Agenda and minutes

            The Minutes of held on 4^th March 2010 were taken as read and signed as a correct record.

            The Board considered a report of the Chief Executive which sought a request be made to the Council to introduce a byelaw on the minimum price of alcohol.

            It was reported that there was currently no national legislation which imposed a minimum unit price for alcohol or made it possible for local authorities to impose a minimum price.

            It was noted that the Council had been contacted by the campaigning organisation “Our Life” with a view to introducing a byelaw to impose a minimum unit price of 50p per unit for the sale of alcohol. Other local authorities in the North West were also being approached. Appended to the report for information was a paper that provided the case for minimum pricing.

            It was further noted that the proposal was to further develop a model byelaw which would be approved by the Secretary of State and which then could be adopted by local authorities knowing that they would be confirmed by the Secretary of State. The Board was advised that there was a risk such a byelaw was unlikely to be approved by the Secretary of State for reasons, which were outlined in the report.

            The Board considered whether the Authority should get involved with campaigning for change in the general law and it was noted that proposal did not cut across the jurisdiction of the Regulatory Committee.

            RESOLVED: That

1)           the Executive Board support the introduction of a byelaw on the minimum price of alcohol;

2)           subject to the approval of Full Council the Chief Executive be authorised to take all necessary steps to introduce a byelaw on the minimum price of alcohol; and

3)           the Chief Executive be authorised to support the efforts of other local authorities and organisations in achieving a minimum price for the sale of alcohol.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Resources and the Strategic Director, Adult and Community which set out joint recommendations from Corporate Services Policy and Performance Board and the Business Efficiency Board for the development of locality working in Halton following the end of the Neighbourhood Management pilots.

            It was reported that the Council’s Executive Board in December 2009 agreed to support the creation of a working group to consider how locality working should operated and be funded in Halton when Neighbourhood Management funding ceased to be available from Central Government and that the working group receive evidence from a wide range of partners across Halton and report their findings to the Local Strategic Parntnership and Executive Board.

            The Board was advised that the group made recommendations to roll out locality working to the whole Borough based on the current Area Forum footprint. Members were informed that these recommendations were endorsed by a joint meeting of the Business Efficiency Board and Corporate Services Policy and Performance Board on 18^th March 2010.

            The full report and recommendations were appended to the report for information in addition to the response from partners and it was reported that there was a very strong view from the three representatives of registered social landlords that there should be a resident presence on the locality partnership boards so that residents had some direct input to strategic decision making.

            Members were advised that a letter had been distributed to clarify that the reduction in monies from Area Forum allocations would be on a percentage basis 7.5% less carried across each Area Forum.

            RESOLVED: That

(1)             the report on Locality Working in Halton be noted; and

(2)    the following recommendations are adopted.

i)    Councillors each Area Forum consider the suggestions in the report on Locality Working (appended) for refreshing the way in which public meetings were conducted in order to increase attendance and engagement;

ii)   Area Forums were renamed to emphasise the new approach (working title Locality Area Forums);

iii)  each Locality Area Forum established a Locality Partnership Board to meet at least 3 times a year comprising local councillors and partner agencies;

iv)  each Locality Area Forum conducted an annual review in consultation with partner agencies to identify priority actions for the area;

v)   a Locality Working Co-ordinating Group be established for the whole Borough with at least one Councillor from each area forum and representatives of key partners to review the operation of these arrangements twice yearly;

vi)  a sum of £45,000 is top-sliced from the combined budget of the Area Forums annually to supplement the funding for Community Development support to the forums; and

vii) a marketing strategy is developed for Locality Area Forums.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Young People which set out the fulfilment of the requirement under the School Standards and Framework Act 1998, the Education Act 2002, the Education and Inspections Act, 2006 and associated regulations, to determine Halton Local Authority’s (LAs) School Admissions Policy for LA maintained community and voluntary controlled schools, and co-ordinated admission schemes for all primary and secondary schools for September 2011 following statutory consultation.

            It was noted that the LA also consulted on the admission arrangements to its maintained nursery schools for the September 2011 intake.

