Agenda item

The open session resumed at 7.48 pm and the Chairman moved to the three proposed amendments.

A tabled amendment (published online) was proposed by Councillor Bates, seeking to amend recommendation iv and require the Council to review Government guidelines with a view to re-opening Clair Hall, undertake a full review of all community facilities local to  Haywards Heath and Burgess Hill to ensure sufficient provision for all current and future user groups for the time of the District Plan, and to keep Clair Hall available for use until suitable facilitates are made available.

This was seconded by Councillor Eggleston who reserved his right to speak.

Discussion was held on the amendment. during the discussion point of order was raised by a Member and he asked the Member to withdraw his comments.  The Chairman asked Members to respect other Members’ views.

The Deputy Leader reminded Members that removing Clair Hall from the contract would make cost savings and reduce the draw on General Reserves.  

The Cabinet Member for Community noted the high usage of the leisure centres and their benefit to health and wellbeing.

Councillor Eggleston noted the need for a community building in Haywards Heath, and asked for a review, commented on the government guidelines on multi-use facilities and stated that other similar facilities in East Grinstead were open.

The Leader confirmed that officers had been working on a Community Building Strategy before the pandemic and alternative provision for users would be considered. Members asked for a recorded vote. A recorded vote was requested by the requisite number of members. The chairman took members to the vote:

16 Members voted for, 27 Members voted against, 3 abstained and 1 could not be heard.  Therefore, the Chairman announced that the amendment was lost.

A second tabled amendment (published online) was proposed by Councillor Hatton, seeking to add another recommendation that officers prepare a financial analysis and business case to take the running of the leisure centres back in house, a report to come to scrutiny committee by 31 October 2020.    She expressed concern with Places Leisure ability to pay the management fee and asked the Council to look at the viability of bringing the leisure centre management in-house.

The was seconded by Councillor Cartwright who reserved his right to speak.

Discussion was held on the negotiation of the contract and Places Leisure management, and the income derived from the management fee.   

The Cabinet Member for Community confirmed the contract had been agreed following a unanimous vote in February 2014.   The Council might incur huge costs if it sought to withdraw from this, and the priority was to get the centres open.

Councillor Cartwright as seconder expressed concern over governance procedures and stated it was sound business practice to look at alternative options.

The Leader noted it was common practice for local authorities to have leisure management contracts as external providers provide an astute service. Contracts limit risks and liabilities for the Council and can secure provider investment.

The Chairman took Members to a vote on the amendment. 16 Members voted for, 29 Members voted against and 2 abstained.  Therefore, the Chairman announced that the amendment was lost.

The Chairman noted the time and proposed a vote to continue the meeting beyond 9 pm. A point of order was raised, A Member suggested the proposer withdraws the third amendment.Councillor Bennett chose to move the amendment.

The e-vote to continue after 9 pm was carried 45 votes for and 2 against.

After a 5-minute recess the meeting resumed at 8.55 pm.

A third tabled amendment (published online) was proposed by Councillor Alison Bennett, seeking that a representative from each of the four political parties are included in a separate review as referred to in paragraph 42. She supported the opening of the leisure centres but advised that broadening cross party discussions was important.

This was seconded by Councillor Henwood who reserved her right to speak.

Discussion was held on the Council’s governance procedures, the role of the scrutiny committees, the Constitution, and Members representing the residents of the District.

Concern was expressed that the public should see that the Council is fiscally responsible and that the usual governance procedure cannot be applied.

The Leader noted that other councils have made a similar decision using the scheme of officer delegation whereas this administration had opted for transparency and robust governance, and he pointed to regular reports to the Members during the pandemic.  The amendment would create a group which had no constitutional basis and the review mechanism already exists.  If there are significant changes to the current situation reports will be brought to Cabinet and Council. The Leader and Deputy Leader will guide the process and a robust governance structure is in place.

The Chairman took Members to a vote on the amendment. 16 Members voted for, 29 Members voted against and 2 abstained.  Therefore, the Chairman announced that the amendment was lost.

The Chairman returned to the seconder of the original recommendation. 

The Cabinet Member for Environment and Service Delivery thanked the officers for their work over the 3 months of difficult negotiations.  He stated that the Council were obliged to work with Places Leisure to open the leisure centres.  He noted the wellbeing aspect to reopening the centres and the desire to open the centres safely.  He urged Members to accept the recommendations.

The Chairman took Members to a vote on the original recommendations. 46 Members voted for, and 1 abstained.  Therefore, the Chairman announced that the recommendation was agreed.

RESOLVED

Council agree:

(i)         That the negotiated costs associated with the enforced closure of the Council’s leisure centres and their reopening as outlined in paragraphs 31 and 36 and the exempt appendix to this report, are noted;

(ii)        That the mechanism for supporting PL to reopen the leisure centres and manage the costs to the tax payer (as outlined in paragraphs 38 to 43) is agreed;

(iii)       That the costs to this Council resulting from this unprecedented set of circumstances be funded from the General Reserve and reported regularly to Members in the usual way; and

(iv)       That the Council agree to remove Clair Hall from the contract with PL (paragraphs 48 to 55 refer).