Transcript

Good morning, it's 10.03am on the 18th of June, 2024. My name is Councillor Murray-Turner and I'm the Chairman of the Culture and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee and I'll be chairing this meeting today. My Vice-Chairman is Councillor Barry Dobson. We're not expecting fire alarm to sound today. If the alarm does go off, please leave the building by the nearest exit and the assembly point is on the green in front of St Peter's Hill surgery. Please can you ensure that your mobile phones are switched off or turned to silent for the duration of the meeting. Please also be aware that the meeting is being recorded and being live streamed via public eye on the Council's website and also can you ensure your microphones are turned off when speaking, after speaking. I'd like to welcome all Councillors, Officers and the public who are joining our meeting today and members of the press will now begin to work our way through today's agenda. I haven't seen any public speakers coming forward so item 1 public speaking, there isn't anybody. Do we have any apologies for absence please Chairman? Thank you Chairman, we've had apologies from Councillor James Dennison, so Councillor Tim Harrison is substituting and Councillor Gareth Knight, Councillor Graham Gill is substituting. We've also had apologies from Karen Whitfield who would normally be in attendance. Thanks Chairman. Thank you. Are there any disclosures of interest from any members? Does anyone hold anything that they need to tell us about before the meeting? Yes, James is just going to add something. Thank you Chairman, it's just to advise, we've obviously got some board members of LeisureSK in the room, I'm aware there's I think three items on the agenda that pertain to LeisureSK. My advice would be that for the two items specifically on LeisureSK that the board members remain in the Chamber during public session and be allowed to answer any questions the committee might have of them and I think that extends to private session if members are minded to go into private as well, the board members need to be here to answer any questions. Following that, if members want to debate about the LeisureSK items, then I'd probably advise that the board members leave at that point but just so they are able to remain to answer any questions the committee may have of them. There's also an item on the agenda about an appointment of a working group. Graham may advise differently but I think my advice on that would be because you're either agreeing or not agreeing to having a working group on LeisureSK, I'm not sure it would be appropriate to have the board members in at that stage. I don't know whether Graham's got anything else to add but that would be my advice, thank you Chairman. Thank you very much James. Is it a point of order? Yeah, just looking at Item 9, I have the play area strategy, I'm also a board member and trustee of the Dyson Park Action Group but I don't think it should affect my involvement in that conversation, thank you. Thanks very much for that Graham. OK, moving on, the minutes from the last meeting. Now, can we, those members that were present, and I know there's been some upturn in the committee since then, are we OK to approve the minutes from the last meeting? And can we have a seconder for that please? Thank you Matt. All those in favour? And those minutes are duly passed. Sorry, was there anyone against the minutes? Are there any abstentions? OK. Moving on then, updates from the previous meeting. Are there any updates from the previous meeting? Thank you Chairman, just to say there was one action from the previous meeting around the cultural strategy update, the action status is to be discussed with committee members, I suspect this is because the proposed tour dates are in July. I don't know whether it's easy with that action, whether I get Amy or myself or a member of the team to get members on the committee to confirm which date they prefer to go on, I think that is the only action from the previous meeting. Also I'm not sure with those dates there, you've got one date on the 2nd of July which is prior to the election, that might not affect your attendance, but as I say, Democratic Services are happy to confirm dates with members and which one you prefer to go on. Thank you. Thank you very much for that James. So we'll do that then, we'll get the officers to contact us and see when we can go and visit the venues. Item 6, are there any announcements or updates from the leader of the council, cabinet members or the head of paid service? Thank you Paul. And also there has been a question submitted to the meeting prior to the meeting via email from Gareth Knight and Paul Stokes is going to answer that question as well in his briefing. Thank you. Thank you. Yes, Councillor Knight had requested an update on where we were in terms of the markets following the update that Councillor Morgan gave us following a survey she carried out previously on behalf of Grantham Charter Trustees. We didn't actually receive anything from Bourne or Stamford in terms of the markets, but obviously there was a substantial focus on Grantham in terms of the performance. There was a proposal previously to set up a working group, but I think it was actually Councillor Gill who suggested that a lot of work had gone on via Councillor Harrison and why do we need another working group. But in terms of the report that we received from Councillor Morgan, there was a whole raft of potential suggestions from those members of the public that had responded. We have actually instigated some of those suggestions. Some of them were due to be instigated anyway but others have come forward. There were potentially, I don't know, about 50 or 60 suggestions so clearly you can't just go ahead with all of those. The idea is obviously the market has been condensed and maybe Councillor Harrison would like to add to this, but the market has been condensed whilst the marketplace works have been taking place and there has actually been substantial uptake of the stalls from crafters and others and the market in its condensed form has been well attended and quite successful in my opinion. I go every week as do others. So the plan is that probably in September will come with an updated review of the markets. Thanks very much Councillor Stokes. Are there any further updates from members of the cabinet? Thank you Chair. Just further to what Councillor Stokes has said, there is quite a large upturning footfall in the marketplace at the moment. By design or by default, moving certain stalls to the south end of the market has captured the footfall, the highest footfall in the town down Welby Street and around to the next sort of shopping centre area. It's moving two food stalls down to that end, the south end of the market has brought a lot of new footfall into the market. People who didn't even know those stalls were there and they're progressing down the market. As Councillor Stokes said, the work I've done on bringing the crafters into the market has worked really well. They come once on the 31st Saturday of the month, the farmers market comes on the 2nd Saturday of the month, we're looking at bringing antiqueas in on the 3rd Saturday of the month and a world food market on the 4th Saturday of the month. We've already had different food stalls attending, Spanish ones, Eastern ones and Indian ones attending, doing street food in there, that's all taken off well. The work that's been done providing street entertainment in the market to counteract the roadworks that's going on has also helped, engaging with the kids, so there's lots of positives there at the moment. We started a three week course of music entertainment in the market on the Conduit Cafe last week, slightly interrupted by the rainfall but hopefully the second one this week will be a lot better. So it's all looking good in the market at the moment. Thank you Chairman and congratulations on the appointment. Just a question that I'll ask kind of sensitively, obviously normally at the start of the meeting we'd get an update from I guess the Director of Growth and Culture, obviously who hasn't been here today and hasn't been in the last meeting. Obviously Karen Whitfield has also sent her apologies for the meeting so I'm just conscious that we actually are missing the two fundamental key officer positions for this culture and leisure committee today. I don't know if the Chief Executive has any updates that she could possibly share but it's just an observation that we seem to be missing two of the key officers for today's meeting. Thank you. Karen, are you able to answer that? Thank you Chairman. I'm sure our members appreciate that our officers are allowed leave. One member of staff is on leave and one member of staff is absent at the moment. But please be reassured Chairman that myself and also the team leader for Leisure Parts and Open Spaces and the longest title in the Council is here to hopefully answer any questions that need to be taken today. Thank you very much. Are there any further things to say on that point? No? Okay, brilliant. We'll move on to Item 7 which is the Grantham High Street Heritage Action Zone Completion Report which I believe is going to be introduced by Claire Saunders. Thank you Mr Chairman. I'd like to present this report to the committee today on the closure of the Grantham High Street Heritage Action Zone Program. The program which was funded by Historic England and South Australian District Council took place over four years beginning in May 2020 and completing on the 31st of March 2024. The report outlines in some detail the successes, challenges and lessons learnt through the delivery of the program and the additional associated cultural program which was funded by Historic England and the National Lottery Heritage Fund which ran from 2021 to March 2024. Although much further detail is provided in the report and the appendices to the report I would like to draw the committee's attention to the following key points. Over its four years of delivery the program successfully delivered shopfront and building regeneration projects to seven properties within the town centre and in addition supported significant restoration works to Westgate Hall which has allowed the ongoing repair and restoration of the building and its future use as a restaurant from its previous long-term vacant state. Over the four years the total grant secured from Historic England was £672,000 which was matched by £284,000 from SKDC. Over that time we also leveraged over £300,000 of private sector matched from people participating in the grant scheme which was over three times the projected value at the time of the bid, putting forward the bid in 2019. In addition a further £370,000 of additional value was leveraged through the scheme which includes the ongoing contributions to the fit out and works at Westgate Hall as well as further private sector investment in two shopfronts in the town centre and other commercial properties securing £18,600 in funding to support Grantham Museum and £10,000 from the Woodland Trust to support feasibility into street greening in the town centre. In addition we carried out a programme of community engagement, of consultation and the cultural programme which included several large scale artwork installations as well as costumed tours, small scale art projects and the creation of long-standing arts facilities in the town centre. The involvement in the scheme led to Grantham being nominated and becoming a finalist for two major awards, the Academy of Urbanism's Great Town and Small City Award and Visa's Rising Star High Street Award. There were of course challenges across the delivery of the programme. A lot was tied into of course the inflation that was seen across those four years which significantly impacted the capital programme but which we were able to mitigate due to renegotiation of some of the grant terms with Historic England. Historic England also required us to spend the full allocation of our grant funding within financial years. We weren't able to move funding from one year to another which unfortunately meant that when capital programmes did hit across unforeseen circumstances which are almost always foreseen when it comes to working with historic buildings there's always something unexpected that you can expect to happen. It meant that in some instances we weren't able to draw down the full grant in a particular financial year and we had to kind of reallocate funding from future years but nonetheless we did successfully deliver the programme as planned. One of the key lessons learnt through the scheme was around how we structured those shopfront grants. When we moved into this scheme we built very much on the work that had been delivered under a previous shopfront scheme and wanted to keep the grant programme operating in a very similar way in that it was an open application, people could come forward for applications at any time. However on reflection, given the uncertainty that many of our private sector partners felt coming forward with increasing inflation, I feel that in future should we get the opportunity to do that again, a way to possibly mitigate this uncertainty and to make sure that there is an advantage to being first to apply