Present:-

Councillors Hart (Chairman), Barker, Clatworthy, Croad, Davis, S Hughes, Leadbetter, McInnes and Parsons

Members attending in accordance with Standing Orders 8 and 25:-

Councillors Brazil, Dempster, Gilbert, Greenslade, Hannan, B Hughes, Julian, Owen, Randall Johnson, Westlake and Wright

*450 Minutes

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on 9 December 2015 be signed as a correct record.

*451 Matters of Urgency

There was no item raised as a matter of urgency.

*452 Announcements

There was no announcement by the Chairman at this meeting.

*453 Petitions

There was no petition received from a Member of the Public or the Council.

*454 Questions from Members of the Council

There was no question from a Member of the Council.

KEY DECISIONS

*455 Budget 2016/17

(Councillors Brazil, Dempster, Greenslade, Hannan, Owen, Westlake and Wright attended in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

The Cabinet considered the Report of the County Treasurer (CT/16/2 - text only | pdf CT/16/2) on the preparation of the Council s Budget for 2016/17.

The Cabinet noted that, notwithstanding the content of the Chancellor s Autumn Statement and the subsequent announcements relating to public sector efficiency savings and expenditure on social care, the Secretary of State for Communities Local Government had only announced details of the provisional Local Government Settlement for 2016/17 on 17 December 2015; the announcement by Government of the public health grant was however not expected until the latter part of this month, hampering effective planning and timely consideration and scrutiny of the Council s budget for this year.

Nonetheless and following a considered analysis by the County Treasurer of the statement of the provisional settlement and the information made available at that time, the Cabinet was now recommended to endorse the revenue spending targets set out in the Report now submitted.

The County Treasurer s Report also explained that whilst it had been widely anticipated that the settlement would only provide figures for one year possibly followed by a consultation on changes to the grant distribution methodology - the Government had in fact introduced radical changes to grant distribution immediately and had, inter alia, provided grant figures for individual Authorities over a four year period from 2016/17 to 2019/20. The detail of those allocations and the implications for those years were set out more fully in Report CS/16/2 - text only | pdf CS/16/2 including the need to prepare Annual Efficiency Plans , details of which were still awaited.

The Cabinet was advised that, for the County Council, Government (core) funding in 2016/17 would be 151,600,000 - a reduction of some 28,200,000 (15.7%) from the 2015/16 figure. In addition a number of grants previously allocated separately had been included in the core funding for this year and if those were excluded - to give a more accurate like for like comparison - the reduction of core funding would be 17.4% compared with the average of 16.6% for Shire Counties. As at the time the County Treasurer s Report was prepared, the Council had received notification of grants totalling 13,732,000 (over and above the Dedicated Schools Grant of 460,401,000) while notification of other grants were expected in the coming weeks, including the Public Health grant.

Both the Cabinet Member for Resources Asset Management and the County Treasurer commented upon the effect of the revised grant distribution methodology which was that Shire Counties would, collectively, lose funding in 2016/17. Moreover, within the allocation to County Councils and Upper Tier Authorities, there had been a further re-distribution with funding flowing from Councils with a higher tax base to Councils with a lower tax base; thought to be to compensate those Councils dealing with Adult Social Care pressures who would raise less income from a 2% precept. Their view was that this had not been a good settlement contrary to the view expressed by the Local Government Association either for the County Council in particular or for Shire Counties in general and that the scale of reductions was unprecedented.

Members were nonetheless advised that as the Council s prudent planning assumptions had assumed a reduction of 14.3% in funding for the year ahead and while the provisional settlement had resulted in core funding some 2,500,000 less than that anticipated (partly offset by the new Rural Services Delivery Grant ( 1,841,000)) the difference was nonetheless sufficiently close to the Council s detailed planning such that it was not necessary to find further savings in 2016/17 to balance the books .

The Treasurer s Report also remarked upon the opportunity to account for Capital Financing Charges in a different manner which was currently being explored (Minute *458 below also refers) and which could provide a further stream of revenue savings that would benefit the Council in 2016/17 and beyond.

