Agenda and minutes

(A)       The Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure advised that Kathleen Gordon, Team Manager - Operational Support, had won the Scottish Ladies Two Bowl Triples, representing Ellon Bowling Club, in Edinburgh at the beginning of the month.

(B)       The Lord Provost reminded members that this year had been the
30^th anniversary of the Aberdeen International Football Festival. The Lord Provost stated that the event had been a great success in its new format, with the finals held at Aberdeen Sports Village, congratulated those involved and looked forward to the event going from strength to strength in the future.

(C)       The Lord Provost thanked the City Events team for organising Tartan Day on 31^st July, which he felt had been hugely successful.

(D)       Councillor Jennifer Stewart highlighted the success of the Aberdeen International Youth Festival in its 38^th year. Councillor Stewart thanked the Friends of the Festival in particular and its main sponsors, BP and Shell, for their continued support, and emphasised the importance of arts and culture to the city.

The Council resolved:-

to concur with the above remarks and congratulate those involved in the various successes.

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Councillors Dean, Fletcher, Ironside, Malone, Reynolds, Jennifer Stewart and Kirsty West declared interests in the following item of business as members of the Board of Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre (AECC). None of the members felt it necessary to leave the meeting during the Council’s deliberations.

The Council was requested to determine that the item of business entitled ‘Future Funding and Development of AECC - Report by Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure’ which contained exempt information as described in Schedule 7(A) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, be taken in private.

Councillor Young moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor Graham:-

            That the Council consider the item of business referred to in public.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion  (13)  -  Councillors Adam, Allan, Boulton, Cassie, Collie, Cooney, Crockett, Farquharson, Graham, Hunter, Ironside, Laing and Young.

Against the procedural motion  (25)  -  Lord Provost Peter Stephen; Depute Provost Dunbar; and Councillors Corall, Cormack, Cormie, Dean, Donnelly, Greig, Kiddie, Leslie, McCaig, McDonald, Malone, May, Noble, Penny, Reynolds, Robertson, Jennifer Stewart, John Stewart, Kevin Stewart, Wendy Stuart, John West, Wisely and Yuill.

Declined to vote  (1)  -  Councillor Fletcher.

Absent from the division  (2)  -  Councillors Clark and Kirsty West.

The Council resolved:-

(i)                 to reject the procedural motion; and

(ii)               in terms of Section 50(A)(4) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, to exclude the press and public from the meeting during consideration of the item of business entitled ‘Future Funding and Development of AECC - Report by Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure’ (Article 17 of this minute refers) so as to avoid disclosure of exempt information of the class described in paragraphs 4 and 6 of Schedule 7(A) of the Act.

(i)         Aberdeen Community Council Forum - in relation to item 7(c)

The Council had before it, in accordance with Standing Order 10(1), a request for a deputation from Aberdeen Community Council Forum in relation to the report on the Aberdeen Local Development Plan (as detailed at Article 10 of this minute).

Councillor Dean moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor McCaig:-

That the request be refused as Aberdeen Community Council Forum would have the opportunity to make representation following the meeting as part of the statutory process.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion  (29)  -  Lord Provost Peter Stephen; Depute Provost Dunbar; and Councillors Cassie, Clark, Corall, Cormack, Cormie, Dean, Donnelly, Fletcher, Greig, Kiddie, Leslie, McCaig, McDonald, Malone, May, Noble, Penny, Reynolds, Robertson, Jennifer Stewart, John Stewart, Kevin Stewart, Wendy Stuart, John West, Kirsty West, Wisely and Yuill.

Against the procedural motion  (12)  -  Councillors Adam, Allan, Boulton, Collie, Cooney, Crockett, Farquharson, Graham, Hunter, Ironside, Laing and Young.

The Council resolved:-

to adopt the procedural motion and thereby refuse the request from Aberdeen Community Council Forum.

The Council had before it the minute of meeting of Aberdeen City Council of 30^th June 2010.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the minute.