            Members were advised that the Government now required Local Authorities to manage the In-Year Admissions process for children moving between schools during the academic year from September 2010 onwards and the consultation paper was issued alongside the above consultation paper seeking views on an appropriate model.

            It was further noted that in January 2010 a statutory required consultation paper on the proposed admission arrangements and co-ordinated admission schemes for the September 2011 intake was issued. A copy of this consultation was appended to the report for information. The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report, together with information regarding implications for policies and the Council’s priorities.

            The Board discussed the sensitivity issues encountered during the admission process.  There was a slight spike in population of school children, in terms of admissions, this year which was expected to reduce next.  Concerns were raised over children having to travel further to attend schools.  In response it was noted that as parents accepted or declined places, nearer school places may become available for some children. Out of a total 3500 preferences only 13 had raised concerns. 

REASONS FOR DECISION

            The decision was statutorily required and any revision to the proposed arrangements may adversely affect school place planning as detailed in 7.1 of the report.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

            Other options considered and rejected included the allocation of places through random allocation (lottery) as this method could be seen as arbitrary and random.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE

            The Policy allied for the September 2011 academic intake and would apply for three years unless further central of local government changes were required.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the Board approves the School Admissions Policy Admission Arrangements and co-ordinated schemes for admission to primary and secondary schools for the 2011/12 academic year; and

2)                 the Board approves the adoption of the In-Year Co-ordinated Admissions Scheme as statutorily required for September 2010 onwards.

(NB: Councillor Nelson declared a personal interest in the following item due to being the Chair of Governors for the Grange School). 

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Young People which summarised the response to the statutory consultation undertaken on Primary Special Education Unit (SEN) Provision in Halton. An outline of the decision making process was included in the report for information.

            Members were advised that the review of SEN units resulted in a set of proposals designed to provide flexible provision within mainstream schools that allowed pupils to spend as much time as possible learning alongside their peers, depending on their individual needs.

            It was noted that consultation took place in March 2009 and the feedback from the initial consultation had led to revised proposals with a second round of consultation in June 2009 after approval to commence consultation on the revised proposals which was given by Executive Board in 2009. Detailed in the report for information were the provisions that were proposed. The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report in addition to a copy of the statutory notice and proposal for information.

            It was reported that there had been 137 responses to the formal consultation with 135 responses in support of the proposals published in the statutory notice.

            Members were advised that the decision maker (Executive Board) must decide the proposals within two months of the end of the representation period otherwise the decision must be referred to the adjudicator for a decision. Appended to the report for information were details of the issues the decision maker needed to consider.

            The report also set out the proposals in detail for each school that would be affected by the proposals.

            The Board noted that all parties involved had been consulted despite reports in the local press to the contrary. Members discussed and welcomed the increased provision set out in the review.

REASONS FOR DECISION

            To enable the process to be completed within statutory timescales. Decision to proceed to implementation must be made within two months of the end of the formal consultation.

            Mainstream Primary SEN units are not matching the present and future requirements of the Borough. At present, there are surplus places within Primary mainstream SEN units.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

            To leave provision as it is. This would leave vulnerable to challenge on the basis of need and value for money.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE

            Approval to proceed with the proposals for primary SEN unit provision must be agreed within two months of the end of the six weeks statutory notice period (21^st April 2010). Implementation in September 2011 to be in line with the implementation of the agreed Secondary resourced provision.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 to receive the report on the proposals for Primary SEN Unit provision; and

2)                 to approve the proposals, in line with the response to the formal consultation, within the statutory timescale of two months from the end of the representation period (deadline 24^th April 2010).

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Young People which set out the response to the statutory consultation to make a prescribed alteration to expand The Heath A Specialist Technology College from 1^st September 2013 so that it could offer 1350 with a proposed published admission number of 270. It was noted the report also sought a decision from the Board on the proposal.

            Members were advised that during the consultation on future secondary provision in Halton, it was agreed that The Heath Specialist Technology College be expanded so that once the BSF building work had been completed the school would provide 270 places per year with a total of 1350 places for 11 – 16 year olds.

