with the problems currently facing agriculture it was important to provide other choices of employment for young people.

Councillor McPeake said that Ian Pearson’s decision was quite different from the Reinvestment and Reform Initiative announced, and he had told him so at a previous meeting at Castle Buildings. These former army bases were supposed to become the engine of economic and social regeneration in local areas. Councillor McPeake continued by stating that whilst the school replacement was necessary he felt that provision could also be made for accommodating the design centre in an area of over 7 acres. 61

Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea stated that the motion was not factually correct. He stated that the Motion rejected the Minister’s decision to devote the entire site to the relocation of the Controlled Primary School. He said that the Minister’s decision was to utilise the site for three purposes:

• the local primary school, • the nursery school, and • an after schools project

All three purposes were cross-community. Councillor Rev Dr McCrea said that the motion did not care about facts or the viability of the Design Centre. He emphasised that contrary to the wording of the Motion, at no time did Magherafelt District Council, in private or public, make a decision of the use of the RIR base. Councillor Rev McCrea said that the press statements made recently had been incorrect regarding the design and training centre. The press statements and the motion were either full of inaccuracies, falsehood or error. He wondered how the Members Proposing and Seconding the Motion knew that the design centre would be viable because the Minister had said that the submission made by Magherafelt Business Forum did not stack up. He further stated that the motion was sectional and not in the interests of everybody in the District.

The Chairman stated that she believed that the project was viable.

Councillor Rev McCrea stated that previous correspondence from the North Eastern Education and Library Board confirmed his assertions regarding the Primary and Nursery School.

Extension of Time

Mr Tohill reminded the Chairman of the lateness of the hour and that the meeting had lasted continuously for four hours and that the meeting would stand adjourned unless two-thirds of the Members present resolved to continue sitting.

It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor J F Kerr

That the meeting continue.

On a vote being taken all the Members present voted in favour of the meeting continuing. The Chairman declared that the meeting would continue by one hour.

Councillor Rev McCrea stated that the Minister had taken his decision and this was recorded in the Department’s letter.

The Chairman argued that this was not an acceptable way forward. She said that Mr Chris Stewart, from the Department, felt that the Centre of Excellence was viable.

Both Councillor J Junkin and Councillor P McLean stated that Magherafelt Business Forum had never produced any financial information to demonstrate the Project’s viability.

Discussion continued about the various contacts and meetings held to discuss the development of the RIR base and reference was again made to a press article headlined “Army base sale raises hopes for economy”.

The Chairman referred to a letter she had received from Mr M Kennedy, Manager, Magherafelt Business Forum (copy handed out to each Member) which she said supported the Motion.

Mr Tohill advised the Members that the Chief Executive had also received a letter from Mr William McKeown, Chairman, Magherafelt Business Forum. This letter stated that the Business Forum would be keen to explore the scope for revised proposals for the Design Centre around the current school site. Mr Tohill asked the Members how they wished to address Mr McKeown’s letter.

Councillor J F Kerr said that he was dismayed at the Minister’s decision on the army base, which he felt was outside the spirit of the Chancellor’s intentions.

He drew the Members’ attention to point 4 specifically the proposal to discuss a more acceptable way forward. He commented on the site of the present primary school, changes in education, the need for the design centre to be located in Magherafelt town and the potential for manoeuvrability. He felt that the first step would be to meet the Minister with a proposed way forward.

Councillor R A Montgomery stated that all along the way he had supported both projects and suggested that perhaps the Council could not ask the Minister to get an independent opinion on his own decision. He suggested that only the Secretary of State or the Prime Minister could change the Minister’s decision.

Councillor J A McBride stated that the whole Council had supported the both projects. The Minister should be met to find a way forward to accommodate both projects. He fully supported the provision for the primary school, nursery school, etc but the Design Centre had been put in jeopardy. There was a need for such skills within the area. He certainly felt that the Council and the Business Forum should meet the Minister.

Councillor Rev McCrea stated that he could not support this motion. He referred to the two separate letters received from Magherafelt Business Form which were somewhat contradictory. He said that it was of the utmost importance that the local primary school was provided for.

The Chairman then recalled the meeting which the party group leaders had held with the Minister and how the Members were united in facilitating both projects.

Councillor Miss Lagan said that she was very dismayed when the Chief Executive mentioned the fact that if the local Primary School was repositioned in the former RIR base then use could be made of the space on the current primary school site for an extension of leisure facilities and associated parking. This was the first she had ever heard of this proposal. The matter had not previously been discussed except possibly between Councillor Rev McCrea and the Chief Executive.

Councillor Rev McCrea replied that he felt that the implication of the Chairman’s remarks in relation to the Chief Executive was insulting. He stated that he was aware of the need for improved leisure facilities. The local community required better leisure facilities and better provision for associated parking. He said that the best site for the Design Centre and the associated work units was at Creagh Industrial Park which was the Council’s main industrial site. The Council had sought to obtain designation of the Creagh as a strategic employment location. As such it would be the best location for the Design Centre.