The County Treasurer also confirmed that the provisional settlement allowed relevant Councils to raise Council Tax by 2% to help cope with the costs of adult social care; any such increase to be in addition to the normal 2% maximum increase that could be levied before triggering a referendum. However, Section 151 Officers (the County Treasurer) were required to notify the Government by 5pm on January 15th if a Council was minded to take advantage in whole or in part of the flexibility to raise a 2% precept for Adult Social Care and the Cabinet's instructions on that specific point were therefore sought. The consensus of opinion among all Members present was that the Council should indicate its intention so to do and the Leader of the Council affirmed that the target budget now proposed was predicated upon the assumption that the Council would be asked to agree to raise Council Tax by up to the maximum permissible as summarised above to help meet increasing pressures on finances.

The Leader also reported on the representations made to all Devon Members of Parliament at a meeting on 12 January about the Council's budgetary position and undertook also to circulate a copy of the briefing paper prepared therefor to all Members of the Council.

The Provisional Finance Settlement would, as usual, be subject to a period of consultation and the final settlement was not expected until late January or early February.

Members acknowledged that the setting of service targets as now recommended was the beginning of the process of determining the County Council s budget which, following a period of consultation within the Council and externally, would culminate in the Cabinet, on 12 February 2016, formulating a budget for consideration by the County Council on 18 February 2016.

Members further acknowledged that, as in previous years and as part of the detailed budget preparation exercise that would follow the setting of target budgets, the Cabinet and Council would necessarily also have regard to appropriate assessments of the impact of the budget on services and be mindful of any legislative and equality considerations; such assessments would also be made available to relevant Scrutiny Committees to be taken into account as part of their deliberations and in order that all Members shall have regard to the requirements placed upon the Council to exercise its Public Sector Equality Duty under s149 of the Equality Act 2010, before making any decisions.

The matter having been debated and the options and/or alternatives and other relevant factors set out in the County Treasurer s Report and/or referred to above having been considered:

It was MOVED by Councillor Clatworthy, SECONDED by Councillor Hart and

RESOLVED

(a) that the Provisional Finance Settlement be noted;

(b) that revenue spending targets for the 2016/17 Revenue Budget be as follows:

	2015/16 Adjusted Budget* 000 s	Inflation 000 s	Pressures 000 s	Reduction/Savings 000 s	2016/17 Target Budget 000 s	Change %
People	299,942	6,135	29,917	(19,876)	316,118	5.4
Place	97,329	2,626	3,485	(9,506)	93,934	-3.5
Corporate	36,716	955	750	(4,935)	33,486	-8.8
	433,987	9,716	34,152	(34,317)	443,538	2.2
*Adjustments for permanent virements between services

(c) that the County Treasurer be authorised to write to HM Government by 15 January 2016 indicating that the Council is minded to raise the precept by 2% to help fund Adult Social Care.

[NB: The 2016/17 Budget Impact Assessment will be available, alongside any specific impact assessments undertaken as part of the budget s preparation, at: https://new.devon.gov.uk/impact/published/budget-setting-201617/]

*456 A38 Deep Lane North Junction Improvements, Sherford

(Councillors Brazil, Julian and Westlake attended in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

The Cabinet considered the Report of the Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment (PTE/16/1 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/1) seeking approval to the detailed scheme and estimate for this scheme; the first of two phases for a scheme required under the planning consent to upgrade the existing junction to increase capacity for the New Community at Sherford and accommodate traffic at Langage Energy Park. The Report also sought approval to proceed with the appointment of a contractor to undertake the scheme, following the recent tender process as set out therein.

The Head of Service commended this [Phase I] scheme which would provide the opportunity to fulfil the potential for housing and employment planned at this strategic site. The scheme was consistent with the aims of the Devon and Torbay Local Transport Plan 3 and had successfully attracted Growth Deal One funding as a priority transport scheme by the Heart of the South West LEP. The scheme had been developed on the basis of the Deep Lane North preliminary design included with the planning permission for Sherford, through a number of options which had re-assessed potential adverse impacts on themes such as capacity, safety and maintenance. The proposed modifications to the existing junction within its highway boundary had been made to minimise landscape and land requirements and impact on neighbouring properties; the junction size had been kept to the minimum requirements.