            Detailed in the report were the aims of the proposals to expand the size of The Heath Specialist School. The consultation procedure undertaken was outlined in the report in addition to the details of the 63 responses which had been received.

            Members were advised that the fourth bullet point in paragraph 3.2 of the report should have read as follows: Reduce the number of pupils choosing to access secondary education outside the borough.

            It was further noted that the decision maker (Executive Board) must decide the proposal within two months of the end of the representation period otherwise the decision must be referred to the Adjudicator for a decision. Appended to the report was a copy of the statutory proposal details of the consultation and the issues the decision maker needed to consider. It was also noted that the decision must be given whether it was approved or rejected and should include the factors and criteria for the decision. Details of who copies of the decision must be sent to were outlined in the report.

REASON FOR DECISION

            To provide more choice and diversity and retain pupils within the Borough.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

            N/A.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE

            The decision needed to be made by 1^st May 2010.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the school be enlarged, as part of the Halton BSF programme and The Heath School be rebuilt and refurbished; and

2)                 the proposed capacity of the school will increase to 1350 from 1^st September 2013 and the proposed admission number increased to 270.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Children and Young People which informed members of the abolition of the Learning and Skills Council (LSC) under the Apprenticeship Skills Children and Learning Bill (ACSL) and transfer of statutory duty and powers to Local Authorities from April 2010.

            It was reported that on 1^st April 2010, the LSC would be abolished and all functions previously carried out by the LSC with respect to 16 – 19 education and training would transfer either to local authorities or the Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA). A number of brand new duties and powers for local authorities would be created.

            It was noted that local authorities would have the central commissioning role for all education and training for young people aged 16 – 19 and up to the age of 25 for those with learning difficulties, and for those people in youth custody aged 10 to 18.

            Members were advised that the Strategic Director for Children and Young People had now assumed lead commissioning responsibility for Post 16 Education and Training in the Borough and sat on the Riverside College Board which was the major provider of post 16 education in Halton. It was noted that this would not be appropriate from 1^st April 2010 when the Council would assume statutory commissioning responsibility due to inherent conflict of interest.  The role was recommended to go to the Operational Director – Employment, Economic Regeneration and Business Development.  This would be subject to a suitability interview by Riverside College Board.

            Appended to the report for information were the key responsibilities for partners who were central to the commissioning process. The transferred LSC posts and resources would be fully funded through a Special Purposes Grant along with a contribution towards non employment costs would be made. Key documents that had been published that would support the transition were referred to in the report.

            It was further reported that the 14 – 19 reform programme was a substantial element of the transfer. Details of this transfer were outlined in the report for information.

            Members were further informed of the transition from the LSC to the Skills Funding Agency (SFA) which would be established to take on the post 19 functions of the LSC. It was reported that the SFA would route around £3.5 billion of funding to further education colleges and other providers including the Third Sector, primarily in response to customer (employer and learner) choice on programmes such as Train to Gain. It was further noted that the SFA would operate through three customer focused gateways which were outlined in the report for information.

            The report also set out the Delivery Plan, policy implications and commissioning details.

            The Board discussed the amount of funding provided to ensure every young person was engaged in training or education in terms of whether it was a sufficient amount.  In reply it was noted that the provisions and progress would be monitored closely by the Council. 

REASONS FOR DECISION  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director,  Children and Young People which recognised the significant contribution that the Playbuilder Project had made in respect of National Indicator N199.

            It was noted that 13 play areas had been delivered over the first two years of the scheme, details of which were outlined in the report for information, and considerable positive feedback had been received.

            The proposed 9 sites for 2010/11 were set out in the report for consideration. Members were advised that successful delivery of the Playbuilder project would make a significant contribution to embed play in local policy in particular to National Indicator N199 (Satisfaction with Outdoor Play Facilities).

            Arising from the discussion it was noted that the Tell Us Survey had reported a 10% increase in satisfaction levels and the Board wished to note its thanks to the team from the Children and Young People Directorate and broader Council involved in developing the sites and innovative new designs of the play areas and the positive effect they have had on the Borough.

