Report of the Chairman of Executive Board.

The Leader of the Council referred Members to his report and also provided a verbal update on the Devolution deal.  A copy of this is attached at Appendix A to the Minutes.

Following which, questions were put forward.

South and East Community Lottery

A Member thanked the Leader for the update and financial information as the Lottery approached its first anniversary.  A request was made that a breakdown be provided on the administrative side and other components of this.  In response, the Leader stated that he was happy to provide a detailed breakdown for the next Meeting.

Social Isolation Grant

A Member commented that the social isolation grant had been very well received and asked whether these would continue in 2024 as they proved to be very useful.  In response, the Leader agreed that it was a very good scheme and would like to see it continue.  However, recognising the current financial situation would have to see what the Council could do in the future.

Future Leaders Programme

A Member commented that it was good news to see the Future Leaders Programme had been shortlisted for an LGC Workforce Award under the Category ‘Best Retention Strategy’.  It was queried whether there were any plans in place, particularly in ensuring that staff were compensated fairly for increasing fuel costs.  In response, the Leader endorsed the success of the programme and advised Members that there was an ongoing review in relation to terms and conditions of employment that would be undertaken with staff.

A Member added that it was disappointing to see that no updates had been provided in the Leader’s report on the Towns Fund projects, the recent flooding issues across the district and also the work of the Heart team.

Devolution Deal

Further to the verbal briefing delivered to Members, the following comments were made.  A copy of the briefing paper is attached at Appendix A to the Minutes.

• A Member stated that she welcomed the fact that further briefings would be held, but queried the lack of information relating to the consultation process.  Further concerns were raised by other Members in the way the questions on the consultation were worded and the impartiality of this.

• A Member considered that information sent out to parish councils from Lincolnshire County Council (LCC) was skewed and that there was no balance in any of the materials received.  Following which, it was queried whether the Council had an opposing view, or whether this was a foregone conclusion and the consultation was simply a box ticking exercise.

• It was further considered that holding the consultation over the Christmas period was a distraction and a Member asked the Leader to give assurances that the consultation would be acted upon, particularly as the views of the public were not the same opinions of LCC or other organisations taking part in it.

• A Member stated that a consultation was intended to deliver a potential outcome to any given situation and that a devolution deal would be the creation of another tier of government, which would be a key issue with members of the public.

• A Member queried how devolution would affect the role of Members and commented that it was interesting that the Leader had changed his views since the devolution deal that was put forward in 2016.  However, further briefings would be welcomed as the deal progressed.

• A Member commented that when something sounded too good to be true, it usually was.

In response, the Leader advised Members that the upper tier authorities were running the consultation.  The controversial issue would be the creation of a mayor and this would be for the upper tiers to sign off.  The District Council’s position on devolution was to seek the best arrangements that it could for the district and those that it worked with.  Over a number of years, the Council had been working on a visioning document including proposals to make sure it got the best that it could from government in terms of devolution and the money that it brought to the district.

It was highlighted that in 2016 the government changed the devolution deal methodology restricting to the upper governance tiers to progress.  The Leader assured Members that he had not changed his mind, but also believed the Partnership with BBC and SHDC was of value.  The achievements and benefits the Partnership had made from central government in terms of decision making, funding and direction of travel in terms of a positive outlook in this part of the world had been second to none.

The Leader informed Members that as districts, the starting point was that they would have two seats on the mayoral combined authority, however this had been increased to four.  It was further highlighted that whoever had the seats from the Partnership would see the interest of its respective Members met and it would push forward with this. 

In conclusion, the Leader stated that the Council had to react to any proposals, and although it would be better for the Council to be part of the devolution discussion and have a part as a non-constituent member, it was still driving forward with the Partnership as this was where the Council’s future lay with creating strong relationships with other bodies.