Agenda item

To receive a presentation from the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods and Cabinet Member for Environment on the social enterprise agency pilot.

36.1    The Chair welcomed Councillor Watkins, Cook and Mr David Lett to the meeting.

36.2    Councillor Watkins explained that the proposal was in its infant stages and the Cabinet were keen to hear the views of the Committee and suggestions from Members. She reported that the idea had evolved from a similar scheme in Aylesbury which had been set up by David Lett.

            She went on further to explain that the 4 pilot areas of Westgate, Podsmead, Matson and Robinswood and Quedgeley had been selected for their strong community links and all of these areas already had a community builder presence. She stressed that if following consultation with these communities there was no appetite then the scheme would not be pursued.

36.3    Councillor Cook commented that the scheme would empower local residents who were keen to take greater ownership of their communities and additionally provide employment and training opportunities for young school leavers.

36. 4   David Lett delivered a presentation regarding the Stewkley Enterprise Partnership as attached at Appendix 1.

Public Questions

36.5    In response to Ms Brammer’s query regarding the risk of redundancies in the Amey Corporation if the Scheme was implemented, the Head of Communities  advised that Amey were positive about the scheme and were struggling with a shortage of staff for the work they were obligated to complete.

36.2    In response to Ms Brammer’s query regarding inviting all communities to hear and comment on proposals, Councillor Watkins advised that active community groups within the local area had been approached and stressed that a wider range of stakeholders would be consulted as part of the process.

36.3    The Chair requested Ms Bremmer to submit any further she had in writing to the relevant Cabinet Member who would endeavour to respond.

36.4    Councillor Wilson noted that in contradiction to the asset based community development principles, the scheme was being introduced by the Council rather than residents. He queries whether a similar model had been trialled elsewhere.

36.5    David Lett acknowledged that the demographics of the City’s communities differed significantly from the Stewkley model. He noted that the core proposal had been bought forward by a resident and was simply being trialled in other communities.

36.6    Councillor Hawthorne commented that the scheme required individuals with passion and energy in order to succeed. He reported that Quedgeley Parish Council had concerns about  additional projects infringing on the services they offered.

36.7    In response to Councillor Pullen’s concerns regarding health and safety of young people and in particular those with disability or other complex needs, David Lett assured that this had and would continue to be considered and no individual would be put at risk.

36.8    The Corporate Director advised Members that large open spaces and parks would be excluded from the scheme, and these places would continue to fall under Amey’s jurisdiction.

36.9    In response to Councillor Hilton’s query regarding other services that could be devolved to an enterprise partnership, Councillor Watkins explained that initial conversations had been initiated with Gloucestershire County Council  and services could extend to private gardens, grass verges and hedges etc.

36. 10 Councillor Haigh noting that it would be an open recruitment process, reported that employment could not be guaranteed for local residents. She went on further to query how much money had been spent on exploring the proposals to date.

36.11  The Head of Communities advised that Gloucester City and Gloucestershire County Council had committed £3000 each to exploring the project.

36.12 SUSPENSION OF COUNCIL PROCEDURE RULE 6

On the motion of the Chair, and in accordance with the Constitution, the Committee resolved that the meeting be extended beyond two hours.

36.13  Councillor Taylor welcomed the proposals.

36.14 In response to Councillor Smith’s query regarding reductions to Amey’s budget and consequent redundancies, the Head of Communities advised that Amey employed seasonal temps during the main grass cutting season and any budgets cuts would be absorbed in this resource.

36.15 In response to the Chair’s query regarding how the proposals would move forward, Councillor Watkins advised that now the Committee had given their support to look into the proposals further, there would be a period of further discussion with local communities and definition of the finer detail. She explained that a further report would be presented to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee in due course.

36.16  RESOLVED that the presentation be noted.