which was seen in this situation that rather than having a wholly open scheme we would do things as rounds of funding which would allow projects to be more effectively compared against each other in terms of their advantages for the town centre rather than essentially operating on a first come first serve basis for the grants. As I say, much more extensive detail is presented in the report on the appendices and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. Thank you very much for that Claire. Having read the report in depth it's very detailed and really well written and I saw that the main downside of the whole scheme was the inflexibility of being able to transfer grants from year to year which I think you brought up two or three times at different points during the report. Are there any questions from the floor? Councillor Martin. Thank you, Chen. I found this quite an interesting report actually. I was just wondering could you clarify where the Future High Streets Fund and the Heritage Zone sort of merged within this report because the appendix seems to be full of things referring to the public realm and how the project fell flat due to the conduit lane issue and such like and it's not really mentioned in the main report and I'm just wondering if you could sort of just clarify where the two mixed. Yeah, certainly. So the two programs because they were both funded by government departments we had to be very clear in separation in terms of what was funded so we had to make sure that we weren't at any point cross funding at various elements so although the two programs were designed to be quite closely aligned so that they would support one another they were very distinct in their operation so in that way although obviously when we put the bid in for this we were aware of what was likely to come forward in the Future High Street Fund bid. This bid did in fact go in first so this was submitted December 2019 the Future High Street Fund bid was submitted early 2020 so we were kind of having to anticipate what might be in that bid so there were elements within the Future High Street Heritage Action Zone that were kind of in almost as placeholders and when we then secured the Future High Street Fund funding later on the following year we had to do a quick reevaluation as to where it was most appropriate for certain elements of work to fall and where there was the greater benefit but in some instances that did allow for example originally there was some funding included within the High Street Heritage Action Zone bid for Public Realm Works because the Future High Street Fund was going to do that far more extensively we were able to renegotiate with Historic England and use that funding to support a much larger regeneration program at Westgate Hall so it was making sure that there was that separation between the two and that it was a very clear cut separation for the purposes of the Treasury who wouldn't allow us to double fund but trying to make sure that the work was still supporting rather than in competition with each other. Thank you for that. So just reading some of this sort of final report and the way it was done I'm just wondering where we are now I'm just wondering what is the current vision for this project because obviously this refers to the marketplace we were at one point going to shut Conduit Lane and actually build I presume some kind of property to block that road up creating a proper zone in that area for events and such like and as we know we've actually gone ahead with kind of half of that project and I'm just wondering where we are now as far as the vision goes this seems to be a conclusion and I'm just wondering where we are. If I could perhaps answer that so the purpose of this report is really to summarise what's gone on with the past scheme this isn't a preparation for the future scheme our duty in this instance is to vote that we note the report thank you for doing it but that is an interesting question perhaps we could bring it to the agenda for a future meeting. It's just obviously we're spending £1.8 million on refurbing the marketplace at the moment and it's just really a case of why I'm just intrigued but if you're going to come back to that later in another time then that's fine. Yes Councillor Harrison. We're not spending £4.4 million on the marketplace. There's two projects going there all that money is not being spent on the marketplace. I think for the purposes of this item we're noting Claire Saunders's report rather than going into a big debate about what we do in the future in the marketplace but thank you very much for your question Councillor Martin. So can I propose that we all those in favour of accepting the report raise their hands please and all those against and any abstentions so that's carried thank you. The next item on the agenda is the corporate plan 20 to 23 key performance indicators end of plan and 20 to 23 to 2024 end of year quarter 4 report and this has been presented by Councillor Knowles. Thank you chair this report outlines SKDC's performance against the corporate plan from 2020 to 2023 the key performance indicators and the key performance indicators for quarter 4 of 2023 and 2024 and it presents a summary of overall performance of the whole life cycle of the corporate plan that has just been finished. There are two parts to the report a retrospective loop back over the past four years now that we've reached the end of the corporate plan and the quarter 4 report for the new plan. The corporate plan for 2020 to 2023 listed seven actions that fell within the remit of this committee. These actions set the council's agenda for the life of the plan. The first round of performance reporting in 2020-21 introduced a series of criteria for what a successful delivery would look like. The criterion has been used as the measure to judge the council's overall performance over the years. SKD fully achieves five of the seven stated actions reported to this committee. Performance against five actions are presented for Q4-23-24. Four of the actions are graded as green. These are the actions which are on or above target as planned. One of the actions is rated amber. These actions which are currently below the plan target and none of the actions at the moment are rated red. So there's nothing that is significantly below the plan target. A new KPI suite to reflect the new corporate plan was approved by this committee in March 2024 and this is the first report and it will be reported again in Q3 of 2024-25. Thank you chair. Thanks very much for that Councillor Knowles. Do we have any questions on the report? Councillor Bailey. Thank you chair. I think most people, obviously when you see reports like this, gravitate to the amber not the green. Obviously on the amber one, this is about markets, I guess we've been talking about that a fair amount already today. I just wanted to really understand kind of what caused these and how we're addressing it. I know we talked earlier on about we're going to come back in September. Obviously that should have been, I think the market report should have been in today's agenda but it was kind of moved out. I think there's a danger here that without that market strategy, this could turn red because we're not addressing what is working and what's not working obviously with the market. So I think it's just a point to say that I know we've kind of, we're looking at it in September but is there a risk here that we've kind of you know missed the belt in actually discussing what we can actually do to support the market in that regard? Thanks very much for that question. I think that we've got such a full agenda with such large reports that we would have done the markets a disservice if we'd had them on here as well. So we were risking four hour, five hour meeting if we want to put everything on the agenda every meeting. So I think it's a very valid question. I'm sure that these issues are being looked at by our offices at all times and they will come back to us a bit later on in the year. But I do appreciate your question. If you've got a further question Councillor Bailey. Just on that point, I think you're absolutely right. It is a full agenda and we know why it's a full agenda because of Leisure SK. Obviously if we, I know there's an item later on about separating Leisure SK but listen to what you said about the market. We've had to push markets because we couldn't get it into the agenda because of Leisure SK stuff. So I think it is more of a point we'll discuss later about kind of why we should be splitting that into a working group for Leisure SK. Thank you. Thank you for your question. I believe Richard was. It's just to actually set the factual position. The reason the markets is not on the agenda stage because the independent market review that we've commissioned was not received in time to be prepared for this meeting. That was the reason for it not being on this agenda completely outside of the council's control I'm afraid. Thank you Richard. Are there any further questions on Councillor Knowles's report? Oh, Councillor Baxter. Thank you. I was just going to come back on the page 81 that you're talking about Councillor Bailey, which is, we're talking about the old KPIs on the old corporate plan. That's what that refers to, isn't it? And the measure of markets becoming cost neutral. I think that's been removed from the corporate plan KPIs because it's not particularly where we want to get. I don't think we are in the next four years. I don't think we are going to get to the point where the markets are cost neutral. I think they are something that we do need to recognise as a loss leader to create and footfall within the town centre. And as Councillor Harrison has said, we're getting better at it. But if our purpose, if our goal with the markets is to make them cost neutral, there is an easy way to do that. Just don't have markets. That's not what we want to do. We want to have markets which we accept. Sometimes they're going to make some money. Often they're going to lose some money, but they are going to bring people into towns and they are going to celebrate our, we all know that they're 800 years old and they're part of our historic cultural offering and so on. So that's why we don't, we're not looking at this anymore after today, I don't think. Thanks. I think it's important just to note on markets as well is that was a KPI in the previous report, but I know you, you heavily support local businesses and a lot of small businesses start on market stores and then expand into shops and things like that. So we'd be badly not doing the duty of the people of this area if we didn't support markets and in the hope that in future we grow more businesses for local area. Right, so slightly digress there, but can we have a vote? Oh, are there any further questions? Sorry. Karen Bradford. Thank you, Chairman. I think it would be remiss of us, I mean we're looking back three years here and it's a very comprehensive report that the committee has in front of them today. I think it'd be really remiss of us to not actually celebrate some of the fantastic achievements that have happened over the last three to four years. You know, the art service has been fully reviewed. We're back and above footfall into our art centres than we've had previously. We've got a new physical and sports activity strategy. We've driven footfall into our markets. You know, there's been a hell of a lot of things that we should be here celebrating and not just looking at the things which are, shall we say, in the more difficult part about making a positive surplus return on our markets. The markets play an amazing need for our footfall driving into our town centres and we mustn't just forget about the income return on the markets, about how important the market is for that town centre. But if you actually look at all the work that's actually gone into what to establish and what's happened over this last three to four years, it's been immense. You know, and I'm proud as a chief exec of what's been achieved by, with members' support, over the sports and leisure services and cultural services over this last four years. And I think that just also needs to be recognised, Chairman. Very much so. Thank you, Karen. No one else commenting. I propose that we accept the report. All those in favour? Thank you for that. So we're going to move on to the play area strategy, which is item nine on the agenda. And Michael Chester and Paul Stokes are presenting this, I believe. Paul first and then perhaps Michael. Thank you. Thank you, Chairman. I am pleased to present this report and accompanying draft strategy to the committee, which sets out the council's key priorities and management of its 38 play areas across the district. The council's corporate plan encourages physical activity to support healthy lifestyles and reduce health inequalities. Underpinning this ambition is the council's key priorities of connecting communities and being an effective council. Therefore, this strategy is pivotal in ensuring that the council's play areas are of a high play value and provide opportunities for improved health and wellbeing conditions. I welcome the development of this much-needed strategy, which has come at a time when the council is facing additional financial