REASONS FOR DECISION

            To agree (8) projects to be progressed in Playbuilder Project year 3.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED AND REJECTED

            N/A.

IMPLEMENTATION DATE

            Three year capital programme with annual capital allowance. Implementation of year 3 projects to be completed by 31^st March 2011.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the Executive Board note the progress, especially in respect of National Indicator N199; and

2)                 agree proposals for 9 year 3 projects.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Adult and Community which set out the Prevention and Early Intervention Strategy.

            It was reported that the Prevention and Early Intervention Strategy was important as it aimed to address some of the challenges that Health and Social Care would face in the future. The Strategy was appended to the report for information.

            It was further noted that a number of National documents had been identified to support the shift towards prevention services and the Local Prevention and Early Intervention Strategy aimed to identify the direction of travel in Halton. Members were advised that a series of consultation events had already been undertaken details of which were outlined in the report. In addition to these events a number of one to one meetings and a multi-agency steering group were carried out to ensure that a wide range of views were covered.

            It was further noted that the Prevention and Early Intervention Strategy complemented a range of other policy documents, both nationally and locally to help shape services. Therefore, the main elements of this Strategy were reflected in the documents appended to the report.

            RESOLVED: That the Prevention and Early Intervention Strategy be received.

(NB: Councillor Gerrard declared a personal and prejudicial interest in the following item due to being an independent lay member on the Community Health Services Provider Organisation and left the room during its discussion).

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Adult and Community and the Strategic Director, Children and Young People which advised members of the Department of Health’s announcements surrounding the modernisation of the NHS and put forward proposals that the Council, in conjunction with St. Helens Council could deliver community health and social care services currently provided by NHS Halton and St. Helens.

            It was reported that in 2009 the NHS publicised how it intended to develop and modernise its NHS services. This set out a five-year vision for the NHS and on 16^th December 2009, the Department of Health (DH) published the “NHS Operational Framework” guidance for PCTs which described the National priorities, system requirements and a timetable for delivery. The five National key priorities were set out in the report.

            It was reported that DH had identified a number of “vital signs” that was a range of system leavers and enablers as well as mechanisms to ensure delivery of National priorities. This had been produced in a tiered approach which was detailed in the report for information.

            The DH had also outlined their approach to workforce described their reforms for commissioning and provided details of how this would be achieved.

            The process to partner and options was detailed in the report in that the Strategic Health Authority and DH had issued some broad guidelines for PCTs to adopt when considering partner arrangements and contact management. In addition, the PCT had produced detailed guidance on the selection criteria and processes and invited organisations to bid for their services.

            It was further reported that after preliminary discussions with the Council and with St. Helens, three options were possible and were detailed in the report for information. The report outlined that Option 2 appeared the most viable as it presented less risk, could yield greater efficiency and, if delivered effectively, could provide a greater range of health improvements within the Borough.

            Members were advised that initial expressions of interest had been invited by the PCT, and the Council recently presented proposals to the PCT outlining the benefits of Option 2. The PCT had now invited the Council to develop a full specification for the delivery of:

·        Services for Children and Families (excluding Midwifery)

·        Health and Well Being Services

·        Rehabilitation and Long Term Neurological Services

            RESOLVED: That the Executive Board

1)                 note the current position report;

2)                 agree to pursue Option 2 to a worked up specification ; and

3)                 that a more detailed and comprehensive report be submitted to a future Executive Board for approval.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Adults and Community which set out the revised Blue Badge Policy, Procedure and Practice document.

            It was reported that the review of the Blue Badge Policy Procedure and Practice had been carried out in conjunction with Direct Link and the Contact Centre who were responsible for administering the Scheme on behalf of the Directorate.

            The Scheme provided a national arrangement of parking concessions to some people with disabilities who travelled either as drivers or passengers. It was noted the Scheme allowed badge holders to park close to their destination without charge or time limit in the on-street parking environment and for up to three hours on yellow lines, unless a loading ban was in place.

            Members were advised that in January 2008 the Department for Transport (DfT) published the current Guidance for Local Authorities on the Blue Badge Scheme and the Guidance intended to promoted assessment and enforcement of the Scheme in order to promote consistency and prevent fraud and abuse.

