Agenda and minutes

To receive apologies for non attendance

There were none.

All Members are required to disclose at this point in the meeting or as soon as possible thereafter, any disclosable pecuniary interest or personal interest in any item(s) being considered at this meeting.

There were none.

To sign as a true and correct record the minutes of the meeting held on 5 July 2023.

RESOLVED: That the minutes of the meeting held on 5^th July 2023 be signed as a true and correct record.

It was confirmed that the Digital Strategy report detailed would be presented in November and that work was ongoing to deliver the allotments that were accessable for a lower cost.

(NOTE: The Board is required to receive a deputation(s) on a matter which is before the meeting of the Board provided that notice of the intended deputation and its object shall have been received by the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon on Monday 2 October 2023.  The total time for deputations in favour and against a proposal shall not exceed 10 minutes).

There were none.

(NOTE: The Board is required to allow a total of 15 minutes for questions from Members of the public on matters within the terms of reference of the Board provided that notice of such Question(s) shall have been submitted to the Borough Solicitor by 12 noon on Monday 2 October 2023).

There were none.

The annual treasury report is a requirement of the Council’s reporting procedures and covers the treasury activity for 2022/23 together with an in year review 2023/24. The report also includes the Prudential Indicators for 2022/23 in accordance with the requirements of the Prudential Code.

Consideration was given to a report of the Borough Treasurer that detailed the annual treasury report which covers the treasury activity for 2022/23 and an in year review for 2023/24 and also the prudential indicators for 2022/23 in accordance with the requirements of the Prudential Code.

The Board was advised that the report was presented annually and that the prudential indicators were approved by Policy and Organisation Board and the Treasury Management Strategy by Full Council. The Treasury Management Strategy covers the cash flow activities of the Council and the Prudential Indicators  was related to  the implications of the Council’s decisions of the capital programme on the Council’s finances.

The Board was advised at 2.4.2 the table demonstrated capital expenditure compared the the budget for 2022/23 and how capital much expenditure was financed and unfinanced i.e. i.e future  borrowing.

There were large schemes to be undertaken, such as the bus station, and finance for this was allocated. In addition there were also upcoming schemes with regard to IT systems, financial system upgrades and home working infrastructure which were all planned expenses.

The Board was advised that a project management group had been established to discuss projects corporately, to support the management of milestones, manage spend and awareness as well as board reporting.

The Board was advised this was a robust review of the capital programme.

A Member questioned that there was slippage detailed of 31% which seemed high and that there was other instances of planned worked not delivered and questioned where government funds that had been sat for the residential element of the waterfront development currently sat, as the proposal would not be going ahead. The Board was advised this was not in the capital programme and the money was ring fenced ready to be returned.

A Member questioned the reduction in cash balances and was advised that over the course of the year cash balances reduced as precepts were paid to other authorities and central government grant received in 2021/22 to fund government schemes  such as energy rebate payments were paid out. Early in the year there would be a large balance, which would equal out over the year.

There were some questions about levelling up and whether the Council had been successful in a recent round of funding and it was confirmed that they had not. It was also confirmed that this was not levelling up funding.

RESOLVED: That the Board noted the report

To brief Members regarding the content of the Government’s consultation document ‘Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill: Consultation on Implementation of Plan Making Reforms’ (25^th July 2023)[1] and set out key matters to form the basis of the Council’s formal response to Government

Consideration was given to the report of the Manager of Planning Policy briefing Members regarding the content of the Government’s consultation document ‘Levelling-up and Regeneration Bill: Consultation on Implementation of Plan Making Reforms’ (25^th July 2023) and set out key matters to form the basis of the Council’s formal response to Government.

The Board was advised that the report was presented to the Policy and Organisation Board as it had subsumed the responsibilities of Economic Development Board.

The Regulatory Boards had responsibility for consultation on neighbouring authority’s local plans.

The report set out the proposed response to the Government’s consultation on the proposed changes to the plan making system.

Concern was expressed that there was a significant reduction in time scales for the processes and that there were many points of concern such as sewerage and heritage, and there was concern that the templates would miss something. It was felt that there should be more ability for the Borough to impact on decisions that affected its people.

Members welcomed the report and the significant work that had gone in to it. Members recognised that there were issues such as deep water access that would be important to Gosport Borough Council, but not to inland authorities and it was important that decisions around this remained local.

Members requested that authority be delegated to the Manager of Planning Policy to be more bullish in the response regarding the point about the precedence of local development management policies over national development management policies once they had been subject to examination by a Local Plan inspector.

Members felt that if there was conflict with issues such as deep water requirements, the Local Plan should take priority as it would present sound and clear justification on local issues.

The Board discussed existing SPDs and it was advised that these would remain in place until a new style local plan scheme had been adopted. They would then potentially be annexed but new style Supplementary Documents which are to be examined   would have more weight than the current SPDs.

Members welcomed the response subject to a tightening of the response by the Planning Policy Manager.

RESOLVED: That this Board:

Agrees the responses to the Government’s consultation questions as set out in Appendix 1 of this report subject to the amendments by the Planning Policy Manager.

It was requested that thanks be placed on record to the Planning Policy Manager and the Group Accountant for their significant work on the reports presented.