Agenda item

Cabinet received a report which requested it to consider the recommendations arising from the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny Committee, held 12 March 2014, to consider the call-in regarding the Executive Decision – Update on proposed ground mounted and wind developments at Newborough, Morris Fen and America Farm – FEB14/CAB/16.

Following the Cabinet’s executive decision, made on 24 February 2014, a request to call-in this decision was received on 26 February 2014. This was signed by Councillor David Harrington, Councillor David Sanders and Councillor Ed Murphy.

On 12 March 2014, the call-in request was considered by the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny Committee and the call-in was upheld.

The recommendations from the Scrutiny Committee were that:

‘The decision was to be referred back to Cabinet with the following recommendations:’

1.    That the Wind and Solar Member Working Group consider the Cabinet’s decision when it meets on the 18^th March 2014 and shall report on that decision and the issues raised by the call-in and discussed at this meeting of the Scrutiny Committee, including alternative options; and

2.    That the Cabinet shall not act on the decision made by it on 24^th February 2014 until it has received and considered the report of the Wind and Solar Member Working Group and the comments of the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny Committee on that report.

Councillor Seaton introduced the report and addressed the recommendations arising from the Scrutiny Committee. He stated that the reasons for call-in correlated with the path which was due to be taken in any event, in that it had been agreed that the decision would not be implemented until the Working Group had met.

The Working Group had met on the 18th March and its report, together with the comments from the Scrutiny Committee, would be available for discussion at a future Cabinet meeting.

Cabinet debated the report and comments included:

·         Going forward, energy security would become an increasingly important issue;

·         None of the individuals who had called in the decision were present at the meeting, therefore the importance they placed on the decision was questioned;

·         A number of explanations contained within the report were very technical and would benefit from being simplified. A plain English update could be produced and provided to Members on a monthly/bi-monthly basis;

·         The Working Group was a cross party Group;

·         The reasons for call-in had been somewhat confusing and unclear. Clear guidance should be provided for future call-ins; and

·         If the proposals were successful, they would generate in the region of £6-£8m per annum for the city council to spend on frontline services.

Following debate, the Legal Officer clarified that the Scrutiny Committee had requested Cabinet to allow time for the Working Group to meet and make recommendations to be submitted back to the Environment Capital Scrutiny Committee for consideration, with further recommendations to be made back to Cabinet prior to implementation of the decision made at the meeting in February.

The Legal Officer further advised that she would contact the Working Group to ensure that a more detailed timetable was put forward, this would provide a clear timeframe in order to obtain an effective decision.

Cabinet considered the report and RESOLVED:

To consider the recommendations arising from the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny meeting of 12 March 2014 and confirmed that it would not act upon the decision made by it on 24 February 2014 until it had received and considered the report of the Wind and Solar Member Working Group and the comments of the Sustainable Growth and Environment Capital Scrutiny committee on that report.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION

As per the Council’s Constitution, Part 4, Section 8 – Scrutiny Rules of Procedure, Paragraph 13.7 ‘if having considered the request for call-in of the decision, the Scrutiny Committee or Scrutiny Commission is still concerned about it, then it may refer it back to the decision making person or body for reconsideration, setting out in writing the nature of its concerns, or it may refer the matter to full Council’.

The Scrutiny Procedure Rules continued that ‘if referred back to the decision taker, they shall then reconsider within a further ten working days, amending the decision or note, before adopting a final decision. Once a decision has been reconsidered by the decision taker if may not be the subject of a further call-in’.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED

There were no alternative options considered in this instance.