4th November 2002

 

Chairman of the Policy and Organisation Board (Councillor Cully) (ex-officio) (P); Councillors Mrs Angus (P), Mrs Binfield (P), Bone (P), Carter (P), Mrs Cully (P), Mrs Elshaw (P), Francis (P), Hook (P), Langdon (P) and Wright (P).

19. MINUTES

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the meeting of the Board held on 2 September 2002 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.

PART II

20. PROVISION OF A MEMORIAL WITHIN THE BOROUGH FOR VICTIMS OF THE HOLOCAUST

At their meeting on 24 September 2002, the Community and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee received a report by Councillor Redrup in respect of a proposal to provide a memorial within the Borough for victims of the Holocaust.

Having considered aspects of the proposal, including a possible location for a memorial with suitable wording attributed to the occasion, the Committee recommended to the Board that:

(i) a plaque be placed in the vicinity of the Gosport War Memorial Hospital, with the wording "In memoriam to the six million Jews and millions of victims from other persecuted groups murdered by the Nazis";(ii) a civic non-denominational service be held on 27 January (Holocaust Memorial Day), with agreement between Jewish Groups and the Mayor's Chaplain as to any religious input, and that an opening address be made by the Mayor or designated Member; and(iii) the Jehovah's Witnesses be invited to consider providing a static display similar to the one in the Imperial War Museum; the site to be negotiated / agreed.

Following further investigation and enquiries made by officers with regard to the proposed location, the Service Manager of Gosport War Memorial Hospital had indicated that it was not deemed appropriate for the proposed memorial plaque to be situated within the hospital grounds as it could create a precedent.

With regard to (ii) above, Members were advised that the Council's budget for 2002/2003 included £4,700 for civic events, of which £490 remained for the rest of the current financial year. There had been no specific reference, within the budget, for either a memorial or a civic service such as had been proposed.

Members considered that more extensive consultation should be undertaken to assess the views of the whole community regarding the provision of a memorial and recognition of the Holocaust and that this exercise could involve the Residents' Panel.

RESOLVED: That consideration of the provision of a memorial within the Borough for the victims of the Holocaust be referred to the Civic and Commemorative Events Working Group.

21. HOLBROOK RECREATION CENTRE - PROVISION OF A SUNBED SERVICE

The Board were reminded that, at a meeting in January 1997, the Health and Leisure Committee had adopted a Skin Cancer Prevention Policy, which recommended the phasing out of sun-bed services at Local Authority facilities. In February 2002, the Community and Environment Overview and Scrutiny Committee established a panel to review the provision of the sun-bed service provided by Glendale Leisure at Holbrook Recreation Centre.

At their meeting on 24 September 2002, the Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered a report submitted by Councillor Allen on the outcome of the panel's investigations and it was agreed that the Community and Environment Board be requested to give consideration to the review of protocols employed within establishments offering tanning facilities as follows:
(i) that staff be required to undertake appropriate training to a level that would ensure a working understanding of the equipment and of the most obvious problems that could arise with regard to skin types and medical conditions, including use of medication; and(ii) that premises offering tanning facilities be subject to licensing and regular inspections of facilities, record keeping and staff competency.

The Leisure and Amenities Manager reported that, under the terms of the contract specification, Parkwood Leisure (previously Glendale Leisure) were required to operate the sun-bed service in accordance with the latest Health & Safety Executive guidance and the Sun-Bed Association Code of Practice. Following a recent enquiry, indications were that Parkwood Leisure appeared to be fulfilling their contractual obligations in the operation of their sun-bed service.

It was further reported that legislation did not currently permit licensing of establishments offering tanning facilities, although, under the provisions of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, all premises were subject to inspection by the Council's Environmental Health staff. Officers were not aware of any specific training courses for operators other than those organised by bed suppliers.

The Board were requested to determine whether they wished to retain a sun-bed service at Holbrook Recreation Centre in line with the recommendations of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee and being mindful of the Officers' comments made in relation to those recommendations.

However, Members were aware that the sun-bed at Holbrook Recreation Centre had been replaced recently and, in view of the policy to phase out sun-beds in Council establishments within five years or at the end of their useful life (whichever was the sooner), the Board felt that the replacement bed constituted a breach in the Council's policy and, as such, the equipment should be removed.

RESOLVED: That the provider of the sun-bed service be requested to cease operating the sun-bed service at Holbrook Recreation Centre, in order to comply with the Council's Skin Cancer Prevention Policy.