The design option now recommended had resulted from extensive consultation with other highway authorities and took account of impacts on local bus services, maintenance requirements and other comments received.

The Head of Service s Report also incorporated an Impact Assessment relating to the possible impacts of the proposal, which had been circulated previously for the attention of Members at this meeting in order that as part of its determination of the next steps in the process the Cabinet might have full regard to the responsibilities placed upon it to exercise its Public Sector Equality Duty, under s149 of the Equality Act 2010, where relevant. That Assessment acknowledged that while the environmental aspects of the proposals would be fully assessed through a separate Environmental Impact Assessment (which had been undertaken alongside the planning application as also referred to in Report PTE/16/1 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/1) it concluded that the scheme would have a positive impact on the wider community and, in particular on pedestrians and cyclists, with the retention of the existing shared pedestrian/cycle path and new signalised crossing points at Ridgeway Junction. In economic terms the scheme would facilitate travel and development which would have a beneficial impact upon the local economy by enabling employment and housing development in the area to proceed with mitigated impact.

The matter having been debated and the options and/or alternatives and other relevant factors (e.g. financial, sustainability, carbon impact, risk management, equality and legal considerations and Public Health impact) set out in the Head of Service s Report and/or referred to above having been considered:

It was MOVED by Councillor Leadbetter, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

RESOLVED

(a) that approval be given to the scheme design at Appendix 2 to Report PTE/16/1 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/1 and on drawing number Dwg B230029, at an estimated cost of 3,100,000, to enable the discharge of the planning condition for Sherford New Community planning decision (Ref: 7_49/2426/06/O);

(b) that the Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment be authorised, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Economic Growth and Cabinet Liaison for Exeter and the local County Councillor(s), to make minor amendments to the design of the scheme in consultation;

(c) that Officers proceed with the appointment of a contractor under the Highway Structural Maintenance (HSM) Framework as set out in paragraph 6 of Report PTE/16/1 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/1.

[NB: The Impact Assessment referred to above may be viewed alongside Minutes of this meeting and may also be available at: http://new.devon.gov.uk/impact/].

*457 Exmouth, Dinan Way Extension

(Councillor B Hughes attended in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

The Cabinet considered the Report of the Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment (PTE/16/2 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/2) on the outcome of consultations on this scheme and seeking approval to proceed with the appraisal and assessment process for the route options, the submission of a planning application and commence associated land purchase.

The Head of Service s Report outlined the background to the need for and development of this scheme which had been identified in the emerging local plan and was intended to:

provide a route of appropriate standard to connect the A376 and Dinan Way distributor road thereby providing a high quality continuous link to the residential and employment areas on the northern edge of Exmouth;

improve safety and amenity around the existing highway network in and around Exmouth; and

mitigate the impact of new developments planned around the Northern edge of Exmouth.

The Report also outlined the outcome of consultations held in June 2015 and the rationale for the continued modification of the proposed route. Consultations had been held in June 2015 on three options (the Valley Option, the South Option and the status quo) and of the 316 questionnaires received, 44% were in favour of the South option, 23% for the Valley option, and 25% for the status quo. Notwithstanding the preference of a majority of respondents for the South option (in part due to the reduced physical impact on the landscape, ecological impact, and cost) the Head of Service s Report indicated that Historic England, the National Trust and East Devon District Council had not supported that option in view of its proximity to A la Ronde and other listed properties.

Subsequently, and having had regard to the weight placed upon heritage matters within the planning policy framework and recognising the importance of preserving such assets, a revised route had been developed in collaboration with East Devon District Council which aimed to minimise obtrusion and thus the negative effect upon such assets and the wider landscape context, namely the Modified Valley option. The Head of Service acknowledged that an appraisal of route options supported a planning application for the preferred route option now recommended.

The Cabinet noted representations made by the County Councillor for the Exmouth Halsdon Woodbury Division in support of the proposal now submitted, which had followed a thorough, comprehensive analysis of the issue that had resulted in a scheme which he felt was welcomed by his constituents and would effectively complete Dinan Way and which would undoubtedly benefit Exmouth and the wider area.