The Council had before it a pamphlet of standing committee minutes from 28^th April to 22^nd July 2010.

The Council resolved:-

to note the minutes.

The Council had before it a statement of Council business which had been prepared by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.

The Council resolved:-

to note the statement.

The Council had before it the minute of meeting of the Appointment Panel of 28^th June 2010.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the minute.

The Council heard an oral report by the Chief Executive providing an update on the actions taken by the Leadership Board to address the findings and recommendations of the Accounts Commission for Scotland on Aberdeen City Council: Reports by the Controller of Audit on the Audit of Best Value and Community Planning and on the Property Sales Investigation.

The Chief Executive advised that the Leadership Board had met the previous week; an update report from the Controller of Audit was due in September, was expected to highlight that the Council had made satisfactory progress and would be reported to Council later in the year.

The Chief Executive added that the Council had been shortlisted as finalists in four categories in the APSE Public Service Awards 2010 to be held in Derry, Northern Ireland. The four submissions were:-

• Transition Extreme
• Effective Equalities Policies
• ICT - Virtual Server
• A Tree for Every Citizen

The Council resolved:-

to note the Chief Executive’s remarks.

At this juncture all officers affected by the proposals contained within the following item of business left the meeting in accordance with Standing Order 25.

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Prior to the consideration of the following item of business, a number of members declared interests as follows:-

Depute Provost Dunbar and Councillors Dean, Fletcher, McCaig and John West declared interests as members of the Appeals Committee, left the meeting and took no part in the Council’s deliberations thereon. Councillor Cormack declared an interest as Convener of the Appeals Committee, left the meeting and took no part in the Council’s deliberations thereon.

A number of members declared interests and chose not to withdraw from the meeting, namely Councillor Crockett (as a member of the Appeals Committee and Unite); Councillor Farquharson (as a member of the Appeals Committee); Councillor Graham (as a member of Unite); Councillors Ironside, Kevin Stewart and Yuill (as members of Unison); and Councillor Kiddie (as a retired member of Unison).

With reference to Article 11 of the minute of its meeting of 30^th June 2010, the Council had before it a report by the Director of Corporate Governance which outlined the progress that had been made in discussions with trade unions on the payment of increments and how these were to be funded during 2010/11.

The report advised that negotiations had been led by the Director of Corporate Governance and a number of options had been considered. Following discussions, a preferred option had been developed and the trade unions had agreed to consult their members on the proposal, with the consultation concluding on 3^rd September 2010. The detail of the proposal was provided in Appendix A to the report. The report explained that the proposal sought to apply spare spinal column points on the COSLA pay spine that were not currently used in the Council’s pay and grading structure. If approved, this would result in a 1.5% incremental increase for all employees who would have expected to receive an increment on 1^st April 2010.

The report stated that the cost of the proposal was £1.6million, including employer on-costs. In order for the proposal to be agreed, savings to the same value would need to be achieved from employment costs, and the following areas had been identified where it was believed these were achievable:-

If it did not prove possible to reach collective agreement with all or any of the recognised trade unions, the report proposed that due to the abnormal financial pressures facing the Council, the increment that was due to be paid to relevant staff employed under the SJC for Local Government Employees from 1^{st  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9.}

Transport & Accessibility Supplementary Guidance

Prior to considering the following item of business, the Council agreed to suspend Standing Order 12(9) to enable each amendment to be the subject of a vote against the motion - if an amendment carried its terms would be subsumed within the motion.

The Council also agreed to suspend Standing Order 13(1) to enable those members moving the motion or an amendment to exercise their right of reply in no more ten minutes rather than five minutes.

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Councillor Noble declared an interest in the following item of business by virtue of his position as a Council appointed representative for Aberdeen Lads Club. Councillor Noble considered that the nature of his interest required him to leave the meeting when matters affecting Aberdeen Lads Club were considered.