            The reasons for reviewing the Blue Badge Policy Procedure and Practice were outlined in the report in addition to details of the main changes.

            Appended to the report for information was a comprehensive Blue Badge Scheme Policy Procedure and Practice.

            RESOVLED: That the revised Blue Badge Policy, Procedure and Practice at Appendix 1 to the report be endorsed.

            The Board received the report of the Strategic Director, Adults and Community which presented the draft report of the Scrutiny Review of Adaptations for Disabled People and resultant revised Policy for consideration by the Board.

            Members considered the Scrutiny Review of Adaptations for Disable People which was appended to the report and had been commissioned by the Healthy Halton Policy and Performance Board. A Scrutiny Review Working Group had been established with four members from the Board, an Officer from the Finance Team and Officers from the Halton Home Improvement and Independent Living Service.

            The process of the scrutiny review was carried out between April 2009 and January 2010 and was set out in the report for information. Also detailed in the report was the Adults and Community Housing Adaptations Policy the Major and Minor Adaptations Procedure and Practice Guidance and details of how the policies and procedures had been developed.

            The Board welcomed the review as it demonstrated an excellent example of good scrutiny and agreed to endorse the review.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the Scrutiny Review and its recommendations be endorsed; and

2)                 the Board endorse the Housing Adaptations Policy and the Procedures and Practice Guidance for Major and Minor Adaptations as attached at Appendices 2, 3 and 4 to the report.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Environment and Economy which sought to gain the approval of the Executive Board of the content of the Halton Local Transport Plan (LTP3). Challenges and Opportunities document for the purposes of a four week period of consultation.

            It was reported that LTPs were initially introduced by the Transport Act 2000 which set a statutory requirement for local transport authorities to produce an LTP every five years and keep it under review. Halton Borough Council as a Unitary Authority was the transport authority for the area of Halton and, as such, was required to produce an LTP. It was further noted that the current LTP ran until March 2011 with the third LTP (LTP3) due to commence in April 2011.

            Members were advised that as required by the 2008 Local Transport Act, LTP3 would be in two parts, details of which were set out in the report for information. It was reported that Halton would be producing an individual LTP3 but it had been recognised that working in partnership with the Merseyside Integrated Transport Authority (Merseytravel) or ITA which was statutorily obliged to produce the LTP on behalf of itself and the Merseyside Districts would be beneficial for the sub-region.

            The report set out the policy framework, the preparation required for LTP3, the anticipated challenges and opportunities, the proposed consultation  strategy and the next steps.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the LTP3 Challenges and Opportunities document be approved, for the purposes of a four-week period of consultation; and

2)                 further editorial and technical amendments that did not materially affect the content of the LTP3 Challenges and Opportunities document be agreed by the Operational Director, Highways, Transportation and Logistics, in consultation with the Executive Board Member for Planning, Transportation, Regeneration and Renewal, as necessary, before the document is published for consultation.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Environment and Economy which sought approval to the inclusion of the 2010/11 Transport Capital Implementation Programme into the Council’s 2010/11 Capital Programme.

            It was reported that during the period of the first Local Transport Plan (LTP 2001/2 – 2005/6) the amount of LTP funding allocated was, in part, dependent on annual assessments of the progress that each authority had made in delivering its LTP.

            It was noted that the commencement of the second LTP brought with it much less rigorous reporting requirements based upon a collaborative approach between the DfT and the local authorities, to enable weakness in progress to be jointly addressed and strengths built upon.

            Members were advised that the new approach required the de-coupling of the link between funding and performance which  resulted in the DfT in its November 2007 settlement letter confirming the block allocations for the period 2008/9 – 2010/11 for both Integrated Transport Capital and Highways Capital Maintenance.

            Detailed in appendix A to the report was the Transport Implementation Programme for 2010/2011 with the sum of £9,412,114 to be incorporated into the Council’s Capital Programme.