The Head of Service s Report also incorporated an Impact Assessment relating to the possible impacts of the proposal, which had been circulated previously for the attention of Members at this meeting in order that as part of its determination of the next steps in the process the Cabinet might have full regard to the responsibilities placed upon it to exercise its Public Sector Equality Duty, under s149 of the Equality Act 2010, where relevant. That Assessment recognised that the scheme would have a positive impact on pedestrians and cyclists with the provision of a new shared pedestrian/cycle path and additional improvements along Summer Lane, had the potential to provide benefits to public transport users by creating the possibility for new routes offering shorter journey times and facilitate travel and development which would have a beneficial impact upon the local economy by enabling employment and housing development in the area to proceed with mitigated impact.

The matter having been debated and the options and/or alternatives and other relevant factors (e.g. financial, sustainability, carbon impact, risk management, equality and legal considerations and Public Health impact) set out in the Head of Service s Report and/or referred to above having been considered:

It was MOVED by Councillor Leadbetter, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

RESOLVED

(a) that the preliminary revised scheme layout shown on drawings DWG A10020/22 at Appendix 4 to Report PTE/16/2 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/2 be approved and a planning application be submitted;

(b) that approval be also given to the necessary land acquisition (by negotiation and, if required, through the use of compulsory purchase powers for any route with planning permission) only when planning consent has been obtained;

(c) that the previous alignment approved in 1994 as shown on DWG 6045E/88 (Appendix 5 to Report PTE/16/2 - text only | pdf supplementary information PTE/16/2) be superseded.

[NB: The Impact Assessment referred to above may be viewed alongside Minutes of this meeting and may also be available at: http://new.devon.gov.uk/impact/].

*458 Budget 2015/16 - Monitoring Report

(Councillors Brazil, Greenslade, Hannan, Julian, Owen and Westlake attended in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

The Cabinet considered the Report of the County Treasurer (CT/16/1 - text only | pdf CT/16/1) on the position at Month 8 outlining areas where there were specific pressures on budgets, potential under- and over-spendings in the current financial year and on management action being taken where individual budget lines were experiencing pressures.

The Report revealed that the overall forecast revenue overspend at the year end had reduced to 1,800,000 ( 4,500,000 at Month 6) which was welcomed by Members; acknowledging nonetheless that pressure remained on all services to reduce expenditure or increase income throughout the remainder of the year. Members also noted that there was an opportunity to account for Capital Financing Charges (akin to debt restructuring) on an amended basis which would provide a substantial in-year cost saving, to be applied to the Outturn position and beyond. The County Treasurer advised that other local authorities had been or were implementing similar accounting changes and proposals would be submitted as part of the Treasury Management Strategy to Corporate Services Scrutiny Committee (and Cabinet and the County Council thereafter) later this month and in February 2016.

The Cabinet noted that the potential overspend for People s Services had now reduced by 1,800,000 - to 7,300,000 - reflecting active management taken since the previous monitoring report, with savings plans in place across all People's services. Those savings included managing vacancies, better utilisation of block contracts, underspendings from the Better Care Fund and the effects of delaying price rises in adult social care. All People s services had contributed to the reduction in overspend viz: Childrens Social Work Child Protection ( 157,000); Education Learning ( 224,000); Social Care Commissioning ( 554,000) and Adult Social Care ( 876,000). Members acknowledged that the pressures of spending in Children s Social Care appeared to have plateaued, with numbers of children in care changing little for several months which, coupled with recent reductions in the average cost of a child in care, had enabled savings to be made.

Place Services currently indicated a projected underspend of 500,000 and an underspend of 1,400,000 was forecast for Corporate Services principally because of further delay in legislation relating to the Medical Examiner service, favourable negotiations on mortuary contract costs and savings arising from staff vacancies and increased income from the Registration Service.

The matter having been debated and the options and/or alternatives and other relevant factors set out in the Report and/or referred to above having been considered:

It was MOVED by Councillor Clatworthy, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

RESOLVED that the position based on Month 8 be noted.

STANDING ITEMS

*459 Questions from Members of the Public

There was no question from a Member of the public.