Councillor Young declared an interest in the following item of business by virtue of his position as a Council appointed representative for Aberdeen Lads Club but did not consider that the nature of his interest required him to leave the meeting. Councillors Collie and Robertson also declared interests in relation to Aberdeen Lads Club but did not consider that the nature of their interests required them to leave the meeting.

The Council had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which presented the Aberdeen Local Development Plan - Proposed Plan, Supplementary Guidance and Action Programme for approval for publication on 24^th September 2010 for a 12 week period for receiving representations.

The report advised that the Aberdeen Local Development Plan - Proposed Plan set out the development land allocations and associated policies that would guide planning decisions in the city and which were consistent with the Aberdeen City and Shire Structure Plan. A new Local Development Plan was required to replace the current Plan, which had been adopted in June 2008 in conformity with North East Scotland Together, the approved Structure Plan at that time. The Structure Plan had since been replaced with the Aberdeen City and Shire Structure Plan approved by Scottish Ministers in August 2009. The report emphasised that planning legislation required that an up-to-date Local Development Plan which was consistent with the new Structure Plan was in place.

The report highlighted the work that had been carried in terms of early engagement. The next stage in preparing the new Aberdeen Local Development Plan was for the Council to agree the content of the Proposed Plan and publish it for public scrutiny. Once the Proposed Plan was published, the Council had to consider all of the representations it received and decide if it wanted to amend the Plan in response. If no significant changes were proposed, a summary of unresolved issues had to be prepared before submitting the Proposed Plan to Scottish Ministers. The Scottish Ministers would appoint a Reporter to hold an Examination in Public of the Proposed Plan if there were unresolved representations.

The report summarised the content of the Proposed Plan, which was the subject of a number of appendices  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Council had before it a report by the Director of Housing and Environment which advised of proposals by the Scottish Futures Trust (SFT) to deliver the National Housing Trust (NHT) initiative to enable the development of short term affordable housing and sought agreement to continue the Council’s interest in participating in the procurement exercise.

The report stated that the Council’s Housing and Environment Committee of
13^th April 2010 had agreed to continue with an interest in the NHT proposals as developed by the SFT. The report provided a summary of the NHT which aimed to meet housing need in particular areas and to help reduce waiting lists.

The report went on to discuss potential rent levels; levels of demand; allocation methodology; the potential for Special Purpose Vehicles to be established; capital spending; property maintenance arrangements; the proposed financing structure; borrowing arrangements; the length of the scheme and intended exit strategy; interest from local developers; site availability; and the timetable for delivery of the initiative.

In regard to financial implications, the report advised that the Council would be required to borrow money to meet its 65% share of the costs, which was proposed be done via the Council’s Loan Fund. The repayment of the borrowing would be serviced from the rental income from the properties and the remaining 35% of the capital costs would be financed by the private sector developer, with 30% as equity and a 5% loan. The report anticipated that an average of £96,000 might need to be borrowed for each property procured - if the Council was to meet its 50 unit target this would potentially require borrowing of £4.8million.

The report concluded that the SFT was planning to publish a Prior Information Notice (PIN) in the OJEU in September. The PIN would set out the requirements of the NHT and would not commit the Council to proceed with its interest but it would be expected to proceed if suitable opportunities came forward from developers which met the Council’s requirements.

The report recommended:-

that the Council -

(a)               agree to participate in the National Housing Trust procurement as developed by the Scottish Futures Trust subject to the Directors of Corporate Governance and Housing and Environment being satisfied that the legal and financial elements of the initiative did not expose the Council to undue risk;

(b)               agree in principle to borrowing through the Council’s Loan Fund for the scheme, subject to a maximum of 50 units; and

(c)               instruct officers to report to future committee meetings as further decisions are required.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the recommendations.

The Council had before it correspondence on behalf of Scotland’s for Peace which invited the Council to join Mayors for Peace and adopt the 20:20 vision for a world free of all nuclear weapons by the year 2020.

The Council resolved:-

to join Mayors for Peace and instruct officers to make the necessary arrangements.