            Outlined in the report was the following allocations for 2010/11:

• LTP Integrated Transport Allocation £1,767,000;
• Additional funding from national Primary Route Network £14,2888,000;
• Bridge Strenghtening and Maintenance allocation £4,980,000;
• Capital Programme for bringing streets to adoptable standard £100,000;
• Council’s capital “Flood Defence” Programme £100,000;
• “Street Lighting” Capital programme £200,000; and
• Road Safety Grant (which would be paid as a capital grant) £75,114

Arising from the discussion Members discussed the Safer Roads Partnership and the decrease in deaths on roads in addition to the remedial works being carried out on Silver Jubilee Bridge and agreed that a presentation regarding the bridge works would be welcomed.

            RESOLVED: That the Executive Board recommend the Council to approve the incorporation of the Transport Implementation Programme for 2010/11 as detailed in Appendix A in the sum of £9,412,114 into the Council’s 2010/11 Capital Programme.

            Members considered a report of the Strategic Director, Adults and Community which sought to determine a way forward for the provision of services at the venue previously known as Widnes Recreation Club.

            It was noted that Widnes Recreation Club was originally founded by ICI as a Sports and Social Club for their employees in Widnes. The Club was a non-profit organisation and re-invested income in the Clubhouse and encouraged sporting and community activity.

            Members were advised in recent years the Club had struggled to survive financially due to a combination of lack of income primarily through the Social Club and the increasing burden of coping with urgent and renewed works. The Members of the Club resolved that on 9^th December 2009 to cease trading on 31^st December. At that point the lease was surrendered back to the Council.

            It was further noted that the Council gave an undertaking to ensure that the operation of the pitches and changing rooms would continue, irrespective of the future of the Club. This commitment had been honoured. It was reported that at the point of closure there were 7 major sports, 24 sections, 55 teams and over 600 participants who used the sporting facilities on a regular basis. There were also a significant community usage of the indoor facilities ranging from snooker, darts, photography, table tennis, indoor bowling and dance. It was understood that most of the indoor groups had been successful in finding alternative premises.

            Members were advised that the Council needed to consider the future of the site and the proposal now was to seek expressions of interest to undertake the management and development of the site in line with Halton priorities. The ownership of the site would remain with the Council and suggestions were detailed in the report for consideration.

            The Board discussed safety of the building in terms of Anti-Social Behaviour and vandalism and noted that the Council’s Property Services Department where keeping the building secure.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the Strategic Director of Adults and Community, in conjunction with the portfolio holders for Environment, Leisure and Sport and Corporate Services be authorised to market test for expressions of interest to develop the Widnes Recreation Club site; and

2)                 following market testing, the Strategic Director and Portfolio holder be authorised to move to letting a lease in line with the approach as itemised in Paragraph 4 of the report.

            The Board received the report of the Strategic Director, Resources which set out the proposed the proposed Calendar of Meetings for the 2010/11 Municipal Year appended to the report for information.

            RESOLVED: That the Council be recommended to approve the Calendar of Meetings for the 2010/2011 Municipal Year as appended to the report.

            Members considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources which presented a draft of the Council’s People Strategy for consideration and comment. It was reported that the Council had initiated two processes that had a significant impact on the way it organised itself as in:

1)     the Efficiency Review which was changing the way the Council worked; and

2)     the work with the Leadership Centre to improve the way that the Council’s Management Team and Executive Board and in particular make space for the development of strategic policy, complemented by the advice from Sensei UK to Management Team on managing change.

            It was noted that Halton Borough Council was developing a People Strategy as this was a major factor in any organisation’s ability to implement change and would be dependent upon the availability and potential of its workforce. The strategy had been prepared by a cross-directorate working group and included representatives from Trades Unions.

            It was further noted that the People Strategy was founded upon the principle that developing the people best develops organisations for example if the people were well trained and well motivated they would feel they were being treated well and then organisational performance would follow. The report also set out what a People Strategy was, the purpose of a People Strategy and the implications of the Strategy.

            The Board was advised that this was an essential piece of work and was relevant at this point in time in the authority and welcomed the report.

            RESOLVED: That the People Strategy for Halton Borough Council be approved.