22. PROPOSED USE OF COMMUTED SUMS - LEESLAND PARK

The Board were reminded that, in 1998, a plan for the creation of Leesland Park had been agreed and Council Officers had commenced work with the Friends of Leesland Park and Gosport Groundwork (now Groundwork Solent) to fund and implement the agreed works.

Work on the project was now almost completed with final modifications required to the children's play areas and the need to replace perimeter fencing and gates, in order to reduce the possibility of children running from the park into the adjacent road and to restrict access during the hours of darkness, following numerous problems being experienced by local residents.

Consultation with local residents, Ward Councillors and the Police had concluded that the provision of perimeter fencing and gates at the Cottage Grove/Zetland Road entrance would be the most effective solution to resolving problems and concerns. Members felt that lockable gates to the site would reduce the risk of vandalism and consideration was given to the practicality and feasibility of engaging a keyholder.

The cost of completing the transformations of Moreland Allotments into Leesland Park, which included the final modifications to the children's play area, was estimated to be in the region of £5,711. The Children's Playing Space Account for this area of the Borough was currently £7,711 and the Board's approval was sought to use £5,711 of the commuted sums for the completion of the works.

RESOLVED: That

(1) £5,711 of Commuted Sums be used from the Children's Playing Space Account to complete works at Leesland Park; and

(2) Officers be requested to explore the possibility of providing lockable gates at the Cottage Grove/Zetland Road entrance to the Park and, as a consequence, seek to appoint a suitable keyholder.

(Councillor Francis declared a personal interest in the above item in his capacity as a Member of the Friends of Leesland Park, withdrew from the meeting room and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon)

23. PROVISION OF YOUTH SHELTERS

The Leisure and Amenities Manager submitted a report seeking approval for the provision of youth shelters in various parks and open spaces in the Borough.

During the process of conducting the Best Value Review of Parks and Open Spaces (BVR), the consultation process had identified a need for additional facilities to be located in parks and open spaces that would be popular with young people. In progressing the provision suggested in the BVR, officers had researched the options for the type of facility that would be suitable. The process had been conducted in conjunction with the Youth Council who had contributed ideas regarding the design and layout of the proposed shelters, which would meet the need for casual leisure activity to supplement the range of more active facilities that already existed in various areas.

Sponsorship funding, totalling £21,000, had been obtained that would make a major contribution towards achieving a limited number of sites in an initial phase, with further sites being added should additional funds become available at a later stage.

The shelters would make a positive contribution to social inclusion and the Community Safety Strategy. Members' views were sought in selecting sites thought to be most suitable for the first phase for the provision of youth shelters. The exact location at each site would be decided following local consultation with a range of parties and agencies, including Gosport Police and in liaison with Ward Councillors.

RESOLVED: That (i) the provision of youth shelters in selected parks and open space areas be approved; and(ii) the sites selected for the youth shelter provision be identified as follows:

Phase I

Walpole Park Bridgemary Park
Lee on Solent Recreation Ground Leesland Park
Grove Road Recreation Ground Elson Recreation Ground

Phase II

Rowner Copse Forton Recreation Ground
Privett Park Holbrook
Nobes Avenue

24. REVIEW OF BEACH ZONING

The Board considered a report by the Leisure and Amenities Manager outlining a number of changes that had occurred since 1987 when beach zoning had been introduced as a means of segregating the various water borne activities for the convenience and safety of all concerned. Zoning was not a statutory requirement but purely advisory in the interests of suitability, reduced conflict and safety. Information boards adjacent to the slipways directed the public to the appropriate zone for a particular activity.

The Leisure and Amenities Manager advised the Board of the major coast protection works that had been undertaken at Lee-on-Solent in 1996/97. In order to prevent further erosion and the loss of the coastal fringe and ultimately Marine Parade, beach levels had been raised and accommodation works had also included raising the levels of slipways L1, L4 and L5. Two lesser used slipways L2 and L3 were not raised, and consequently ceased to exist. It would therefore seem logical to re-number the remaining slipways.

At Stokes Bay the slipway adjacent to No.2 Battery (SB1) had suffered severe structural damage and could no longer been considered serviceable. Although attempts were made to clear the slipway on a weekly basis, the contractor encountered insurmountable difficulties due to the gradient of the beach and the large amount of shingle crossing the intertidal zone due to littoral drift. In view of the structural failure of the slipway and the impracticality of repairing it, it was concluded that the best course of action would be to close it.

The Leisure and Amenities Manager further reported on works that had been undertaken at slipways (SB2) and (SB3) at Stokes Bay. Members had attended a site visit to Stokes Bay on 21 October 2002.

