Agenda item

Purpose: To receive an update on the work of the Sports Hub Task and Finish Group.

The Chairman introduced the Sports Hub Task and Finish Group item (Agenda Item 8).

It was noted that the report had been put into the public domain and the Chairman did not consider that there was a constitutional basis for officers preventing this.

The Chairman noted that, in the Chairman’s Briefing Sheet, officers’ advice was that the report should be discussed under Part II as it was likely that there would be disclosure of exempt information of the description contained in paragraphs 1-3 of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act 1972. However, further explanation had not been provided regarding which information should be exempt.

Concerns had been raised with the Chairman by the Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer. These had been shared with the other Task and Finish Group Members, but they had made the unanimous decision to proceed with publication.

The Chairman was not prepared to be the Member to propose moving to Part II and opened the floor to Members.

Members felt that the report’s recommendations were valuable, but considered that the report should not be discussed in its current format and concerns were expressed about how it was presented and its content. Concerns were also expressed about the process that had been followed by the Task and Finish Group, since they did not believe that a right of reply had not been given to all stakeholders, so natural justice had not been served. It was suggested that consideration of the report should be deferred so further work could be undertaken.

Members of the Task and Finish Group refuted the allegation that they had not worked properly and appropriately - they had simply reported their findings. They were determined that it should be heard. They could not recall a similar report, written in good faith by Members with the support of officers, being blocked in this way. Concerns were expressed about the impact of this on the principles of scrutiny.

It was noted that the report contained recommendations relevant to the Playing Pitch Strategy, which was due to be finalised in June. If the report was to be deferred to the July meeting, this would be too late to inform the Strategy. It was suggested if consideration of the report was deferred, then it could be brought back to a special meeting of the Scrutiny Commission.

Councillor Erik Pattenden proposed that the report should not be discussed at this meeting, and that it should be deferred so further work could be undertaken. Councillor Martha Vickers seconded the proposal. At the vote, the motion was carried.

The Chairman proposed that a special meeting be arranged to consider the Sports Hub Task and Finish Group report. Councillor Chris Read seconded the motion. At the vote, the motion was carried.

It was felt that the report was extremely well written and those Members who had proposed deferral were concerned that most of the recommendations be implemented. They would not have used the word ‘libel’. They were concerned that there was nothing in the report that could get in the way of those recommendations going forward.

The Leader noted that some of the report’s recommendations echoed those of the previous London Road Industrial Estate Task and Finish Group report. However, concern was expressed that witnesses who had given evidence to the Sports Hub review, may not have been aware that their statements would be reported almost verbatim. He cited the Rugby Club as an example. It was suggested that some of the comments could be considered to relate to the financial standing of organisations, and so the report needed to be carefully considered. He was grateful that the report would be deferred, however, it was acknowledged that the report had been put into the public domain and suggested that it could cause considerable embarrassment to those who wrote it. Also, he suggested that the report included statements that he was not convinced could be backed up by evidence. Additionally, it was noted that witnesses listed in the terms of reference, had not been called, and it was suggested that this should be put right.

RESOLVED that:

·       the Sports Hub Task and Finish Group report should not be discussed at this meeting, and that it should be deferred so further work could be undertaken; and

·       that a special meeting of the Scrutiny Commission be arranged to consider the Sports Hub Task and Finish Group report.