pressures and the cost associated with maintaining our play areas is ever increasing. The strategy will allow the council to prioritise those play areas which require capital investment and allow the council to continue working with external stakeholders to identify funding opportunities. In recognising the work undertaken to develop this Draft Play Area Strategy for Southka Stephen, it is recommended that members of the Culture and Leisure Overview Committee reviews and comments on the Draft Play Area Strategy and considers any amendments for inclusion, recommends the Draft Play Area Strategy to cabinet for approval and requests that an action plan be developed and presented to a future Culture and Leisure Overview Committee if the strategy is approved by cabinet. Thank you. Thank you very much. Do you want to talk Michael or do you just want to answer questions? I'm happy to just answer questions if there are any. Thank you. Would anybody like to ask any questions? Councillor Martin. Thank you, Chair. Basically it's interesting to note in this report it refers to transferring play areas to third parties who are going to access external funding, so my first question really is what is this funding and do we know if it's adequate enough to create play areas which are of top quality for our residents? Richard, what else? I mean just in that particular space we've had some really good success. I mean many say it's right when council led them and we've really had a positive engagement with Denton Parish Council who are happy to accept the transfer of a play area because they know they can access funding. This council frankly can't, such as rent funding, lottery funding, community funding, UK shared prosperity funding. There's a whole wealth of different avenues of funding streams available to all the parties that the council frankly has not got access to and there's been a success of going to be helpful in Councillor Stokes's area as well. We're in conversations with Denton Parish Council of the transfer of some play areas in that part of the district as well, so there's been some real traction in this area and it is kind of who's the best body to deliver play in particular parts of our district. As the report alludes to, we've got a significant portfolio of play equipment, some of which is coming to end of life, some of which is only available due to funding that's already been put in place and frankly there's a real pressure on the council to maintain it at the levels in which it needs to, to comply with health and safety and other requirements, so I think what the report's trying to do is give a factual position but also say let's not close our eyes to the art of the possible of where play is best located in the area and who's best placed to deliver that play, be it the council directly or through other means. Thank you. Thank you Richard. Do you have a further question Councillor Moss? Thank you. So of the 38 play areas we've got, there's no real information about the size of the football, how often they're used, what the actual requirement from us would be to maintain them. I was just wondering if it's possible to have a better breakdown of some kind of levels of costs, something to give us something to actually go on with this. There's also things like, yeah there's no mention at all of maybe closing a play area and moving it, are they actually, it's a lack of detail basically, it would be useful to know more about and I presume is that what will come in the next part? Well I'd just like to say before we go on to Richard that I don't believe there was a play area strategy for SKDC before this were drawn up, so I'm glad that we can address all these issues at this time. Richard have you got something to say? It's basically exactly the point that Councillor Martin is alluding to and I think again if you look in my comments and elsewhere in the report. Sorry? Can I go on once? So what the report is actually saying is that we need to gather all this data and we've actually got a contractor in place at the moment called Compan who are going out and assessing the equipment and they're also within that inspection given as a visibility and profile of the life expectancy of the equipment itself, when it becomes end of life, when it needs replacing, when we need to invest in different pieces of equipment in those locations, but exactly as well the needs analysis of those locations, the demographic of those particular parts of the district to see whether our play equipment is strategically located in the right locations going forward. So I think as has been mentioned, what we need to do is gather the data and bring it back with an action plan so the committee can debate and prioritise where our attention should be spent. The report also confirms there's £100,000 that's been allocated to this part of the Council's finance portfolio and again the committee will need to guide us as to where's the best place to invest that sum of money going forward. Thank you. Is this a further question on the same point, Councillor Martin? Okay and then I've got Councillor Bailey, Councillor Leaden, but I'm aware that Michael might have answered some of the other part of your previous question. Do you want him to answer that first? Just repeat your last question, a bit of it. What, the one I've just asked? Particularly the 38 areas and how we can identify how big they are and things like that. Yeah it's just really getting more detail so we can understand where we're coming from. I mean you have things like footfall, how many kids are actually using these play areas. I know one of the play areas, I hardly got any children in it ever. It's just left and you know at some point do we talk about closing some, moving them, do we have any kind of idea of distances between play parks to say that one's useful, that one's not, etc. So it's really getting the policy in place so we can really sort of make sure the money goes where it needs to go. Thank you Councillor Martin, Michael. Thank you Chairman. So within this strategy there is a table of where all the play areas are located and there's an appendix with a map across the district to where they are so we can see where abouts in relation to each other they are. I think the action plan that will be developed on the back of this will really guide and steer how we invest in those play areas as well and help with making those decisions and then we can work with planning moving forward on any play area developments as part of housing developments and look at contributions for that as well. So it'll become a guiding principle document with the planning team as well. Thank you Michael. There's a few waiting, you've already had three. Last shot Councillor Martin. Councillor Bailey please. Thank you Chair. Just look at the report. The one thing that I couldn't find is a real focus on accessibility, obviously people with additional needs. When we look at the future design principles there's not much in there about how is this going to be accessible for all of our residents across the district. So in terms of the report I would like to involve maybe the inclusion and diversity officer to actually really understand kind of what impacts our strategy might have on those parts of our residents that are often forgotten about but when it comes to kind of parks and kind of play areas I think it's a real key area that we need to get right. So when I look at the report I think there should be a section in there about how we're going to make everything accessible to everybody. Thank you for that Councillor Bailey. I will duly note that unless you'd like to say something. Within the report it does mention the wide range of user groups but we can make it more specific in that and I know for recent investment that we've done such as Godby Hill Fort we did stipulate in there about inclusive equipment as part of the tender specification so it is noted but I can make an amendment in there. Thank you Chair. Richard's already commented that at the moment we're going through the process at Denton Parish Council. We've got a small play area which was put in I believe in about 1972. Now there's been no investment in that play area since then. As memory serves me I mean I can see the play area from my lounge window and I've been there for 30 years and I think we've had two or three swing seats replaced but when a piece of equipment's failed it's just been removed hence why we've got holes in the ground and areas where roundabouts used to be which used to be the thing in the 70s which believe me were dangerous as hell but hey ho. But obviously we've gone down the route because at the time when we asked about investment in the play area we were told that there was about 20 other play areas worse than ours so heaven forbid what theirs are like and with £100,000 to spend each year we're probably 25 years away from any improvements to play area. So we've gone down the route of the asset transfer and I'm using the word asset as a liberal term because we've actually asked for it to be cleared and which SK are doing at the cost of £4,500 but we're still having to contribute £1,500 towards it which has been a bit of a bitter pill to take when there's been no investment in our village play area ever since it was installed. Now Denton is a small parish, we are now growing with more and more families moving in so we are getting more and more children. The play area is situated about less than 100 yards away from the village school. The school is only a small Victorian style school with the old tarmac playground area and a lot of the kids come to Denton because their grandparents live in Denton so even though we probably haven't got a vast amount of children play area age in the village living we do have the grandchildren of people who do live there so you know it is heartbreaking when you sit there and when you notice that at half past three in the afternoon you've got 20, 30 kids trying to play on I don't know what you'd call it a bit of metal sticking out of the ground which is an excuse for a climbing frame so hence why we're looking at the funding but since we first thought of this project and taking it on as a parish council our original quote was a fully actioned play area with sensory items because we've obviously got children in the village who need to use sensory items autistic, SCN children and we need to make sure it is fully accessible for everybody to use at all levels plus we want a community hub with tables and chairs a safe environment where children can play with their parents for well-being and peace of mind and general like I say mental health you know our original quotes were £40,000 £50,000 and now obviously after Covid well the way stuff has gone at the moment for the same area now we're looking at having to fund or try and find funding for £70,000 to £90,000 but I think we need to push as many opportunities as we can and I was pleased to hear what Richard said about there are more parishes looking at taking the offer up but I do feel, I am finishing, I do feel that the £100,000 what we have as a maintenance budget would be better off saying to these parishes here's £5,000 £10,000 if you want to take it on as like a match funding offer for you to go and find funding from other departments because we would have slapped your hands off if even if we got £5,000 to help us do it, thank you. Thank you very much Councillor Leadenham, I am going to come over to Councillor Baxter and Councillor Fellows in a moment but I believe that Richard wanted to say something else. Just wanted to be clear because Councillor Leaden referred to it as a maintenance budget that's not a maintenance budget that's an investment budget for replacement of equipment there are other maintenance budgets within the revenue budgets to ensure that all our equipment complies with health and safety so I just want to make it clear there are multiple budgets that are invested in this portfolio the additional £100,000 was something that the cabinet recommended to council which is about investment and replacement maintenance is dealt with elsewhere, thank you. Thank you for that clarification Richard. The £100,000 looking at the prices we are looking at now for equipment replacement is not going to go very far. It's a start isn't it so I agree with you but thank you very much for your point. Councillor Baxter please. Thank you. I hope I'm not going to wax lyrical but you have stirred my soul with this talk. This is a play area strategy based on the play areas which are currently managed by south receiving district council. It is not a play strategy. Listening to a conversation and particularly from Councillor Martin it makes a good argument for a broader play strategy. We're not delivering these things in isolation there are plenty of other people who provide play equipment particularly parish councils so on the field known as Jubilee Park that Mr Wiles refers to there is some SKDC maintained play equipment on there. There is also some play equipment which is managed by the parish council and there are also children playing on fields who are not using play equipment. When I was walking through deep in St James on Sunday morning during a major international football tournament season there was not a single child running