In view of the changes that had taken place during recent years, it was proposed to amend the beach zoning and update the information signs accordingly. Concern was raised that, in making the changes, it was proposed to omit 'swimming' and 'canoeing' from the signboards and it was felt prudent to depict areas, on the coastline maps, that were suitable for those activities.

Following discussion, the Board considered that motor boats (with hand drawn trailers) should be permitted to launch at SB1 (Stokes Bay Central) and that board sailing should be permitted from L2 (Marine Parade East) at Lee-on-Solent.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the re-designation of beach zones at Lee-on-Solent and Stokes Bay be approved as follows:

Location Existing Designation New Designation

HMS Daedalus L1 L1
Motor boats No change
Jet skis
Water ski boats

Marine Parade West L2 Abandoned
Swimmers
Board sailing

Solent Gardens L3 Abandoned
Swimmers

Marine Parade East L4 L2
Dinghy sailing Dinghy sailing
Board sailing Board sailing
Canoeing

Elmore L5 L3
Angling Angling
Dinghy sailing Motor boats
Dinghy sailing

No. 2 Battery SB1 To be closed
Board sailingMotor boats Board sailing from beach

Stokes Bay Central SB2 SB1
Dinghy sailing Dinghy sailing
Board sailing Motor boats
Swimming

Stokes Bay East SB3 SB2
G.A.F.I.R.S G.A.F.I.R.S
Angling Angling
Sailing Motor boats
Canoeing

(2) the closure of the slipway at No. 2 Battery, Stokes Bay be approved.

25. HEALTH SCRUTINY

By reason of special circumstances, the Chairman determined that this item be considered at this meeting notwithstanding the fact that the item had not been available for public inspection in accordance with the provisions of Section 100B(4)(a) of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. The special circumstances were that the Government had released its consultation papers on Health Scrutiny after the date for reports to be included on the agenda for the Community and Environment Board. The deadline for receipt of responses and comments on the proposals was 18 November 2002, which meant that this meeting would be the only available date for Members to express their views.

The Regulatory Manager submitted a report outlining the main elements of the Government's consultation document on its proposals for new Regulations and Guidance Notes on scrutiny powers for local authorities in respect of health matters.

Details were also reported in respect of the proposed framework for a Joint Health Liaison Panel. Recognising the responsibilities of the new Fareham and Gosport Primary Care Trust (PCT) and the role both Councils had in overseeing the health and social well-being of their local communities, the Panel would seek to develop a closer working relationship between the PCT and representatives of the two Borough Councils that fell within the geographic boundaries of the Trust.

The draft Regulations specified the areas that should be included in reviewing/scrutinising health matters. These were detailed in the report and Members were asked to comment on whether the proposals were adequate.

The consultation document detailed the following options in relation to exercising the scrutiny functions, namely, (a) Joint Committees (b) Delegated Scrutiny and (c) Co-option, and the Board's views were sought on the issues outlined in the proposals. The Board felt that the Regulations should impose a duty on the County and Unitary Authorities to involve District Councils in the scrutiny process and that joint committees were their preferred option.

The Board welcomed the Regulations and in particular the intention to include Borough and District Councils within the process of health scrutiny and review. Members felt that the Council would have a positive role to play in the scrutiny process, especially with regard to Primary Care Trusts and local Hospital Trusts working within their area.

It had not yet been decided how the County Council would undertake the formal scrutiny function and final guidance was required from the Government before any definite framework was put in place.

The main role of the Joint Health Liaison Panel would be to focus on health improvement and discussion should be on strategic direction, general principals, and overall performance. It was suggested that each Borough Council would provide a Senior Officer to support elected Members and that administrative support would be shared by each Council on a rotating annual basis.

Representation on the Joint Panel would comprise:

o 3 Councillors appointed by Fareham Borough Council;
o 3 Councillors appointed by Gosport Borough Council; and
o 3 representatives from Fareham and Gosport Primary Care Trust.

The Board were requested to confirm the willingness of Gosport Borough Council to the formation of the Joint Panel and to recommend to the Policy and Organisation Board and Council appropriate Member representation to serve on the Panel.

RESOLVED: That

(1) the willingness of this Council to the formation of a Joint Gosport and Fareham Health Liaison Panel be confirmed;

(2) the Policy and Organisation Board be requested to appoint three Members, on a proportional basis to reflect the political balance of the Council, to serve as this Council's representatives on the Joint Panel [ as in (1) above]; and

(3) the Regulatory Services Manager ( Head of Environmental Health) be authorised to respond to the Government's consultation document on Health Scrutiny, reflecting the views of this Board.

CHAIRMAN