The Chairman stated that any proposals to acquire the Primary School site for leisure purposes should have been discussed by the full Council and not by the Chief Executive and selected Councillors.

Councillor J F Kerr stated that the Council should proceed with meeting the Minister as the first step in resolving the issue.

Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea requested a recorded vote.

On a vote being taken, Councillors P E Groogan, O T Hughes, J F Kerr, Miss K A Lagan, J A McBride, P H McErlean, J J McPeake, H E Mullan, S O’Brien and J P O’Neill voted for the motion (10 votes).

Councillors T J Catherwood, J Junkin, Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, P McLean and G C Shiels voted against the motion (5 votes).

Councillor R A Montgomery abstained.

The Chairman declared the motion carried.

21.2 In accordance with his Notice of Motion, Councillor J F Kerr proposed:

“That this Council urges An Taoiseach and the Dublin government to recognise the exclusion of Irish citizens resident in the Six Counties from exercising their right to participate in Irish presidential elections. Consequently that this Council calls on that government to bring forward the necessary legislation to allow them to vote in elections for the office of President of Ireland.”

The motion was seconded by Councillor J J McPeake and supported by Councillors H E Mullan, P E Groogan, J P O’Neill, S O’Brien and O T Hughes.

Councillor Kerr said that many people felt that they should have this right to vote in the election for the office of President of Ireland. As an Irish Citizen he wished to vote for the Irish President. If he were to stand for Presidency as it was currently, he could not even vote for himself. In order for the motion to proceed, the Chief Executive should write a letter to An Taoiseach and the Dublin Government.

Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea stated that he had no desire to participate in the politics of Southern Ireland.

On a vote being taken, 10 Members voted for the Motion, 5 Members voted against, 1 Member abstained, voting being by show of hands. The Chairman declared the motion carried.

22. RESOLUTION TO It was PROCEED “IN COMMITTEE” PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, and

RESOLVED: that the Council proceed “In Committee”.

Council “In Committee”

23. STAFF MATTERS This item was taken “In Committee”.

Councillors H E Mullan and P E Groogan retired from the meeting at 6.35 pm

24. LEGAL MATTERS This item was taken “In Committee”.

During this item it was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor P McLean, and unanimously

RESOLVED: that Standing Orders be set aside.

25. RESOLUTION TO It was PROCEED IN “OPEN COUNCIL” PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, and

RESOLVED: that proceedings be resumed in “Open Council”.

Proceedings in “Open Council”

It was

PROPOSED by Councillor R A Montgomery, Seconded by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, and

RESOLVED: that the foregoing proceedings of the Council “In Committee” be and they are hereby approved and adopted.

25. SEALING OF The Seal of the Council is hereby affixed to the DOCUMENTS the following documents:

25.1 Transfer of lands at Station Road, Magherafelt (Folio 25110 affected) to Hugh McGuckin, 38 Station Road, Magherafelt.

25.2 Indenture between the Derry and Raphoe Diocesan Trustees to Magherafelt District Council of lease of Plantation adjacent to St Columba’s Church, Draperstown.

26. ITEMS FOR The following items were submitted for the INFORMATION information of Members:-

a) Minutes of Meetings of the North-Eastern Education and Library Board. 67 b) Minutes of Meeting of the Northern Group Building Control Committee held on Wednesday, 3 December 2003. c) Northern Ireland Housing Executive – Executive Briefing – Wednesday, 25 February 2004. d) Press Release of the Northern Health and Social Services Board meeting held in March 2004. e) Letter and Planning Priorities and Actions for the health and Personal Social Services 2004- 2005 (copy circulated to each Member). f) Copy of the Draft Equality Impact Assessment (EQIA) on the Transport Programme for People with Disabilities (TPPD) prepared by the Department of Regional Development. g) Letter, News Release and “A Good Practice Adaptation Guide” from the Northern Ireland Housing Executive. h) Information leaflet prepared by the Department of Finance and Personnel on Rating of Vacant Commercial Property (copy circulated to each Member). i) Letter from the Department of Finance and Personnel, Central Procurement Directorate on assisting small and medium sized enterprises (SME’s) to do business with the public sector and booklet highlighting the barriers that discourage these firms from competing for this business (copy circulated to each Member). j) Copy of letter and two publications produced by Belfast Health Cities –

• Equality in Health, Tackling Inequalities – Understanding the links • Equality in Health, Tackling Inequalities – Case Studies k) Letter and 2003 Annual Review of Business in the Community, Northern Ireland. l) Annual Reports:

1. The Community Foundation in Northern Ireland 2003 2. International Fund for Ireland 2003 3. The Rural Development Council for Northern Ireland. 4. OFREG’s combined Annual Report on Electricity and Gas from 1 January 2002 – 31 March 2003.

It was

PROPOSED by Councillor Rev Dr R T Wm McCrea, Seconded by Councillor P McLean, and unanimously

RESOLVED: that the meeting resume under Standing Orders.

The meeting concluded at 7.15 p.m.

DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION

The foregoing Minutes are hereby Confirmed.

______(Chairman)

______(Date)