Meeting documents

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 July, 2015 attached as Appendix A.

RESOLVED –

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 14 July, 2015, be approved as a correct record.

Members to declare any interests.

There were none.

Councillor Mordue

Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Compliance

To consider the report attached as Appendix B.

Contact Officer:  David Thomas (01296) 585158

It was normal practice for Councils, and other employers, to indemnity all of their employees against any expenses, liability, loss, claim or proceedings arising from doing, or not doing, something in the course of their employment (other than conduct of a reckless or wilful nature) whether they were acting for the Council itself or another person or body with the Council’s consent.  A number of exceptions and other conditions applied to this indemnity and this would be detailed in the Indemnity Resolution.

AVDC, in line with other businesses, had put in place an indemnity resolution, passed by the Personnel Committee in 1997, although it had not been reviewed for 16 years.  It was important for the Council to update it to reflect changes in legislation and the regulatory framework since 1997.  There were several sets of regulation where both the authority and individuals might be in a position to have to defend themselves against criminal proceedings where there was a ‘reverse burden of proof’, i.e. where it was for the defendant to convince the court that they had done enough to comply with the law.

A recent incident at the Depot had highlighted the need to update what is an outdated policy.  For example, levels of fines and costs had increased significantly since 1999 with the council having to ensure that it is capable of defending itself adequately.  Since the recent review by the Sentencing Council, far more severe sentences were being actively sought for health and safety offences including 32 custodial sentences since November 2014.

Included at Appendix 1 to the Cabinet report was the recommended text for an updated Indemnity Resolution.  Opportunity had been taken to increase the applicability with regards to the Road Traffic Act and other primary Fire and Health and Safety Legislation with our insurers via our Insurance Officer.  The wording of the indemnity covered both the applicability of the Council’s existing Employers’ Liability Policy (Appendix 2 to the Cabinet report) and should AVDC have a different insurance provider in the future.

Cabinet was mindful that recent reviews of criminal justice and the reduction of legal aid meant that courts were less likely to award costs if someone was acquitted.  This review had been part of a wider review of Health and Safety including the Council’s ‘Critical Incident Plan’ and health and safety arrangements.

There was also no cover for a breach of Environmental Legislation such as the Environmental Protection Act 1990, for which the Council would have to meet any defence costs from reserves.

RESOLVED –

That Aylesbury Vale District Council’s ‘Indemnity Resolution’ be updated, as detailed at Appendix 1 to the Cabinet report.

Councillor Mordue

Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Compliance

To consider the report attached as Appendix C.

Contact Officer: Paul Marston-Weston (01296) 585116

(a)       Decision(s)

(1)       That the financial terms and other proposals set out in the Cabinet report for the management and operation of the Aylesbury Waterside Theatre by the Ambassador Theatre Group be approved.

(2)       That Officers be instructed to progress the required updated contract documentation with the Ambassador Theatre Group.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

The negotiated new terms and financial agreement are considered the best terms available at this time and provide the Council with a much improved financial arrangement and also provide for a further review in 5 years time.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

The Contract Review has included a comprehensive report by a Theatre and Arts Consultancy, Artservice.  The options of re-tender the contract, establish a charitable trust, consider in house operation, partnering with an existing trust or local authority or including in a larger cultural/leisure contract have all been considered.  The option to re-negotiate with ATG was recommended by the Consultant.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services Scrutiny Committee. A report on this matter will be submitted to the scrutiny committee meeting on 12 October 2015.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Cabinet received a report advising Members of the outcome of the 5 year review of the Aylesbury Waterside Theatre contract, that had looked at the proposed financial terms of the management contract and other items jointly proposed by the Council and the Ambassador Theatre Group (ATG).

The five year review of the Aylesbury Waterside Theatre (AWT) contract with the Ambassador Theatre Group (ATG) had been conducted in accordance with the provisions of the current 15 year contract.  Prior to review meetings being held, a comprehensive review looking at the original submission from ATG and the actual delivery over the last 5 years had been conducted by a specialist Theatre and Arts Consultancy, Artservice.  That review had reached the conclusion that ATG had delivered a first class programme of events and productions but due to a number of factors, primarily the worldwide recession and less disposable income since 2010, it had taken considerably longer to build audiences, group bookings and repeat business than was expected at the time of the bid.  A copy of the detailed Artservice report had been included with the confidential section of the Cabinet agenda, given the commercial details it contained.

Options for the Council that Artservice had considered had included re-tendering the management contract, establishing a charitable trust, in house operation, partnering with an existing trust or local authority or including in a larger cultural/leisure contract.  In terms of the way forward, the report had recommended the continuation of the current agreement with ATG, via re-negotiation of the lease and terms of the management agreement as the most sensible option.  This would  allow the Council to continue the good relationship it had built up with ATG and to build on the foundations laid in the first 4-5 years of operation.  The option of granting a longer lease should also be explored with a view to encouraging some capital investment in the Theatre to upgrade and re-design key areas of operation with a view to increasing income from ancillary trading, hires and events and making the second space more suitable for live arts use by amateur, community and educational organisations.