460 Notices of Motion (County Council Minute 160/10 December 2015)

*(a) Protection of the Bee Population

The following Notice of Motion submitted to the County Council by Councillor Hook had been referred to the Cabinet in accordance with Standing Order 8(2) for consideration, to refer it to another committee or to make a recommendation back to the Council.

Bees play an essential role in food production. The Bee population has been in alarming decline in recent years, due to various external influences. One such harmful influence is the use of neonicotinoids, an aggressive pesticide. Devon is heavily reliant on agriculture and this council will therefore prohibit the use of this pesticide on all land that it owns or manages in a proactive effort to reverse the destruction of the Bee community here in Devon. The Council will also explore other ways which, in addition to banning this particular pesticide, will help the survival of the Bee population; a report on other potential actions will be brought to Place Scrutiny .

The Cabinet also received and had regard to a factual briefing/background paper prepared by the Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment (PTE/16/3 - text only | pdf PTE/16/3) to facilitate the Cabinet s discussion of this matter which had been accepted as a fair and balanced response by the Mover of the Notice of Motion, who was himself unable to be present at the meeting.

It was MOVED by Councillor Croad, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

RESOLVED

(i) that, notwithstanding the facility that exists within the Council s Rules of Procedure enabling Members to ask a Scrutiny Committee to review any area of Council activity directly, the Place Scrutiny Committee be invited to consider undertaking a piece of work on the issues raised by the Notice of Motion, and, if it be so inclined, to report any findings and recommendations to the Cabinet prior to any further consideration by the Council;

(ii) that while the Notice of Motion may not fully reflect the current and complex position relating to this class of agricultural pesticides, Cabinet acknowledges that they do represent a threat to bees and other wild insects all of which are vital to the pollination of crops and the Place Scrutiny Committee be therefore also asked to comment upon the desirability of and review the proposed Pollinators Action Plan (to be produced by the Head of Planning, Transportation Environment and the Head of Business Strategy and Support), through which more detailed consideration might be given to any relevant restrictions on the use of neonicotinoids on County Council property and any opportunities to support the conservation of bees and other pollinators.

(b) Renewable Energy Subsidies

(Councillor Wright attended in accordance with Standing Order 8 and Councillors Brazil, and Owen in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

The following Notice of Motion submitted to the County Council by Councillor Wright had been referred to the Cabinet in accordance with Standing Order 8(2) for consideration, to refer to another committee or to make a recommendation back to the Council.

This Council is working hard to promote economic growth during a very difficult period in the UK s finances. Unfortunately, thousands of jobs across the south west could now be lost as a result of dramatic cuts in subsidies to renewable energy schemes. This Council regrets the government s proposal to reduce subsidies for renewable energy schemes at the speed and scale proposed and agrees to write to all Devon MPs, urging them to publicly support the community energy groups co-ordinated by Regen SW, that have united to campaign against the cuts

The Cabinet also received and had regard to a factual briefing/background paper prepared by the Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment (PTE/16/4 - text only | pdf PTE/16/4) to facilitate the Cabinet s discussion of this matter.

The Mover of the original Notice of Motion accepted that in the circumstances and accepting that the Council had previously made representations which appeared to have been taken into account in the Government s announcement last month, there was nothing to be gained from further representations at this stage and she acknowledged the action now proposed.

It was MOVED by Councillor Croad, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

RESOLVED that, while acknowledging the sentiment behind the Notice of Motion, the Council be advised that in light of the action already taken there is nothing to be gained through additional lobbying at this point in time and it be recommended therefore to take no further action on the Notice of Motion but, instead, Officers should respond appropriately to the forthcoming review of the Renewable Heat Incentive (making further representations to Devon MPs at that time); moreover, and in the meantime, Officers continue also to explore economic opportunities associated with the renewables sector through the LEP Rural Special Interest Group, the related ESIF grants distributed via the LEP and through the Devolution process.

(c) Trade Union Bill

(Councillor Hannan attended in accordance with Standing Order 8 and Councillors Brazil and Westlake in accordance with Standing Order 25(2) and spoke to this item).

The following Notice of Motion submitted to the County Council by Councillor Hannan had been referred to the Cabinet in accordance with Standing Order 8(2) for consideration, to refer to another committee or to make a recommendation back to the Council.