around kicking a ball on the field and I think that's not a deeping problem that's not a Southgate Stephen problem but I think it is a problem for the health fitness and potentially the championship hopes of this country that children are not running around either chasing a ball or chasing each other and there's a problem with children knowing how to play so our play strategy or a play area strategy should be aimed at encouraging children out. Please don't allow officers or worse still counselors to decide where the best play equipment is and who should be using it and where it should be and we must make sure we ask child minders parents and obviously children of all ages where the best play area is and what equipment should be put out otherwise you'll do what a parish council close to me did on one occasion where they said well we want play equipment but we want it to be maintenance free and safe so they ended up with a bar that my six year old could reach up on and functional but absolutely no fun part of the point of play is taking risk so we need a play area strategy and this is it or this is heading in the right direction subject to the comments that you've made but we also need a play strategy when we go back to our cars if we've parked them in Wallham Street car park sometimes when you go back to your car there are kids skating up and down using the ramps that we've provided in Wallham Street car park and some people might think oh what on earth are they doing skating there the answer to that question is where are they supposed to skate and what are we as councillors doing either at parish county district level what are we doing to find somewhere safe for those kids to mess about which is what kids at that age should be doing in a safe and controlled manner thank you councillor Baxter councillor fellows thank you chair and thank you for allowing me to speak welcome to both you and your vice chair and best of luck I was going to say something about welcome to the bare pit but I better not because I get into trouble for saying that so I apologise for saying it the minute I've said it on the play strategy I welcome this totally and following councillor Baxter's remarks and also I was very reminded by councillor Linden's reports it is so important and there's so much we need to move forward I would just like to ask the committee to consider going forwards that our play areas we do look after are maintained and cleaned the biggest issue we have with one big play area in Bourn is that it is not tidied and cleaned so children are going to play in an area that could have broken glass bottles and goodness knows what so part of having them is we need to make sure that the ones we are meant to managed are maintained on a regular basis and made safe. Thank you very much for that councillor fellows. Councillor Deere. Thank you Mr Chairman a couple of points firstly to add to councillor Bailey's comments about disabled access and things at the Dyson Park Action Group we were incredibly proud that we installed through in partnership with Wren the first play equipment that was disabled child friendly and could be used by a range of abilities so I think that does exist I think we need to understand I know from feedback from parents across the district that that that turned Dyson Park into a destination and people travelled to it because it was certainly I don't know about the south of the district but in the north of the district at the time when we installed that it was the only park in the north of the district that had disabled children friendly play equipment. So yeah I think you're absolutely right we need to have a greater understanding of that. Secondly moving on to that point I mean I know that this is probably a question for councillor Stokes, councillor Stokes and I attended the opening meeting of the Grantham green spaces open forum which was a meeting of you know the Friends of Arnall Field Park, the Dyson Park Action Group, the Friends of Queen Elizabeth Park, the Friends of Wyndham Park, the Friends of all the various different park groups and attempt to get them all together. That was a room where there were several dozen people and an enormous amount of energy literally decades, decades of backgrounds of working with our park and the experience there. So my question is what involvement does that decades and decades of experience of our parks and volunteers, what involvement have they had in this strategy? Surely they must have been front and centre in terms of developing this because they know more than we do, they know more than we do so I mean as I say councillor Stokes was there at that meeting so I'd like to understand what all of those dozens and dozens of people have had involved into this part in this strategy, thank you. Do you want to answer that Michael Chester or is that you councillors? Thank you chairman, I mean I wasn't at the green spaces forum so I'm not aware of the discussions, I mean we haven't specifically consulted with the relevant Friends groups for the parks in developing this strategy but moving forwards for any developments within those areas we would consult with the groups as we did with the Wyndham Park senior player that was done in 2022 I believe it was so there will be engagement and should local groups such as the Friends group be able to attract funding we'll definitely work in partnership and happy to have conversations with them to move that sort of investment forward. Thank you for the answer. Councillor Stokes? Yeah just to add to Michael's comments there Councillor Gerald, this particular play area strategy has obviously been in development for some time, the green spaces forum which we attended is actually struggling a little bit to find its way forward, a lot of people who attended the first night have dropped off and have expressed more of a will to work in their particular groups, I can understand both if I'm really honest, so there wasn't really the opportunity in preparing this particular play area strategy to engage the green spaces forum for Grantham and I think the consultation that Michael's done is as far as he could at that stage in bringing the draft forward. You've had one go but we'll let you have another one. Thank you, I didn't realise we had a one question limit. Just looking at the process for play area investment, I think it's table 4 in there, obviously I was speaking to the officers around the little blue train that appeared in Wyndham Park because I and my son have spent many a year playing on the red fire engine which is actually a favourite of many families in Grantham and then one day we went down there and the little red fire engine had disappeared, replaced by a tiny little blue train and I was quite surprised at this, I did actually speak to the officers and I was amazed at the price to what Councillor Leadham was saying, the price of these equipment was astronomical, obviously I would have preferred to have repaired the existing fire engine but I think it was twice as expensive to repair it than by that blue little train and I think maybe looking at step 7 in terms of contact play equipment suppliers we need to explore other suppliers, there are lots of play equipment suppliers around there, obviously some are reputable, some maybe aren't so but I think we might be a bit more agile, we only have a set amount of budget, maybe we can be more agile in this strategy in terms of spending our money more wisely exploring other equipment suppliers, I don't know how many suppliers are on the list, I don't know if Michael can share that with us, thank you. Thank you Councillor Bailey, as I said earlier I think that this is a starting point so we've got a strategy now and it's a very valid point to raise outside the meeting, we had a previous discussion where we were considering alternative blue sky thinking about what we do with our leisure areas so it can definitely come back to this committee and we can further develop our play area strategy but I don't think that, I think Michael Chester and the team have done some great work on this and I can't see that they need to answer, lots of minutiae on it but thank you for your point, Councillor Jewell. Just returning to the recommendations, yeah, play equipment is very expensive, it's always very expensive and I think that having been through two projects where we've installed play equipment, yeah it's just expensive but returning to the recommendations, as I said we've not had a play area strategy before and so you're right to point that out Chairman so I think that this is a step forward. I think on the Grantham Green area spaces, yes that was a first meeting where they attempt to bring together dozens of groups, I think it's probably fair to say that some of those groups were better organised than others which is why the Grantham Green area spaces is struggling to, well not struggling but it's working through the challenges of working with volunteer groups, some of which have been established for thirty years and some of which have been established for thirty days, so I think that's normal. What I would say on the recommendations is I think we should definitely add a recommendation that this strategy goes to those various groups and some of them will provide good feedback and some of them won't. I think we just need to recognise that from dealing with volunteer groups but I do think that some of the volunteer groups are incredibly well organised, incredibly well, they're multigenerational in terms of how long they've been around and I think it's dangerous to cut out the volunteers that have been so involved for so long over so many years just in this part of the district, I'm sure they exist in Stamford Deepings and other parts of the district as well, but I do think this ought to go to those guys for consultation as well, thank you. Thanks very much for your point as Michael Chester pointed out moving on he will be seeking consultation with other groups. I'm aware that we've still got quite a bit of business so I think we should move to wrap this up and, oh, Councillor Stokes. I think it would be good if we could just taper that a little bit, I think it would be the right thing to bring this strategy to Cabinet and I wouldn't want to hold it up while we're doing a further consultation but I think what we could do is share it with, such as the Dysart Park Group, individually and any comments quickly brought forward but I think if we hold things back we're going to move the strategy from September to December or whatever and I'd rather, this is such a good thing to bring forward, I'd rather try and get this play area strategy to Cabinet in September. I think that we vote on accepting the strategy as it is at the moment and then seek to amend it later because otherwise we haven't got a strategy and we're kicking the can down the road. Just going back on Councillor Stokes' point there, I think it ought to be shared with all the parishes, all the people on this list of the 38. You know, they're the ones who don't know the full state of their play areas and what's needed in their areas and I think that we all need an input from our own wards. I wholeheartedly agree with you but in order to get the strategy going we need to vote to accept it now and then seek to go outside and develop relations with the other parish councils. I know, but so we can move on from here can't we Councillor? Thank you. I'm going to propose that we vote to accept this report. Can I have a proposer? Just to say, Chairman, that the recommendations in the report as printed, so you're reviewing and commenting on the strategy and if there's no further debate then I'd suggest you've done that. The second recommendation is to recommend to Cabinet so it's not just about accepting the report, it's about whether in the printed recommendations whether you're going to recommend that report as printed to Cabinet or whether you're going to amend it. If you're not, then unless you're going to change those recommendations that printed or moved something different you'd be recommending it to Cabinet rather than just accepting it. Thanks for correcting me on that, James. Yeah, I'll propose that we, I can't, you propose it? I propose it. Are we all right with it? All those against? And any abstentions? Thank you very much. Item 10 on the agenda is Leisure SK Limited, progress on actions requested by Cabinet and this is being presented by Councillor Stokes. Is it pink paper? Oh, it's pink paper. Do you want me to clarify that? Yes, James is just going to speak on this. Thank you, Chairman. Just quickly, the progress on actions requested by Cabinet, three of the appendices are private but I think the initial copy that went out, the cover report was actually published in private when it should have been public. That's since been corrected so as I understand it, unless someone tells me otherwise, the cover report is public. Following that, if there's any discussions on the private appendices that's when you may look to exclude public and press but the report itself is public and obviously you've got board members from Leisure SK in the room, as I said earlier, if there are any questions for you. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you. Councillor Stokes. Thank you, Chairman. At a meeting of this committee held on the 9th of January this year, the members present moved a motion of no confidence in Leisure SK Limited. As a result at their meeting in January, Cabinet set a series of tasks to be undertaken to provide assurance on the performance of Leisure SK Limited. This to include bringing forward the timescale to assess alternative management options. The report before you today provides an update on each of the tasks set by Cabinet and a high-level analysis of alternate management options. As detailed within the report, the contract with Leisure SK has been extended for the maximum period allowed, and a new arrangement will be required to be in place for the 1st of January 2026. There is a commitment to provide a further report to this committee, providing detailed information on the results of the Leisure Management Options appraisal once this work is completed. The recommendations within the report are that the Culture and Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee notes the progress made on the actions agreed by Cabinet on the 18th of January 2024, and requests any further information that is required at this stage, and agrees to receive a further report providing detailed information on the results of the Leisure Management Options appraisal at a future meeting. Thank you. Thanks, Paul. I wish, if I could, to make a statement about SK Leisure. I was appointed to the Board a few weeks ago, not many weeks ago. I've attended one Board meeting and met with other Board members on occasion since then, and I'd like to make a statement which will affect your later discussion. I will make it clear that I'm here as a member of the SK Leisure Board and not as a Councillor, and I will make that clear whenever I come here and I will leave the meeting when you have your private discussions later in the agenda, so that I will not be here for that discussion. I will make a statement under this agenda item, which is a Board report, so I believe it's appropriate to do so. So, if I may, Chair, and I may take a few minutes with this, so I hope you'll all bear with me, because I believe it is important what I'm trying to say, and I'll get on with it as quickly as I can. Is that okay, Chair? Thank you very much. Thank you. Everybody knows there's been problems with SK Leisure. We became aware particularly when it needed funding very, very quickly in order to meet a cash flow problem a few months ago, and at that time there was lots of action taken, but I honestly believe that we have problems for SK Leisure which are much more fundamental and much more deeply rooted, and they are not just operational, and everybody knows the operation, how we get more people in, how to maintain the equipment that's there in a very old building. We've got three very old buildings, one of which we still don't own. It's owned by Lincolnshire County, as was Deepings, so that we've got a difficult situation that the new Board has been put into, but I think the real problems are more fundamental. First of all, in terms of what do we expect from it? The shareholders are the members, 56 of you. You're the members and you're the shareholders for this company, and so ultimately you are responsible for making sure it's delivering what it's meant to deliver. But how many of us have ever thought exactly what its objectives are? Are its objectives to make a profit out of the three centres we now have, not four? Is that our objective, to make a profit? Is our objective to provide as much leisure facility as is possible within the three centres at a reasonable cost, at an affordable cost, so it serves as many of our constituents as it possibly can, because those two objectives would be incompatible. Is it to build a business with new or fresh facilities in which becomes a high quality facility in our three high quality facilities, or maybe two or maybe one or whatever, but high quality facilities for leisure in our area, because that's a different objective. So there are three or four potential objectives, some of which would be incompatible with one another. I've never heard a discussion at cabinet, and I've been at cabinet for the last 12 months, or anywhere else that really sets that out. There was a document when it was first done. It was done very quickly, of course, SK Leisure, because of Covid and because of a need to do something very quickly, but since then there's not been, I think, a revision of what it's meant to do. We vote on a budget every year, and the budget says we think it will cost us this, but have we ever looked at the value? What value do SKDC place on leisure facilities, in a wider sense, because their culture as well as leisure facilities has SK Leisure, and we've never had that discussion. I believe that discussion needs to be quite quick, and then we have a very, very clear set of parameters and objectives for the SK Leisure board to chase after and to accommodate. So I think those are the, yep. Could I just pause you there for a moment? Graham's got a point of information. Councillor Gill, sorry. Sorry, sorry. Sorry Phil, and apologies to interrupt. Actually, we're not shareholders. We're guarantors. It's a company limited by guarantee. There are no shareholders. We're guarantors of this company, and there are no shareholders. So the definition of responsibilities is broader, as you say, than it would be if we were shareholders. We're actually guarantors. Apologies for interrupting, but I think that is an important distinction, actually. Sorry, thank you. Sorry if I got the terminology wrong. The company was created by the full council, and the council is responsible for it. I'm happy with that, yep. Okay, sorry if I misled you there. But what is the value we place on it? Is it ten bob, ten pound, ten thousand, ten million? I think that needs to be part of the discussion. And then we create the parameters, the new parameters for the new board and the companies it stands, of what is expected from them, and then basically give them some stability to go and achieve those. Look at the structure. I was appointed in my absence, without my specific agreement to join, to a board at a meeting of the governance. And last meeting, last full meeting, I introduced a change in the constitution which gave governance the opportunity to sack me as well, because they didn't have that in the past, but now they've got the right to sack me as well as to appoint me. So they might sack me in my absence, I don't know. You never know with these things. I need an assistant to play with the buttons. I've always needed that in any of my companies. So the board has changed so many times, it's been like a revolving circus act in the last few years, and eventually we got down to two, when the biggest problems were arising, two directors. One, a newly appointed chair, who's Debbie, and the second one, David Monkhouse, who is a non-executive. And we were down to two directors, which is the minimum required for the company to exist and to operate. If we got down to one, the company would be non-operational and not functional. So there's been changes there. I've already said that we've had governance involvement with appointee, appointing and sacking directors. We get this committee that has now taken a great interest in SK Leisure, as it's entitled to do, and has a one-time meeting and a later proposal later in this meeting to say we'll have another separate committee just to look after SK Leisure, which frankly appears to me to be nonsensical, but I'll leave that to this committee when they choose to debate it. On top of that, when I attended my first board meeting, it became clear that SK Leisure staff have a large contingent at the board meeting. I've never been to a board meeting in my life where the board has been outnumbered by advisors, onlookers and other people being there. Never been to a board meeting like that. In fact, at board meetings at senior level, the owner of the business, who was the owner of the whole group, used to write to ask for permission to come to the board, if he wanted to say something to the board, because he looked on the board that I was a part of, as being sacrosanct. But here we have more other people than there are board members at our board meetings, and we had to separate the board meeting into two in order so the board could get together. There are five of us now. On top of that, we have a situation where there are reports go to the executive and to the executive briefing committee about SK Leisure. We've had a situation where the leader, I believe on behalf of the executive or some part of the executive, now writes to the board to say what they can do, what they can't do very specifically, and what they should be doing, whatever else, and asking for more and more information. Which has got more information than, I don't know, how do I do that? Can we have a training programme on pressing buttons please? So we've got more and more information. You've never seen it, it's 150, 70, 80, 90 pages of information available to this committee today. We're reporting back to the executive briefing, and now we've got the leader writing to the chairman of SK Leisure saying you can do this, you can't do that, and we want a report more on this, that and the other, whatever. What it does need more than anything else is stability and patience. It is a new board. Three new appointees were Patsy, myself and Paul, and the most important of these is Paul because now it's got its own financial management director. In other words, it's got its own finance director, which will do two things. It will make sure that the finance numbers are given to us regularly, timely and accurately, and that wasn't allegedly always happening in the past. That was something that was apparently not quite that in the past. The other thing he can agree with, which is much more important, is management accountancy leading. Every company's finance director leads on management accounting, and he will look after cash flow and things of that nature, which was in a separate pot before and wasn't a key concern of anybody. Now it's the key concern of a board member, and having met him a couple of times and having heard him say his piece, he's just like me. When I'm at SK Leisure, I will not be representing or reporting back as SK Leisure to this body. I will be board member of SK Leisure and he will be the same. So when he's there, he'll be SK Leisure and doing what is best for them and best for that as a company. We've got a new chairman, he's been there a few months, but Debbie, and I've every confidence in Paul in doing what he says he's going to do, I've every confidence in Debbie to chair the meetings and specifically to build a team, to give us leadership and build a team. I've put it on a note somewhere, we'll take a team of five, because there are five board members, and we'll challenge the world and I'll put in brackets SKD as well. So we will get a team together now with a new team with a new board. Patsy and I will offer various experiences of management in the past to try and help that board take on its responsibilities, to understand what is required of it and to meet those responsibilities not over the next 12 months but beyond that as well. So the new board will meet and will meet the needs of the board. It needs patience, it needs clear parameters to which to work with, it needs structural clarity of who we're going to report to and who's going to take those reports, and we don't need all those bodies micromanaging the business, because if other bodies here of any description are going to micromanage the business, count me out. I'm not being a member of a board that is overruled and outmanaged by other bodies at various stages. Of course there are relationships that we've got to understand and relationships we've got to do and we understand that the company is financed by SKDC. We're not that silly that we don't think there's a close relationship but we don't want to be micromanaged by the thing. Thank you, Councillor Knowles. Are we coming to the end of the statement? I'm on the last two or three lines. So we need your patience, we need your confidence, we need your support and we need to be left to do the job that the independent board should be doing. Thanks for your time and I'm sorry to take you so much time. That's okay, thank you very much for your summation of the current circumstances of SK Leisure. Councillor Baxter, did you have a question? No it wasn't a question and it's not my job here to question, I just kind of, it's quite clear that we haven't conferred very much before we've come into the meeting, but just to put some context in it, as for leader, yes I... You're on, Barry. Oh, I'm back on. As I was saying, yes I'm not going to apologise for writing to the board of the council's wholly owned management company as the leader because we had been in a difficult situation and we continue to be in a difficult situation financially with SKDC and so there are different ways of communicating with the board. One is to have a face-to-face conversation which is obviously a good system, but also there are some things that need to be put down in writing. I'm really pleased that Councillor Knowles has more confidence in the new board, but we must remember that until earlier this year we did not