The Council had before it correspondence from Councillor Wisely which advised that from 18^th August 2010 there would be two Conservative groups on the Council. The new group would be called Aberdeen Conservatives, with Councillor Donnelly as Group Leader and Councillor Wisely as Group Chairperson.

The correspondence requested that the Council suspend Standing Orders to enable the position of Vice Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee to be reconsidered.

Councillor Wisely moved as a procedural motion, seconded by Councillor Donnelly:-

That the Council suspend Standing Order 2(1) to enable the position of Vice Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee to be reconsidered.

On a division, there voted:-

For the procedural motion  (37)  -  Lord Provost Peter Stephen; Depute Provost Dunbar; and Councillors Adam, Allan, Clark, Collie, Cooney, Corall, Cormack, Cormie, Crockett, Dean, Donnelly, Fletcher, Greig, Hunter, Ironside, Kiddie, Laing, Leslie, McCaig, McDonald, Malone, May, Noble, Penny, Reynolds, Robertson, Jennifer Stewart, John Stewart, Kevin Stewart, Wendy Stuart, John West, Kirsty West, Wisely, Young and Yuill.

Against the procedural motion  (2)  -  Councillors Boulton and Farquharson.

Absent from the division  (2)  -  Councillors Cassie and Graham.

The Council resolved:-

to adopt the procedural motion.

Councillor Wisely moved, seconded by Depute Provost Dunbar:-

That Councillor Donnelly be appointed Vice Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee.

Councillor Farquharson moved as an amendment, seconded by Councillor Boulton:-

That Councillor Farquharson remain as Vice Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee.

On a division, there voted:-

For the motion  (13)  -  Depute Provost Dunbar; and Councillors Cormack, Cormie, Dean, Donnelly, Fletcher, Greig, Robertson, John Stewart, Wendy Stuart, John West, Wisely and Yuill.

For the amendment  (2)  -  Councillors Boulton and Farquharson.

Declined to vote  (23)  -  Lord Provost Peter Stephen; and Councillors Adam, Allan, Clark, Collie, Cooney, Corall, Crockett, Hunter, Ironside, Kiddie, Laing, Leslie, McCaig, McDonald, Malone, May, Noble, Reynolds, Jennifer Stewart, Kevin Stewart, Kirsty West and Young.

Absent from the division  (3)  -  Councillors Cassie, Graham and Penny.

The Council further resolved:-

(i)                 to adopt the motion, thereby appointing Councillor Donnelly as Vice Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee in place of Councillor Farquharson; and

(ii)               to allow the two Conservative groups and Councillor Boulton one cycle of meetings to allocate their committee places between them, and that the matter be reconsidered at the next Council meeting in the event that the allocation was unable to be resolved.

At this juncture, Councillor Crockett paid tribute to Councillor Farquharson for his support in the role of Vice Convener of the Audit and Risk Committee and expressed his sadness at the situation that had just occurred.

(1)               To ask the Convener for Finance and Resources if he is aware of the regulations regarding Allowances and Expenses for Councillors and if so does he recognise the words of an anonymous Administration Councillor who said in the Press and Journal on 2^nd July 2010 “he had been given an envelope of cash for a trip abroad and there were no instructions about how to hand any change back” regardless of his awareness of the regulations can he confirm or otherwise if giving an envelope to a Councillor full of cash meets the requirements of any Act or Regulation laid down by statute and will he refer the matter to the Audit and Risk Committee for scrutiny for them to investigate this and other matters relating to Councillors receiving cash in envelopes?

(2)               To ask the Convener for Finance and Resources what instructions if any has been given by him, his predecessor or by Council officers in relation to ensuring that cash given to Councillors to spend on trips abroad or within the UK given in an envelope or otherwise but unused is returned to the Council?

(3)               To ask the Convener for Finance and Resources to provide Council with a detailed breakdown of all monies given to Councillors for trips abroad or within the UK and the amount returned by Councillors from these trips either within or without the envelope given to them at the start of the trip from May 2007 to present.