The Council notes the positive contribution that trade unions make to the delivery of public services in Devon. Through partnership rather than conflict, trade unions represent their members, assist in the development of a safe and decent working environment, and add to the overall ethos of this Council as an attractive place to work.

The Council believes that proposals in the Trade Union Bill could undermine collaboration between employers and trade union members, and is concerned about the impact this would have here and in many other workplaces across the County and therefore resolves:

to endeavour to continue to offer a check-off service - the ability of trade union members to have their subscriptions deducted at point of payment - to all members of staff at Devon County Council and if this is not possible, to come up with a local plan to facilitate alternative methods of payment;

to support the continuation of Trade Union Facility Time, in recognition of its contribution to reduced litigation and to promoting a healthier, safer and more positive working environment

The Cabinet also received and had regard to a factual briefing/background paper (SC/16/1 - text only | pdf SC/16/1) prepared by the Head of Service for Communities to facilitate the Cabinet s discussion of this matter. In acknowledging the value of an effective working relationship with Trade Unions as espoused by the Mover of the Motion, the Cabinet Member for Performance Engagement reiterated the need for all necessary options to be explored in light of the challenging financial climate and undertook to update Members further on the outcome of further programmed meetings with the staff side on this matter.

It was MOVED by Councillor Parsons, SECONDED by Councillor Hart, and

RESOLVED that the Council be recommended not to approve the Notice of Motion acknowledging that:

(a) the Cabinet had already confirmed its support for check-off (as previously discussed at the Personnel Partnership in October) and [the Council] will continue to enable check-off to operate unless and until the proposed legislation was to preclude that from happening;

(b) while the Council is willing to assist the Trade Unions it does not believe that it should take responsibility for developing a local plan to facilitate alternative methods of payment, that any such activity should be undertaken in union members own time and not be funded by the Council; and

(c) in relation to facility time, the Council will continue to provide a smaller, sustainable level of funding for a small number of dedicated Trade Union representatives.

*461 Delegated Action/Urgent Matters

The Registers of Decisions taken by Members under the urgency provisions or delegated powers were available for inspection at the meeting in line with the Council s Constitution and Regulation 13 of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012; a summary of decisions taken since the last meeting had been published with the Agenda for this meeting. Decisions taken by Officers under any express authorisation of the Cabinet or other Committee or under any general authorisation within the Council s Scheme of Delegation set out in Part 3 of the Council s Constitution may be viewed at https://new.devon.gov.uk/democracy/officer-decisions/

*462 Forward Plan

In accordance with the Council s Constitution, the Cabinet reviewed the Forward Plan and determined those items of business to be defined as key and framework decisions and included in the Plan from the date of this meeting onwards reflecting the requirements of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 (at https://new.devon.gov.uk/democracy/how-the-council-works/forward-plan/)

*463 Land at Monkerton Farm, Exeter: Disposal of land surplus to requirements (Cabinet Minute 416/14 October 2015)

The Cabinet noted that the Head of Business Strategy Support had withdrawn this matter from consideration at this meeting pending continuing discussions; to be considered further at a subsequent meeting as shown on the Forward Plan.

NOTES: 1. These Minutes should be read in association with any Reports or documents referred to therein, for a complete record. 2. Notice of the decisions taken by the Cabinet will be sent by email to all Members of the Council within 2 working days of their being made and will, in the case of key decisions, come into force 5 working days after that date unless 'called-in' or referred back in line with the provisions of the Council's Constitution. 3.The Minutes of the Cabinet are published on the County Council s website at 4. A recording of the webcast of this meeting will also available to view for up to six months from the date of the meeting, at http://www.devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/home 5. Notice of agreement under regulation 5(6) of the Local Authorities (Executive Arrangements) (Meetings and Access to Information) (England) Regulations 2012 that in accordance with Regulations 5(6), 10 and 11 of the above the Chairman of the Corporate Services Scrutiny Committee had agreed to the matter at Minute 466 above being taken at this meeting, if necessary, being satisfied that the decision was of special urgency and could not reasonably be deferred.

*DENOTES DELEGATED MATTER WITH POWER TO ACT

The meeting started at 10.30am and finished at 12.03pm.