Meeting documents

PRESENT: Councillor Mrs Pearce (Chairman); Councillors Baldwin, Barclay, Ghent, Mrs Hannelly, Mrs Kendrick and Searle.  Councillors Cadd, Mrs Morgan-Owen, Mrs Polhill and Rowlands attended also.

APOLOGIES:  Councillor Chapple.

RESOLVED

That the Minutes of 24th May, 2001 be approved as a correct record.

The Committee received a report, previously presented to Cabinet on 31st July, 2001, regarding the proposed Food Safety Service Plan.  The Plan had been produced as part of a Framework Agreement on Local Authority Food Law Enforcement in order to establish a standard approach across the country.

The Plan had been produced from a template initiated by the Food Standards Agency and covered matters such as:

The template had initiated the Council's objectives, three of which were directly linked to the food service plan.

The three objectives were:

It was reported that all food safety work was undertaken by 6 District Environmental Health Officers (EHOs) supported by 4 Technical Officers (TOs) but that only qualified EHOs, and TOs who had specific qualifications, were authorised to carry out food safety inspections.

The staffing levels were considered adequate for the achievement of the aims and objectives within the Plan but it had been recognised that some of the other services that EHOs had been providing had been reduced in order to meet the new challenges of food safety.  Those reductions had been planned so as to minimise the impact on service delivery.  The Best Value Review will determine if any re-prioritisation is required.

RESOLVED -

That this Committee concurs with the decision of the Cabinet to endorse the Food Safety Service Plan.

The Committee received a report from the Chief Executive that detailed the CCTV Scheme in Aylesbury.

It was reported that, in partnership with the Thames Valley Police, there were 14 cameras in use with proposals to increase this to 39.

The operating costs of the scheme had been met between AVDC and the Thames Valley Police with AVDC's50% (£90,400) being covered by the revenue budget for 2001/2002.

The costs for the capital investment on the additional 25 cameras had been met by an award from the Home Office of £346,000 and the running costs would be met from the car parking services budget.

The Town Centre scheme was governed by agreed Codes of Practice monitored by an  Inspection Panel of Councillors, that made monthly unannounced visits to the Control Room.

Members were advised that the statistics comparison for the three years of operation had shown a marked increase on monitored incidents, 150% whilst arrests had risen by approximately 20% over the same period.

Key issues that could be explored in more detail were:-

Members thanked the Officers for the level of detail contained in the report, but had concerns that they had not seen the written Codes of Practice and details of how the current operators would manage when the number of cameras reached 39 as projected.

It was also commented that consideration should be given to installations in other towns in the Vale such as Buckingham and Winslow and also in areas around Aylesbury, that had been identified as being vulnerable.

Members agreed that public awareness should be raised of the CCTV scheme and how the revenue to maintain it was collected.

RESOLVED -

Members considered a report from the Head of Leisure and Cultural Services, previously presented to Cabinet on 31st July, 2001, that outlined recommendations for the forthcoming consultation programme for the Local Cultural Strategy for Aylesbury Vale, including two public forums and a Members' Seminar.

Cabinet had, on 31st July, agreed that the number of venues for public forums be increased to include Aylesbury, Buckingham and Wendover and that the Key Themes be approved.

This Committee concurred with the Cabinet with regard to the Key Themes but commented that a public forum should also be held at Haddenham and the Officers undertook to progress this.

RESOLVED -

That this Committee concurs with the decisions of the Cabinet.

Members received a report and presentation from the Director of Planning, Property and Construction Services on the fundamental challenges carried out in relation to the Best Value process that had previously been considered by Cabinet on 31st July, 2001.

Members were advised that the review process had been divided into three stages and that the report contained details of Stage 1 only.

An oral report was given, as part of the presentation, on the work to be undertaken in Stage 2.

It had been concluded that the Best Value Review for Environmental Health should be limited to the functions where customer and quality information was lacking.

In order to progress the next stage it had been recommended that the following work be actioned and the results reported in October/November, 2001:

RESOLVED -

That the Committee notes the results of the fundamental challenge of Environmental Health and endorses the areas identified for further review and the production of improvement plans under Stage Two of the Best Value process.