have, in fact in December this committee had no confidence in the SK board, so I think I would be out of place if I wasn't communicating by all means necessary with the board. Having spoken to Councillor Ellis and Councillor Knowles and others about the forward-looking board, I share Councillor Knowles' confidence in the new board and I think their integrity and independence and determination gives me some confidence that they're going to turn the ship around, but we are still surrounded by icebergs potentially, not to stretch a metaphor, and so the letters that I've sent to the chair of Leisure SK about issues such as is she confident that they have the money to recruit the staff that they have, is she confident that energy, which is one of the biggest costs, is being managed properly, I think they are legitimate questions. It is quite within the right of the board to say, to write to me and say frankly that's an operational matter and keep your nose out, that's fine, but I'll carry on asking questions and they'll carry on giving me answers, I hope I haven't over-spoken. Thank you very much Councillor Baxter. I think with this item, item 10 and item 12, you've got board members in the room, I think this is an update on actions requested by Cabinet and I think the committee then, if you're going to go with the printed recommendations, you're going to be asking for a further report or not as the case may be. I think if you've got any questions related to this report to board members, now would be the time to ask them and then if you need to debate following that, then we'd probably be asking those members to leave for you to deliberate after that, but I would suggest that if you've got any questions for Debbie or Matt, Paul or any of the board members that you probably want to ask them now whilst they're in the room. Let's do that then, so any questions for the board members of ESCO Legere? Councillor Bailey. Thank you Chair, I guess obviously I've got lots of reports going on all over the place, so hopefully I don't think it's on pink paper on this machine at least. Obviously I found the Legere SK Financial Regulation, obviously the first time that I've certainly seen this document and obviously in there I pick out the, it's called the five year business case and I don't think that I've ever seen a five year business case for Legere SK. I've seen basically a one year, two year business case which I think the committee voted down, but I haven't seen a revised version of that come back to the committee and I certainly haven't seen something as long as five years in terms of that overall strategy of Legere SK. I don't know if that does exist and I understand Legere SK, dare I say, firefighting to try and get things back under control, so maybe this is going to come at a later stage, but I for one want to understand that longer term vision, I guess touching on what the board member obviously mentioned in terms of that longer term strategy around Legere and Legere SK. Would you like to answer that Debbie or Matt? Thank you for the question Councillor Bailey, so Legere SK does have a business plan but obviously we only do have a contract until December next year, so that five year plan, obviously the plan is now only for the next year and a half rather than five years. As a board of directors we agree the business plan, so that has been agreed as a board of directors that obviously they're looking at that strategic aim of the company, so there is one in place, yeah. I have a quick question. In terms of the future set up of the company now you have greater confidence in the way that the Legere SK is run. Surely there must be some thought towards extending it beyond that indeed to replace the current set up, the council has a duty to legally start looking at who might replace any such set up now because it takes so long to get one of these things in place, so is that something that you are considering? That's a council question rather than a Legere SK question, obviously you've got to have some options in front of you for you to consider, but I believe the options and looking at the future of the Legere service is a council decision. Councillor Bailey. Yeah just to follow on your point, the five year business case, obviously if we are trying to decide here what is the direction of travel for Legere SK and in the report it talks about insourcing, future contracts, agency, external models, obviously there are four options on the table, but if I'm reading one looking externally it's going to take 16 months it says in the report and obviously I'm looking at the time frame and going we're now in June, our next meeting is until September, that's less than 16 months before the contract expires, so time is definitely against us going to those external providers and getting something in place before December 25, so I think that I certainly would like to, for us to explore extending the contract, I would like to understand what is that five year business plan because I don't want to get to a point of I understand the contract expires then, but there is an option here to extend it for another 3-5 years, but if we don't know what Legere SK's plans are then how can we ever make that decision, so I one would like to ask Legere SK to provide that future looking business case so we can understand if that is a viable option for this council to take. Michael Chester. Just want to clarify that the current contract with Legere SK cannot be extended further, last 31 December 2025 the council would have to look to enter into a new contract arrangement with them and the detail within the report is given the four different options which are being looked at, there are, but the hope is in September to bring to the committee the results, that options appraisal to move forward, but it is a significant procurement exercise should the council wish to go out to full tender on the open market, we have done some initial soft market testing, we have, but to go for a full procurement exercise is roughly about 16 months to do that, which would tie in with that timeline anyway. Thank you, any further questions from members of the board? Councillor Bailey. Thank you, in the report obviously it does highlight 153,000 overspend for 23/24 and I know that the cabinet has seen a mitigation plan to some degree, but I guess from my perspective and for this Culture and Legere overview scrutiny committee, I just want to understand kind of more around kind of how, I guess I assume we have carried this debt into this financial year, so is that something that the chairman and the board is confident at being able to cover somehow, obviously 153,000 pounds is a big chunk of money to start a year off with in the red, so just to understand kind of what the plans are, if you can share them as much as you can with us. Just to start on that, the figure that we are talking about we didn't include in the performance of Legere SK board report, that was in our exempt appendices, I am happy to cover that off when we talk about the performance and we talk about the end of year, but just to say this isn't my report, the deficit position, the company are bearing that position, we have not asked the council to cover that, so I would say it will come up later in the report and there is a whole lot of explanation around the deficit, but if we can come on to that and we can go in an exempt session for that term and that would be appreciated. Thank you Toby. Councillor Baxter. Thank you, just coming back on an earlier point about how is it to be managed in the future, I don't think it's a secret that would necessitate removing the directors from this meeting, but we are looking at all options for the future management of our Legere provision across the district, of which there are four main contenders, one is to bring the whole Legere service in house, one is to send the whole Legere service out to the wider market, the third one is to retain Legere SK in its current form and the fourth one is to retain Legere SK but in an adapted form and we are currently doing a homework on the costs and benefits of each one and that will arrive at a later date. Obviously that won't be something that we discuss with the board of Legere SK. Thank you Councillor Baxter. Any further questions? You only need to move to exclude public and press if you wanted to discuss the information in the private appendices, obviously for that you'd still require the board to be here but if committee are moving into moving a recommendation I'd probably suggest that the board members leave at this stage because for item 11 as well, which is the working group, I'm not sure it would be appropriate for them to be here for that either so we then bring them back for item 12 when you're discussing the update from Legere SK. I don't know whether that's a way forward for each other. Yes that sounds perfect James, so if you wouldn't mind removing yourselves temporarily. [no audio] We are not in a private session now are we? We've just removed directors. Apologies for the delay we're just seeking some clarification. [no audio] Sorry about that. Are we all listening? There's two recommendations as part of this item, the first one is to note the report and the second one is to agree or not or perhaps ask questions on that as to whether we require a further report. So we could take the first item first. Karen? Thank you Chairman, sorry I just had to pop out then. I know we're in private session now but I think, are we not in private session? Sorry I thought we'd moved into private session. Okay I'll just temple what I was going to say then. I think it's really important that as an authority are very clear, I thought we'd moved into private, that Legere SK was established, it has a board of directors, it has articles, it has a clear specification about what it's providing. We've had an exceedingly good team supporting this board over the last number of years, providing financial reports. Michael himself does the administration for this board. Now if the now board of this company that you are all guarantors of do not want that support, that is fine, we can withdraw that report, that service. The leader has written to the board for a number of reasons and the main reason is, is a concern over our cash flow for the year. There is a budget and we want to ensure that the board stays within that budget because if it doesn't then of course as guarantors of that company that then demand comes back onto this local authority. That is why we have requested a mitigation plan. It is covered in the report, we did get a mitigation plan, it wasn't to what we wanted and we've asked for a further drafting of that mitigation plan. For some of the comments, it was very uncomfortable for me to sit here and listen to some of those comments that were being said there, especially with all the support members have given to this board and officers, myself, previous deputy 151, Michael goes to every meeting. I know the cabinet member to build those relationships with that board has gone to a number of the meetings and we do want to work together. We do want to see Leisure SK flourish until the time that we take that decision that we need to either see a different delivery model or an extension of that contract. So I think it's really important that this committee understands that we are trying to work hand in glove with Leisure SK and we have been on the beginning. Thank you Chairman. Thanks very much for that Karen. Councillor Stokes. Yeah, I totally underpin what the chief executive has said there and I think it's great that there's a new found passion within the board because that has to a certain extent been missing. But not many companies are in the nice position of if they're suddenly in difficulty being able to turn to us and say we need some money. And I think as part of what their way going forward, it's one thing saying we want to omit the council from our proceedings but actually if all of a sudden they need some money, they would come to us. So I think it's perfectly within our rights to sit and be present and not feel unwelcome. I totally agree with you but obviously this committee is a reflection of the whole committee and the whole council. I wasn't expecting that long statement I must admit. So we are where we are. In a way it's good that the new board are emboldened to try and move things on but thanks for your response to it Karen and Councillor Stokes. Sorry, let's go back to where we were. We're voting. Can we have a proposer to note, this is part one of item 10, the report. Thank you Councillor Harrison and could we have a seconder for that please. Councillor Newn, thank you. And so we're voting to accept that we're noting the report. All those in favour? Any against? Any abstentions? Sorry Councillor Jewell, were you in favour of that motion? We couldn't tell. Your stay, thank you. So the second printed recommendation is to agree to receive a further report providing detailed information on the results of the Leisure Management Options Appraisal at a future meeting. So if members wanted to go with that printed recommendation you need a mover and a seconder. Thank you Chairman. Can we have a proposer for that please? Thank you Councillor Harrison. Seconded by Councillor Jewell, thank you. All in favour? That's