            The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Corporate and Policy which set out a new policy framework for Information Governance within the Council. Members were advised that the Council had a Corporate Information Governance Group which had met over the last year to produce a user friendly information guidance document. A range of Workshops had been held to develop policies and guidance for areas services which were outlined in the report.

            It was reported that following this work a range of new or revised policy documents had been produced together with the Corporate Information Governance User Handbook (CIGUH) and were appended to the report for consideration.

            It was further noted that following the formal approval of the CIGUH the Handbook with links to the Council’s policy documents embedded in the Handbook, would be available on the intranet and this document would effectively act as the Council Policy for Information Guidance. Various ways on which the CIGUH and allied guidance would be communicated was set out in the report for information.

            RESOLVED: That the new Corporate Information Governance Handbook and Allied Procedures be endorsed.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Resources which set out the Corporate Customer Service Standards for the Authority. It was noted that in February 2008 the Cabinet Office launched its approach to improving standards within Customer Services with the introduction of the Customer Service Excellence Standards to replace the Charter Mark.  At this time the Authority was undertaking a scrutiny review of Corporate Customer Complaints and at its meeting on 3^rd June 2008 the Corporate Services Policy and Performance Board (PPB) recommended that the Complaints review be followed up by a scrutiny review of the Customer Services taking on board the new Customer Service Excellence Standards.

            Two strands to the Scrutiny Topic were outlined in the report for consideration.

            The Customer Service Strategy was completed, supported and passed on by the Corporate Services PPB for its meeting on 15^th January 2009 where it was approved. It was further noted that first actions from the Customer Services Strategy Action Plan involved the procurement of a company to work with the Council in the pursuit of the Customer Services Excellence Standard. In April 2009 a company called Customer Services Excellence Assessment Services (CSEAS) was appointed.

            Members were advised that the Council took a step by step approach to accreditation that would build information and involvement from one stage to the next. Detailed in the report were the steps taken and progress made to date including the approach for monitoring the standards across the Council, the full programme of promotional activities and details of the developments of promotional materials for a media release.

            Members were advised that the Council already had a good level of customer services. However the Corporate Standards would help to build on the current position and it was proposed that these Standards would be approved by the Executive Board to progress with the development of related training, communication and monitoring aspects and the pursuit of accreditation of the Cabinet Office Customer Services Excellence Standard.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 approve and draft the Corporate Customer Service Standards and Guidance Notes for staff; and

2)                 continue to support the process to develop, promote and monitor the Standards, as part of gaining accreditation of the Cabinet Office Customer Service Excellence Standard as outlined in the report.

The Board considered:

(1)       whether Members of the press and public should be excluded from the meeting of the Board during consideration of the following item of business in accordance with Sub-Section 4 of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 because it was likely that, in view of the nature of the business to be considered, exempt information would be disclosed, being information defined in Section 100 (1) and paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972; and

(2)       whether the disclosure of information was in the public interest, whether any relevant exemptions were applicable and whether, when applying the public interest test and exemptions, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighed that in disclosing the information.

            RESOLVED: That as, in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item of business in accordance with Sub-Section 4 of Section 100A of the Local Government Act 1972 because it is likely that, in view of the nature of the business, exempt information will be disclosed, being information defined in Section 100 (1) and paragraph 3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972.

            The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Environment and Economy which set out details of the pilot Recycling Reward Scheme that had been operating in Halton since October 2009.

            RESOLVED: That

1)                 the roll out of the Recycle Bank Recycling Reward Scheme in Halton be approved;

2)                 Executive approve the financial expenditure required to deliver the scheme as detailed within the report;

3)                 AMCS be appointed to retrofit RFID tags to wheeled bins to facilitate the Recycling Reward Scheme; and

4)                 the Strategic Director for Environment be authorised, in consultation with the Executive Board Members for Environment, Leisure and Sport and Corporate Services to take all steps necessary to develop and implement the Recycling Reward Scheme in Halton, including the agreement of all necessary contractual arrangements.

MINUTES ISSUED: 9 April 2010

CALL IN: 16 April 2010

Any matter decided by the Executive Board may be called in no later than 16 April 2010