Meeting documents

To approve as a correct record the Minutes of the meeting held on 1 September, 2015, attached as Appendix A.

RESOLVED –

That the Minutes of 1 September, 2015, be approved as a correct record.

Councillor Sir Beville Stanier

Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste

To consider the report attached as Appendix B.

Contact Officer:  Jacqui Bromilow (01296) 585498

(a)       Decision(s)

(1)          That the revised Food Service Plan be commended for adoption by Council and the Environment and Living Scrutiny Committee be thanked for its input.

(2)        That, for the reasons outlined in the Cabinet report, Council be recommended

            to remove the  Plan from the Policy Framework and to delegate  approval of the Plan to the Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste, after having been the subject of scrutiny.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

            The amount of discretion that can be exercised by the Council is limited in terms of the requirements set by the FSA and the above proposal would be a more efficient way of reviewing the Plan.  This will still involve scrutiny which is considered to be an important part of the process.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

            To continue with the current approval process.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Environment and Living.  That Committee has reviewed the revised Plan and it’s comments have been taken into account.  As the Plan will be submitted for final approval by full Council, Cabinet’s decisions are not subject to call-in.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

Cabinet received a report, also submitted to the Environment and Living Scrutiny Committee concerning proposed revisions to the Food Service Plan.  The Scrutiny Committee report incorporated a copy of the updated Plan and summarised the key features.  The Food Standards Agency (FSA) was the regulatory body for ensuring food safety standards.  The FSA had developed a framework agreement which provided for the production by all local authorities of a Food Service Plan.

As mentioned previously, the revised Plan had been considered by the Environment and Living Scrutiny Committee which had commented on a number of specific issues, but had otherwise endorsed the Plan.  The Plan would be submitted to full Council for formal adoption as part of the Council’s Policy Framework.

Cabinet was invited to consider recommending Council to remove the Plan from the Policy Framework, and in future delegating approval to the Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste.  Future revised plans would however still be subject to review by the Scrutiny Committee, whose comments would be taken into account by the Cabinet Member.  This would provide the Council with greater flexibility to take advantage of any commercial opportunities that might present themselves in relation to the delivery of this particular service.

The FSA set out how food controls should be delivered by local authorities in the Food Law Code of Practice guidance document.  Each local authority had to have an up to date documented Food Service Plan which was readily available to consumers and businesses and which stated how they intended to deliver food controls in their area, including the delivery of food enforcement activity.

When drafting the Food Service Plan, the FSA stated that local authorities had to have regard to any advice issued by the FSA and the Local Government Association.  Consequently, the structure and content of the Plan was largely dictated by FSA requirements and the Food Law Code of Practice, with limited discretion to deliver local food controls any differently.  Bearing this in mind, the existing adoption process was somewhat cumbersome.  It was therefore felt that a more appropriate approval mechanism would be to submit the Plan for Scrutiny, after which final sign off would be the responsibility of the Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste.  Cabinet felt that Scrutiny remained an essential element in the adoption process, particularly as future decisions might involve targeting the limited resources available to high risk rather than low risk businesses and possibly developing potential income generating opportunities.  Accordingly it was,

RESOLVED –

(1)          That The revised Food Service Plan be commended for adoption by Council and the Environment and Living Scrutiny Committee thanked for its input.

(2)          That, for the reasons outlined above, Council be recommended to remove the Plan from the Policy Framework and in future approval of the Plan be delegated to the Cabinet Member for Environment and Waste, after having been the subject of scrutiny.

Councillor Mordue

Cabinet Member for Finance, Resources and Compliance

To consider the report attached as Appendix C.

Contact Officer:  Tamsin Ireland (01296) 585004

(a)       Decision(s)

That, subject to reference being made to the work of the wider south-east authorities in the sources of assurance in relation to the delivery of the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan (VALP) (page 7 of Appendix 3 to the Cabinet report), the updated Risk Management Strategy, Risk Appetite Statement and Strategic Risk Register be approved.

(b)       Reason(s) for Decision(s)

To reflect properly the Council’s approach to risk in a continually changing operational environment whilst at the same time ensuring a robust governance structure.  The reference to the work of the wider south-east authorities reflected the Council’s dependency on this being delivered within the expected timeline for delivery of VALP.

(c)        Alternative Option(s) Considered

To do nothing.  However this would not reflect the current operational environment.

(d)       Relevant Scrutiny Committee

Finance and Services Scrutiny Committee.

(e)        Conflicts of Interest/Dispensation(s)

None.

The risk management arrangements of the Council formed a key part of the overall internal control arrangements of the Council and were incorporated within the Annual Governance Statement.  The Risk Management Strategy was last updated in September, 2013 and a revised Strategy and been produced to reflect changes in the Council’s approach to risk and its changing risk appetite.  A copy of the revised Strategy was submitted.  A Risk Statement had been produced, which was also submitted, and which would be the subject of annual review.  Both these documents had been posted on the Council’s web site as part of the agenda pack for this meeting.

As part of its governance arrangements the Council was required to manage risks effectively as highlighted in CIPFA’s Good Governance in Local Government document.  The Strategic Risk Register provided evidence of a risk aware and risk managed organisation.  It reflected the risks "on the current radar".  The Risk Strategy had been updated to reflect the Council’s wish to become a totally sustainable organisation and a copy formed part of the agenda pack (also posted on the Council’s web site).  The Strategy was the subject of review at six monthly intervals.  Having asked that the Strategic Risks Summary should reflect the Council’s dependency on the work of the wider south-east authorities in relation to delivery of the Vale of Aylesbury Plan within the expected timeline, it was,

RESOLVED –

That, subject to appropriate reference being made to the Council’s dependency on the work of the wider south-east authorities in the "Sources of Assurance" section of the Strategic Risks Summary (page 7 of Appendix 3 to the Cabinet report) with particular reference to delivery of the Vale of Aylesbury Local Plan, the updated Risk Management Strategy, Risk Appetite Statement and Strategic Risk Register be approved.