Regarding the management fee, the consultant had commented that the annual subsidy paid to ATG was in line with the national average for this type of management arrangement. However there might be scope to reduce it if the Theatre could build on the encouraging estimated financial outturn for 2014/15, and if it could increase income from ticket sales and ancillary trading and events.  There was a limit to how much cost cutting was advisable in flexible areas of the budget such as staffing and marketing, as cutting costs further could have a negative impact on performance and, especially on the Theatre's ability to generate increased ticket sales; to undertake commercial development function; and to increase trading income.

In terms of other operators, there were only 1 or 2 comparable theatre management companies in the market place.  ATG was the accepted market leader and was also the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Councillor Mrs J Blake

Cabinet Member for Business Transformation

To consider the report attached as Appendix D.

Contact Officer:  Andy Barton (01296) 585430

(a)       Decision(s)

(1)       That approval be given for AVDC to launch an online Vale Lottery, as detailed in the Cabinet report.

(2)       That the Chief Executive, after consultation with the Cabinet Member for Business Transformation, be authorised to agree the final arrangements for launching the online Vale Lottery.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

To help in addressing the budgetary pressures facing the council in the future, and to enable community groups to ‘self help’ by gaining access to their own lottery within the Vale Lottery umbrella scheme.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

A number of different delivery options were detailed in the Cabinet report and these were taken into account in making the decisions.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services Scrutiny Committee.  However as this matter will be considered by full Council, it is not subject to call-in.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Cabinet received a report seeking agreement to the launch of an on-line Vale Lottery to help fund discretionary support to the local voluntary and community sector (VCS) and to enable good causes to raise funds directly.  AVDC was seeking to become the first council in the country to run a lottery in this form.

AVDC had historically provided substantial financial support for the VCS across the Vale, helping to deliver a number of corporate aims, and currently distributed around £1m p.a. through Service Level Agreements as well as through Community Chest grants (ending in 2017) and other one off support.

As budget pressures continued to grow on all aspects of the council’s work there would inevitably be an impact on the funding available for good causes during the medium term. The concept of an AVDC lottery had been considered for some time as a partial new source of income to help mitigate budget pressures, however the struggle with its development had been a combined one of how this would be delivered, and how it would fit with existing funding for good causes. The report addressed these issues and provided a model for implementation of a Vale Lottery.

The concept of a Vale Lottery also fitted in with the ethos of the Council’s New Business Model (NBM) approach to exploring new ways of increasing income, reducing processes, bureaucracy and costs.  Part of the NBM programme was considering how AVDC could sell more services to the general public, wider public sector and private sector to increase the income position of the Council.  It would also help to move the Council away from being a provider of all services to a more diverse model of buying and selling services, as well as the public and groups being able to ‘self help’.

Lotteries had long been a way of smaller organisations raising income and were regulated by the Gambling Act 2005. There were different types of lotteries available, however the Cabinet report only discussed ‘society lotteries’.

Society lotteries were promoted for the benefit of a non-commercial society.  A society was non-commercial if it was established and conducted:

·                    for charitable purposes.

·                    for the purpose of enabling participation in, or of supporting, sport, athletics or a cultural activity.

·                    for any other non-commercial purpose other than that of private gain.

In all cases, lotteries had to deliver a minimum of 20% of proceeds to good causes – the report recommended that a minimum of 50% of proceeds would go to good causes in the Vale Lottery.  This compared favourably to other well-known lotteries such as Euromillions and the National Lottery (who shared 28% of lottery monies with good causes) and the Health Lottery (who shared 20% of lottery monies with good causes).  As a local authority, AVDC would have to be licensed by the Gambling Commission.

There were no Vale wide lotteries currently being delivered, and there was only one other council known to be a licensed operator  in the country. There were however a number of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The following matter is for consideration by Members "In Committee". It will therefore be necessary to –

RESOLVE –

That under Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in the Paragraph indicated in Part 1 of Schedule 12A of the Act.

Aylesbury Waterside Theatre 5 year contract review (Paragraph 3)

The public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information because the report contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of organisations (including the Authority holding that information) and disclosure of commercially sensitive information would prejudice negotiations for contracts and land disposals/transactions.

In connection with minute 4 above, Members received the following commercially sensitive information included in the confidential section of the agenda in accordance with Section 100(A)(4) of the Local Government Act, 1972:-

Aylesbury Waterside Theatre 5 year contract review (Paragraph 3)

The public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information because the report contains information relating to the financial or business affairs of organisations (including the Authority holding that information) and disclosure of commercially sensitive information would prejudice negotiations for contracts and land disposals/transactions.

(Category – Paragraph 3 of Part 1)

Councillor Mrs J Blake

Cabinet Member for Business Transformation

To consider the attached confidential information (Appendix A).

Contact Officer: Paul Marston-Weston (01296) 585116

As referred to above, Cabinet received commercially sensitive information relating to the contract negotiations in connection with the management of the Waterside Theatre.