unanimous. Thanks very much for that. So we're now moving on to item 11, overview and scrutiny Leisure Working Group and I think Paul Stokes is on this one again please. Thanks Chairman. I think we've somehow managed to merge one or two of the items together now but we'll proceed. At the last meeting of the Culture Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee held on the 26th of March there was debate around establishing a working group to monitor the performance of Leisure SK. A draft terms of reference for a potential working group has been developed and provided at appendix 1 to the report. However, as detailed within the report further consideration is required including the membership of a working group and frequency of any meetings. The paper before you today recommends that all matters relating to Leisure remain as part of the main committee meeting agenda. One of the reasons there is who's going to drop off? Why wouldn't members of this committee be interested in the way forward? So Leisure and the performance of Leisure SK is an important subject matter for the Culture Leisure Committee particularly as we look to assess alternative management options and establish the way forward. Retaining the performance of Leisure SK as part of the main committee will allow all members to fully contribute to this important issue and will ensure that the debate and discussion remains in the public area. Should additional time be required to discuss Leisure SK or other topics the committee can request an extraordinary meeting or vary the timings of scheduled meetings. The recommendation within the report is that the Culture Leisure Overview and Scrutiny Committee agree that reports relating to the performance of Leisure SK continue to be considered at future Culture and Leisure Overview meetings rather than schedule additional working group meetings. Thanks very much for that. Any questions for Councillor Stokes? Thank you Chairman. I think it's just something just to note. You can have as many of your meetings if you want to and you can have single item agendas if you want to and that may be a consideration how this, if you didn't want the working group, a separate group, that this committee moves it forward. So there's no reason why you couldn't, you know, have ten extra committees, I mean James going no, no, no, only nine, but have them as single item agendas so specific so you get then the time to consider that information in detail and certainly around the leisure options as well. That's going to be a critical decision for this Council and you could just have a one single item agenda committee to give consideration to, to the way forward. Councillor Bailey. Yeah, I think it's clear to everybody that, you know, Leisure SK, like I said earlier on, is taking up a lot of our time and we have to get this right. I'd rather have, personally, I'd rather have more meetings to discuss this properly without time pressure and without pushing other things off the agenda. So I just, what the Chief Exec there, just kind of worry what the, how would those meetings kind of get arranged? Is this something that the Chairman would just decide? What is the process for, let's just say we want to have a meeting in August about Leisure SK, is it for this, the members here to request it to the Chairman, what does that look like to actually have that kind of happen? I'm not sure about the, whether we could host these meetings on a single issue outside of the Chamber, perhaps in the evening, so we had two or three hours to talk about it or something like that, rather than formally come to the Chamber if it's a single item. James, Karen, sorry, Bradford. Thank you Chairman. It's up to you when you want to debate this, so if you wanted a ten o'clock at night meeting, that would be up to you over ten o'clock at night. I know, yeah, I've got a witching hour, too. But, you know, you could have them in the mornings, in the afternoons, you can have them as often as you want. If you wanted a meeting in August, you can have a meeting in August. That would be for you to confirm that what you need to do is that the agenda item needs to be properly considered, so the information needs to come forward at the appropriate time to what you want to do with a timetable of meetings. But that would be up to you as a committee to decide that as a framework to help you make those sensible recommendations to Cabinet and to Council in the future around structures, around funding and governance. Thank you very much. Councillor Dobson. Thank you Chairman. Yeah, I'd like to see, as all the members here on this OSC are then called to do these individual meetings, otherwise we're going to have another set of people talking about another load of things that we've all discussed already and it just goes on and on and we don't get anywhere. So, if I might suggest that, you know, an ad hoc meeting with this OSC would be more beneficial to everyone concerned. Thank you Chairman. Just letting them and then I'll say something. Yeah, I mean, I totally agree with what Karen said there. I think if we, and what Barry said, that I think we need to stay together as a committee and if we're quite happy to have one item of agenda, I think that is the way forward. I don't look at it as micromanaging the board. I look at it that we're there holding their hands through the process and making sure that we give them the support they need. We do need the leisure centres to be a success and I do take on board, you know, some of the points of, you know, we need to offer these services but it would be nice to make sure that they do cover their costs, not necessarily make a profit, but then again, if you don't make a profit, you can't make the investment. But I suggest and fully support what Barry said, we keep it to the same committee but single item agendas, so we need just for us to discuss all the stuff. That's it. Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Leddingham. Seems like we're coming to a consensus here, so I'd initially like to propose that we circulate some emails amongst ourselves and see, is it a 16 month deadline before we have to, before the end of December 25, so we need to have everything in place before 16 months? Yeah, roughly it'll take about 16 months should the council decide they want to go out to the full open market to procure a new leisure contract with an external operator. So I propose that we meet in early August in an evening to discuss that as a single item agenda meeting. Late July, look at that hand. I'm just trying to help, Chairman. So that's fine, whenever you'd like to meet, I think there's a number of things that the committee seems to get frustrated or want information on. There's the appraisal around the new leisure options, which is one piece of work, and then there's the also to ensure the sustainability of Leisure SK up to December 2025. So I do think, I'm sure officers can pull together a bit of an itemised process that you make for members to understand the framework, making sure that we could make the decision around the 16 months leading for an options appraisal, if that's so what members want. And also that members may want to look in detail around the mitigation plan to ensure that the cash flow and the performance of Leisure SK is where they would like to see it at, to make sure that this limits the liability and risk to the authority of non-performance. So I think there's probably two pieces of work, unless I'm misunderstanding here. So there's the leisure options appraisal and there's the performance appraisal of Leisure SK. And if that's the case, then you need to think about the timeline for the Leisure Options Appraisal and bring that forward. But at the same time, you might need a number of meetings to look at the performance and some of the difficulties that Leisure SK are facing at the moment with financial performance. Councillor Baxter. Just to say that you're welcome to have meetings whenever I'm just letting you know that I will not be available for the first half of August. I think that I'm not sure the Chief Executive is either, but we're confident that you'll have the Deputy Chief Executive and the Deputy Leader. So crack on. James Swalwell. Just to maybe to guide Councillors, the recommendation in the report, the printed recommendation in the report is that to agree that reports relating to the performance of Leisure SK continue to be considered at future meetings, it sounds like you've come to a consensus on that. In your overview and scrutiny procedure rules, you do have provision to call meetings. The Chairman, the Vice-Chairman, Karen can call meetings as and when needed. I'm not entirely sure that you need to specify in the recommendations that you want to meet at a certain date. We can sort that out outside of the meeting. You've already got the provision to do that is what I'm saying in short. Okay, so I think we're going to do that. We're going to have a further meeting. Where are we on the agenda now then, Jo? Chairman, that you need to agree then to Recommendation 1 or propose it, second it and take a vote on Recommendation 1 as that's to not have the Working Group and to have the reports considered by the full Committee. Can we have a proposal for that please? Thank you, Councillor Harrison and thank you, Councillor Dobson. So can we vote? Unanimous, thank you. We'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, we'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, we'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, we'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, we'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, we'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, we'll just have a brief pause there while we refill our water et cetera. Okay, can we move on then please? I'm just waiting for Debbie. Thanks very much for rejoining us, Board Members of Leisure SKA. Is Councillor Knowles coming back in? Don't we know? Yeah, he's just in the rush. Right, so next item on the agenda is the performance of Leisure SKA open parenthesis projected out turn for 23/24 Leisure SKA limited close parenthesis. So Debbie, would you like to present this for us please? Thank you, Chairman. So the report before you is the end of year financial information and also the first year which is April's cash flow provided. So the information that we've had before you obviously talks about deficit position of the company in the paragraph 1.7 just to clarify that deficit position. Obviously the company's bearing that overspend at this moment in time and we aren't requesting any additional management fee at this point in time either, Chairman. Since we've obviously got the new board of directors in place, our first board meeting that we had was to talk about the deficit position and how we were at year end and in 1.9, I just wanted to touch on some of the more positive areas that fitness income received was higher than our original budget, swimming income received was higher than the original budget and we continue to perform strongly with swimming. Other things such as indoor activities, we were very strong in that and that was due to room hire at the Meares and Bourne Leisure Centre. Utilities, there was a significant overspend at year end because of the cost of utilities originally budgeted, I mean significant overspends because of utilities and we are already seeing that those are coming down in the new financial year. Central costs and there was an overspend at year end and that was due to the coverable VAT and the budgets for the Gladstone system which we've now since rectified and they're included in the new budget. So just to note there that obviously included in Appendix A and B is the financial information, Chairman, and if the members of the committee have got any questions, obviously if we could go into closed session to discuss those. On a positive note around performance for March and April as well, we've had an increase in our fitness memberships and March and April membership sales were in line with our expectations. Just to say we've had our Quest assessments as well and we're all waiting for the results of those but we're expecting them to be good or very good. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think there's a couple of questions that aren't directly related to the financial report so are you able to stay and take those questions? Thank you. Did you have a question, Councillor Baker? Thanks, Councillor Turner. Yeah, just in terms of advertising, we've brought this up many times at this OSC and just wondering what we're doing more in terms of advertising because even a few of us that follow SKDC religiously I guess on social media platforms still are not seeing stuff that is related to Leisure at SK so I just wondered what we're doing and whether we're going to plan on getting stuff actually into houses. Thank you. Just to further on that point raised by Councillor Baker, I don't know if you're aware but I live in quite a rural ward, Toller Ward and there's a large influx of newcomers into our area which is very welcome but I'm not sure any of them are even aware that there's a Leisure Centre in Grantham for example because they're not seeing any direct advertisement in the rural parishes of our leisure facilities across the district so have you any plans for that for us please? Thank you, yeah we work with an external marketing provider called Big Wave and they recommend a mix between digital and kind of physical advertising so for example in January we leaflet dropped 10,000 homes in and around Grantham then in April we did the same for Bourne and Stamford and we have continuous work behind the scenes on social channels so online so it will target people that we think are the right demographic to join. There's always more we could do so happy to look at other things and then obviously by the sounds of it we're not linking with the SKDC comms team very well to get it pushed through their channels but you should find if you live in SKDC or if you're on social media I'd like to think that you've seen some of our stuff. Councillor Harrison and then we'll come back to Councillor Baker please. Oh Councillor Baker sorry. Yeah I was just going to come back on that so my son was selected as one of the people that was going to be photographed in Stamford Leisure Centre to advertise it and as his mum who's obviously very keen to see those photos I haven't seen them so yeah there is absolutely something that you do need to be doing because it's not getting even to people that are actively looking for this. Matt. Yeah happy to look and have a conversation afterwards to get the details because we actually had professional photographs done last year and they're used quite heavily so you'll see my face on the recruitment campaign you see one of my colleagues Ryan's blown up on a big banner outside the centre so it's all been used so I'm happy to talk about that afterwards because I'm not sure on the detail. Thank you for your answer. Councillor Harrison. Thank you chair. Yeah it's always going to be a problem getting stuff out on social media for everybody you know things get moved to tops of feeds and bottoms of feeds and if you're not looking at a certain time you're quite liable to miss it but if we could ask we're as members it's our duty as well to put this out there so if we could ask that the leisure centres and all their media providers link in with us as well and tag us in things or forward us the information so that we can share it out to our demographics that see our posts as well you know let's all work on this together rather than put a portion of blame to one particular area you know there's lots of strings we can put on this bow to get the message out there. You're absolutely correct Councillor Harrison we're not seeking to criticise here we just want to increase the footfall in the leisure centre so if you are able to send your target advertising to all members by blind copy we can start featuring them on our in Harris Councillor Harrison's case large Facebook followings. Councillor Dobson yeah just one thing and I can't remember did we do we advertise in the SK today that's our magazine it goes out to all residents. So we have in the past but it's been a little while so we can we can look at that again it's it to be honest it's very tricky because we could quite easily go to big wave and they could say right to reach everybody you are looking at tens of thousands of pounds so we have to kind of manage our our budget to to fit what we can so that's why we try to balance between leaflet dropping grant them for one campaign born and Stanford for the next campaign etc but yeah there are there are always other things that we can do in SK today is one that we're happy to look at. SK goes out anyway so you know we do need to and perhaps a report of what facilities are there you know saying we have leisure centres in Stanford Grantham and Bourne but what do they do what do they provide you know we've got wave technology in Stanford I think isn't it I'm not sure we've got it in Bourne but certainly in Grantham so you know all these things and what what you know there's a big push on on health at the moment by by by government so we might as well join in and do it as often as you can even looking at the Lincolnshire one when it comes out the it would be a good idea thanks Matt. Councillor Baxter and then Councillor Harrison thank you. Thank you at risk of stating the bleeding obvious the marketing is important and putting the word out on paper and social media is is very well but there is absolutely no substitute for word of mouth and the best way to promote our leisure centres is for people to have a good experience of leisure centres with the pool the right temperature the the staff friendly and helpful facilities clean so that people go off and say that leisure centre is is well managed and competitively priced. Thank you Councillor Harrison just a quick one chair there is also you can pull out free on the Grantham together website any information they want about leisure centres. Matt's just made a note of that thank you are there any further questions for the board not related to the appendices I know that's why I'm asking thank you no no further are there any questions related to the appendices which would mean that I have to exclude the board again really sorry about this thanks very much for your attendance yes James I would suggest that even if you want to discuss the financial appendices you can but I would suggest that the board members stay because if you've got any questions on the finances they will be the people to answer them I think following the questions on the private papers if there are any if there's any further debate debate to be had that would be when you'd look to exclude the board members specifically but you probably want to move to exclude just the public and press at this stage you do need the board members for this I apologize could we exclude the public and press then please are there any yeah propose can we have a proposal for that please thank you Councillor Noone and a seconder thank you Councillor Bailey all those in favour that's unanimous thank you back in the public session now so did we exclude anybody from the room no one left and the recording's on thank you item 13 the work programme for 24 25 thank you so we've got we've got the proposed items but I think that we need to reach out a bit more to SK general public so I'd like to I don't know where we can add it but bring in another item whereby we contact all the other leisure providers in SK DC and sports facility providers and find out what they're up to and whether we can have a more united strategy for leisure and sport and culture within SK DC everything that we do is very it seems like it's joined up but it's all related to SK DC but in reality lots of private groups and individuals run many of the sports facilities which are beneficial to the people of South Kesthevan so I'd like to add that somewhere into the work programme that some sort of possibility James just to say Chairman was this specifically related to Michael's player strategy or was this a new one on leisure strategy so you want an information report on that topic yes and that's fine I'll probably defer to officers on that because obviously I wouldn't be involved in the content of that but it might be might be worth consulting with the officers as to specifically what you want and you might want to take that outside the meeting I'm quite prepared to but I just wear it to take up some space in our meeting agendas in the future so can we meet up and discuss what what we need to do thank you apart from that looking at the work programme is everyone happy with the other things that we've got to do Councillor Baker is that this not where we could put in our additional meeting and then make sure that like Leisure SK is taken off the third September and put into an earlier one yes exactly so we we need to do that so we're going to meet we're proposing that we'll circulate this via email that we're proposing to meet potentially on an evening in early August to discuss Leisure SK which should free up some other space on our busy agendas Chairman can I just confirm is that that you want to meet on the performance of Leisure SK for 23 24 which you've had today or the performance of Leisure SK in April May and June so the quarter figures just so we are clear so the board are aware that what information that they will need to provide for that meeting hopefully that's not asking you too many questions that's fine to ask those questions because I don't want to be vague we have to be quite exact on this don't we it's such an important topic that we need to have an additional meeting can I suggest that you deal with the first quarter reporting then and then the mitigation plan which is coming forward for that year for that for 24 25 as a starter for 10 at that meeting that sounds like a great suggestion any further comments any further comments on the work program in general and anything that anybody else would like to add to it or suggest that should be added to it Councillor Dobbs I notice that we do have it again on the 3rd of September when we update on the performance of Leisure SK is there a possibility that you know in order to you know get be ready if we're going to keep that there in position with 3rd of September is that going to be duplicated at all with this other meeting that we're proposing that we take it out of the 3rd September meeting and move it to the early August meeting is there Councillor Dobson Councillor Karen Bradford I'm not a Councillor for my pay grade that one believe me the performance of Leisure SK of course is not just financial and I think we also ought to I think the committee also ought to be looking at the quality they've got the quest reports due back in so it'd be a good one to receive the quest reports at I'm assuming that the board have had a quest assessment for each of the facilities so it'll be interesting to understand what the quest reports say and it may be also for their feedback reports that they do with their customers their customer contact groups so it might be a little bit more about the performance and the quality of the offer of Leisure SK if you are considering the financial performance of Leisure SK at the beginning of August which is of course the first quarter can we not constitutionally discuss that and just add that to the agenda for the August meeting I think you probably may be wanting to do a deep dive into the quarter performance and maybe the mitigation plan that you've got on that meeting I don't know if the board's able to bring the quest assessments forward around the quality at that point and any assessments and customer contact that they've had what customer surveys they've been doing to understand the quality matters I think at the last meeting in March you received that six-monthly update included including kind of all those areas around performance so we can include again the performance and some of the mitigation and the information that we have but the committee does receive six-monthly wider performance of Leisure SK already So we had it in March does that mean it's due in September then and what immediately do you report it then or is it you get the figures up to September and then it's reported in October or what happened? It would come to your September meeting but it would be financial information to as close to writing the report as we can include it but around the performance we do already kind of have that as a standard six-monthly agenda item for this committee Thank you very much Councillor Dobson's right then we do need to leave that on to discuss a separate item about Leisure SK in our September 3rd meeting as well any further suggestions? Chairman do you need the play strategy to come back around the action plan on the play strategy because if it's recommended from this committee to the Julia I's committee of cabinet and then you're going to be doing some further consultation as been suggested and an action plan back on that committee do you want that coming back in September as well? I think we've agreed to recommend the initial play strategy to cabinet yes so depends what comes out of their meeting with that item on their agenda is what we then need to discuss about play areas isn't it? Yes so we could approve it at cabinet in July or discuss it at cabinet in July but then we've got the action plan that we could bring back to here in September because part of the approval was to develop an action plan Okay thank you and then we'll amend it from that point I can't see any further hands raised Right so we've agreed what we're going to talk about in a man scheduled meeting and also the meeting after and within the work programme there's some further development to the meeting beyond that as well so at any time feel free to email me with other suggestions for things that we need to bring to the work programme and I think we'll leave that there we don't vote on work programme do we? No so we're not going to have any other business I prefer to do it in a way by if you have any other business can you pre submit questions to me before much in a way that Gareth Knight did and then we can get the appropriate officers or cabinet members here to come and answer those questions in exceptional circumstances we may allow it in the future but I can't see any need for it at the moment so I'd like to thank you all for coming and conclude this meeting thank you [BLANK_AUDIO]