(4)               To ask the Chief Executive if she can confirm or otherwise if this Council fully conforms to the regulations laid down by Scottish Ministers in relation to the reimbursement of expenditure incurred on approved duties by Councillors?

(5)               To ask the Chief Executive to confirm or otherwise if Councillor Fletcher’s claim published in the Press and Journal’s letter page on Wednesday 24^th June 2010 and the Evening Express letter page on the same day which states and I quote “I will finally admit that I, too, have waived a significant amount of salary, over £33,000, and not submitted one claim form for councillor expenses, since 2007” is either incredulous or incredible given the fact that the STATEMENT OF ALLOWANCES & EXPENSES FOR ABERDEEN CITY COUNCIL PAID TO AND ON BEHALF OF ELECTED MEMBERS FOR THE YEAR 1^st April 2009 to 31^st March 2010 confirms that Councillor Fletcher has claimed a significant amount of expenses. Will the Chief Executive confirm the amount of claim forms submitted by Councillor Fletcher since 2007 and also the amounts claimed?

The Council had before it five questions, of which due notice had been given in terms of Standing Order 20(2), which had been placed on the agenda as Councillor Young had indicated that he was unhappy with the responses.

Councillor Young

QUESTIONS -

To the Convener of the Finance and Resources Committee

(1)               “To ask the Convener for Finance and Resources if he is aware of the regulations regarding Allowances and Expenses for Councillors and if so does he recognise the words of an anonymous Administration Councillor who said in the Press and Journal on 2^nd July 2010 “he had been given an envelope of cash for a trip abroad and there were no instructions about how to hand any change back” regardless of his awareness of the regulations can he confirm or otherwise if giving an envelope to a Councillor full of cash meets the requirements of any Act or Regulation laid down by statute and will he refer the matter to the Audit and Risk Committee for scrutiny for them to investigate this and other matters relating to Councillors receiving cash in envelopes?”

(2)               “To ask the Convener for Finance and Resources what instructions if any has been given by him, his predecessor or by Council officers in relation to ensuring that cash given to Councillors to spend on trips abroad or within the UK given in an envelope or otherwise but unused is returned to the Council?”

(3)               “To ask the Convener for Finance and Resources to provide Council with a detailed breakdown of all monies given to Councillors for trips abroad or within the UK and the amount returned by Councillors from these trips either within or without the envelope given to them at the start of the trip from May 2007 to present.”

ANSWERS (by Councillor Kevin Stewart) -

(1)               I am aware of the Allowances and Expenses regulations but can relate to the quote in the Press and Journal as no information about returning unspent money was given to me on the first of three overseas trips I have made on behalf of the Council in my eleven years as a Councillor. I asked for that to be rectified on my return from Ireland. I received the relevant advice the second time I went away.

It does not require me to refer the matter to Audit and Risk as the Convener of Audit and Risk can ask for reports on matters of concern and I would be quite happy for the Audit and Risk Committee to look at all matters regarding overseas trips since the inception of this Council in 1996.

Councillor Young seems to be alleging other suspect activities in his line of questioning. If Councillor Young has any knowledge of any wrongdoing then I would urge him to contact the Police and the Monitoring Officer.

(2)               I refer Councillor Young to the answer I gave to Question 1. I cannot answer for any other Councillors who have held the Finance  ...  view the full minutes text for item 14.

“Council agrees that in view of the ongoing serious financial situation affecting public bodies and the major budgetary pressures outlined in the recent UK Governments Emergency Budget Statement the Council’s policy will be to actively seek the sharing of major strategic services with other authorities in the North and North East of Scotland in order to deliver significant budget savings.

Council instructs the Chief Executive to formally approach other authorities in this regard.”

Councillor Kevin Stewart, pursuant to notice, moved:-

“Council agrees that in view of the ongoing serious financial situation affecting public bodies and the major budgetary pressures outlined in the recent UK Government’s Emergency Budget Statement the Council’s policy will be to actively seek the sharing of major strategic services with other authorities in the North and North East of Scotland in order to deliver significant budget savings.

