Agenda and draft minutes

Scrutiny Committee for Community, Customer Services and Service Delivery - Wednesday, 17th November, 2021 6.00 pm

As of May 2021, decision making of meetings of the Council have returned to in-person sessions. A number of meetings remain virtual, with appropriate Councillors attending via remote video link. Public access to these meetings is via a live stream video through the Council’s official YouTube channel

Venue: Via Remote Video Link

Contact: Email: committees@midsussex.gov.uk 

Items
No. Item

1.

Roll Call and Virtual Meeting Explanation.

Minutes:

The Vice-Chairman carried out a roll call to establish attendance at the meeting. The solicitor to the council provided information on the format of the virtual meeting.

2.

To note Substitutes in Accordance with Council Procedure Rule 4 -Substitutes at Meetings of Committees etc.

Minutes:

Cllr Hatton substituted for Cllr Sparasci.

3.

To receive apologies for absence.

Minutes:

Apologies were received from Cllr Sparasci.

4.

To receive Declaration of Interests from Members in respect of any matter on the Agenda.

Minutes:

Cllr Bennett declared a personal interest in Item 8 – Food Waste Collection as she is a Member of West Sussex County Council who are the waste disposal authority.

5.

To confirm the Minutes of the meetings of the Committee held on 24 March and 6 October 2021. pdf icon PDF 221 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

The minutes of the meeting held on 24 March and 6 October agreed as a correct record and electronically signed by the Chairman.

6.

To consider any items that the Chairman agrees to take as urgent business.

Minutes:

The Chairman had no urgent business.

7.

Draft Terms of Reference for forthcoming Community Governance Reviews of Hurstpierpoint & Sayers Common and Worth Parish Council. pdf icon PDF 116 KB

Additional documents:

Minutes:

Tom Clark, Head of Regulatory Services, introduced the report which informed the Committee that the Council had been petitioned to conduct Community Governance Reviews relating to the Governance and Electoral arrangements for the following: Hurstpierpoint & Sayers Common and Worth Parish Councils. The Council has consulted statutory consultees on the draft Terms of Reference for these Reviews and largely their contributions have been incorporated. There is broad agreement among the parties that the Reviews commence 14 February 2022 as the Local Government Boundary Commission’s Final Recommendations relating to the Electoral Review of Mid Sussex District Council will be published 1 February 2022.

 

The Vice-Chairman endorsed the comments of the Head of Regulatory Services and observed that  the consultation issues must be put to the public in a balanced way.

 

A Member noted the additional text highlighted in red in the report for Worth Parish Council offered two potential outcomes. He said he was aware of two other options; not doing anything or Crawley Down being extracted from Worth Parish Council to form its own Council. He asked whether the two options are unduly restrictive so should the Council not wait until February for the Boundary Commission changes so all of the different potential options can be discussed rather than limiting them in the ToR with two particular options which might not be the only options.

 

Terry Stanley, Business Unit Leader for Democratic Services, confirmed that the Council will be developing full guidance for respondents which will be put before the next meeting of this Committee. He also confirmed that there are indeed four outcomes that can be specified in the guidance for respondents however the addition of the text in the draft ToR was requested by Worth Parish Council as part of the ToR consultation. He noted that if that text were removed it would serve only to expunge the Parish Council’s main contribution.

 

The Member understood the importance of listening to what the Parish Council has asked for, but his belief was that there is not a consensus with the different parties involved in the process. He felt the two options as they stood limited the scope of the ToR and might prejudice some people’s views.

 

The Business Unit Leader for Democratic Services offered to list all four options in order to retain the Parish Council’s contribution and the Member agreed it would be helpful to do so.

 

The Chairman noted that no Member wished to speak so moved to the recommendation to agree the draft Terms of Reference for the Community Governance Review of Hurstpierpoint & Sayers Common which was agreed unanimously. She then moved to the recommendation to agree the draft Terms of Reference for the Community Governance Review of Worth Parish Council, including the amendment for two additional options of not doing anything or Crawley Down being extracted from Worth Parish Council to form its own Council, which was approved unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

 

The Committee:

 

      i.         Subject to the amendments, agreed each of the draft terms of reference.

 

     ii.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

8.

Food Waste Collection. pdf icon PDF 106 KB

Minutes:

Judy Holmes, Assistant Chief Executive, introduced the report which provided an update on the Council’s work to introduce a weekly food waste collection service alongside a restructured residual waste collection frequency in Mid Sussex.

 

A Member suggested that the Council should encourage people to compost which would save money. He noted the triple type collection that they have in Bristol where they collect three varieties on a weekly basis by a multiple-type collection lorry which he presumed was not an option in Mid Sussex.

 

The Chairman highlighted that not every household has the opportunity to compost.

 

Rob Anderton, Divisional Leader for Commercial Services and Contracts, explained that the Council was proposing to bring in a separate food waste vehicle specifically to service the properties on the trial. In respect of composting, the Council endeavours to encourage residents not to produce waste in the first place and, where they do, to compost it before it enters the waste stream.

 

A Member outlined that it is hard to see the finer detail given the movable position the pilot is in. She acknowledged that everyone wants to be much greener and much cleaner in their living and is certain that attitudes on the topic are changing. She asked whether there is a contribution from the packing manufacturers to help with the disposal.

 

The Divisional Leader for Commercial Services and Contracts confirmed that the Extended Producer Responsibility Scheme which is being proposed by government  will require producers who produce certain materials to foot the bill for their collection and disposal; the expectation would be that the Council would receive compensation as a waste collection authority for dealing with the waste. He added that by virtue of being charged for the collection and disposal of the material they send to consumers, the expectation would be that the amount of material consumers receive would reduce over time.

 

A Member drew attention to an apparent consensus of Members who want the pilot to go ahead whilst acknowledging the challenging landscape. He also drew attention to the risk of waiting to decide until the landscape is more settled and asked what could be done in the immediate term. He felt that making a commitment to put something in place so that the Council is committing by a certain point to have a more formal plan for the long term would show other district and borough Councils that Mid Sussex is serious about creating a unified system that works for everyone.

 

Steve Read, Director of Environment and Public Protection at West Sussex County Council, stated that the County Council is keen to move the food waste agenda forward as swiftly as possible and some time ago proposed to support authorities who wanted to move into a trial with the three, two, one collection system as very few counties are using the system. He noted that they are supporting Arun in trailing the three, two, one system and are keen to support Mid Sussex in their trials.

 

A Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 8.

9.

Scrutiny Committee Community, Customer Services and Service Delivery Work Programme 2021/22. pdf icon PDF 260 KB

Minutes:

Tom Clark, Head of Regulatory Services, introduced the report and presented the Work Programme. He noted that the Committee will have two further meetings in the municipal year and that in addition to the two items seen on the February meeting there will Community Governance Reviews’ Terms of Reference after being refined by officers.

 

The Chairman noted that no Member wished to speak so moved to the recommendation to note the Committee’s Work Programme as set out at paragraph 5 of this report which was agreed unanimously.

 

RESOLVED

 

The Committee noted the Work Programme.

 

10.

Questions pursuant to Council Procedure Rule 10.2 due notice of which has been given.

Minutes:

No questions were received.