Council instructs the Chief Executive to formally approach other authorities in this regard.”

The following amendment was put forward by the Labour Group:-

Council acknowledges the ongoing serious financial situation affecting Aberdeen City Council by the mismanagement of this SNP/Lib Dem Administration and calls upon the Edinburgh Government to set out more fully the principles that will inform its approach to developing its 2011/12 budget. Calls upon Edinburgh Government to demonstrate real leadership by setting out its spending choices in an open and transparent manner in order that this Council can determine how it can work with other local authorities to deliver excellent services that fulfils its obligations to the people of Aberdeen without the need to slash public services.

In accordance with Standing Order 18(1)(iii), the Lord Provost ruled that the amendment was incompetent, as he considered it to be a motion, which would have required to have been submitted in accordance with the timescales prescribed in Standing Order 21.

The Council resolved:-

to approve the terms of the motion.

“That this Council writes to the Transport Secretary to state that we believe that direct rail links between Aberdeen and London are vital to the economy of Aberdeen City and Shire and should continue and that we are vehemently opposed to proposals contained in Sir Andrew Foster’s report on the Intercity Express Programme which would see these links cut.”

Councillors John Stewart and Kevin Stewart, pursuant to notice, moved:-

“That this Council writes to the Transport Secretary to state that we believe that direct rail links between Aberdeen and London are vital to the economy of Aberdeen City and Shire and should continue and that we are vehemently opposed to proposals contained in Sir Andrew Foster’s report on the Intercity Express Programme which would see these links cut.”

The Council resolved:-

to approve the terms of the motion.

In accordance with the decision recorded under Article 2 of this minute, the following item of business was considered with the press and public excluded.

MATTER OF URGENCY

The Lord Provost intimated that he had directed in terms of Section 50(B)(4)(b) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, that the following item of business be considered as a matter of urgency as it was a matter of outstanding business which the Council had requested be reported on.

DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS

Councillors Dean, Fletcher, Ironside, Malone, Reynolds, Jennifer Stewart and Kirsty West declared interests in the following item of business as members of the Board of Aberdeen Exhibition and Conference Centre (AECC) and left the meeting prior to the Council’s deliberations.

With reference to Article 20 of the minute of its meeting of 10^th February 2010, the Council had before it a report by the Director of Enterprise, Planning and Infrastructure which sought approval to withhold support for AECC’s planned hotel development, due to the unacceptably high risks associated with the proposed operational and financial structure of the current proposals from the Council’s perspective.

The report reminded members of the decision of Council of 10^th February 2010. Following this decision, officers had embarked upon a series of discussions with AECC and their advisers in an effort to complete the necessary documentation required to conclude the hotel development deal in accordance with the terms and caveats as outlined in the report to Council in February 2010, which were designed to protect the Council’s interests and ensure that the Council would not be exposed to any unreasonable risks.

The report advised that the Council’s legal advisers had been unable to submit a final report summarising the hotel development deal, and the various risks associated with it from the Council’s perspective, until 21^st June 2010 as result of delays in obtaining and evaluating the necessary documentation. The report emphasised that by the time the final report was produced, the proposed deal varied significantly from the deal submitted by AECC to Council officers at the beginning of 2010. The main differences between the proposals were contained within an appendix to the report.

Based on the content of the full report from the Council’s legal advisers and taking into account the main differences between the proposals, the report recommended that the Council do not support the proposed hotel development proposal in its current form. The report envisaged, however, that a hotel development could be delivered using a structure that exposed the Council to less risk, whilst making use of the substantial investment that had been made to date on the project.

The report went on to discuss options for the re-financing of AECC if the Council decided to withhold its support for the hotel development, as the medium term plan to put AECC on a stable financial footing, approved by Council in February 2010, assumed two cash injections as a result of the hotel development proceeding. The costs associated with the hotel  ...  view the full minutes text for item 17.