Venue: County Hall, Oxford OX1 1ND
Contact: Deborah Miller Tel: (01865) 815384; E-Mail: deborah.miller@oxfordshire.gov.uk
| No. | Item |
|---|---|
|
Additional documents: Minutes: The Minutes of the Meeting held on 14 July 2015 were approved and signed. |
|
|
Apologies for Absence Minutes: Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Godden, Langridge, Owen and Webber. The Council welcomed Zoe Patrick back on her return to the Chamber. |
|
|
Official Communications Minutes: The Chairman reported as follows: Council paid tribute to the Joanna Simons on her 10 years’ service as Chief Executive to Oxfordshire County Council. The Chairman presented Joanna with bouquet of flowers on behalf of Council as a token of its appreciation. Council paid tribute and held a minute’s silence to honour the memory of former County Councillor Ann Bonner, County Councillor from 2009-2013 and former County Councillor Richard Rymer, County Councillor from 1985 – 1989. |
|
|
Petitions and Public Address Minutes: Council received the following public address: Ms Helen Marshall, spoke on behalf of Protect Rural Oxfordshire (PRO)
against the proposals in relation to Park & Ride Sites set out in Agenda
Item 14, Local Transport Plan 2015 – 2031.
PRO believed the sites proposed in the Plan would have a severe
detrimental impact on the greenbelt and that the County Council should have
conducted proper research into the impact of such sites before including them
in the Strategy. PRO further questioned
the logic of locating Park & Ride sites in the Countryside, thus moving
congestion onto rural roads. Furthermore,
there was no information in the Park & Ride Strategy explaining why 6 of
the proposed sites were in the greenbelt and the cumulative effect this would
have, or whether alternative sites had been considered. She urged the Council to reject the LTP4
until a proper evidence based study had been carried out into Park & Ride
provision in Oxfordshire. Ms Julie Mabberley,
speaking in relation to Agenda Item 14, urged the Council to oppose the Local
Transport Plan 4 (LTP4) on the basis that the Strategy was not strategic and
did not include planned funds for the transport infrastructure needed to
support the proposed growth in the Wantage & Grove area in terms of road
infrastructure, public transport, cycling and local schools. Ms Jill Huish, local Resident and user of children centres in Oxford
spoke in relation to agenda Item 8, Questions with Notice from Members of the
Council against the closures of Children’s Centres. She related her personal experiences with the
centres, including the extensive support she received through Domestic
Violence. She urged the County Council
to reconsider closing the centres as they provided essential support to mothers
and families such as outreach, domestic violence, breast feeding, mental health
support, speech therapy, freedom support and nutrition allowing families to
help themselves before intervention was needed. She believed the closure of the
centres would see an increase in Social Services intervention and leave many
families in Oxfordshire isolated and vulnerable. Mr Alexander
Murray, Local resident of Witney spoke in support Agenda Item 15, Motion from
Councillor Laura Price. He expressed
deep concern that the trust had been implementing changes to the Community
Hospital without due and proper consultation and that further changes would
result in patients from Witney having to go elsewhere for treatment. He urged the Council to support the Motion
put forward by Councillor Laura Price. Mr David Hartley, West Oxon 38 Campaign Group spoke in support of Agenda Item 15, Motion from Councillor Laura Price. He expressed deep concern over the implemented changes carried out thus far including ward closure and staff losses at the Witney Community Hospital. He further expressed concern that the implementations had not been carried out with the expected transparency or formal consultation with all 'stakeholders' and that the decision by the OCCG, raised serious questions regarding the future integrity of WCH to offer the high standard of health provision it had been clearly able to manage ... view the full minutes text for item 53/15 |
|
|
Questions with Notice from Members of the Public Minutes: Mrs Alison Williams to
Councillor Judith Heathcoat Can the Cabinet
Member for Adult Social Care assure ratepayers, Councillors and those who
use the services that thorough risk assessments have been undertaken which take
into account potential health & safety hazards that will be faced by the
most vulnerable people in our county as a result of reduction in services due
to the most recent cuts to their budgets in this financial year and following
years? Furthermore, can the
responsible Councillor explain and give proof to elected members residents and
users that reassure us that none of the people of Oxfordshire will be at any
serious risk or harm as a result of this third round of severe cuts in
services. Answer: Adult
Social Care prioritises the safety and wellbeing of all service users and
carers, and has overarching statutory responsibility for safeguarding the adult
population of the county. As such, all decisions taken in the directorate
include full consideration of the potential impact they will have, both
positive and negative, to ensure that there will not be any unacceptable risks
or consequences resulting from proposed changes. In
line with national good practice and Oxfordshire County Council policy, all
proposals to change policy, service delivery or projects are informed by a
Service and Community Impact Assessment (SCIA). This considers the potential
impact of the proposals on individuals and communities, staff, other service
areas, and partner and provider organisations. Assessments consider the full
range of potential risks and impacts, including health and safety, and set out
the action that will be taken to mitigate any negative impacts identified. The
Service and Community Impact Assessments are used to inform decision-making
within Adult Social Care and for the Council as a whole - Service and Community
Impact Assessments accompany Cabinet papers recommending changes in policy,
projects and service delivery. An overall impact assessment considering the
cumulative impact of changes in the council budget on particular groups and
individuals is also produced each year as part of the papers agreed by Cabinet
and Council. Supplementary Question Would
you agree with me that your answer merely describes the process and the
services and that the Community Impact Assessments, on the Council Website, do
not clearly identify any evidence or show low, medium and high risk assessments
addressing health and safety and legal rights of vulnerable people? Do you not agree that they do not set objectives,
which have due regard to the duties placed on the Council by their own Equality
Policy, the Human Rights Act 2010, or the Council’s own Constitution, which can
identify councillors who vote for those savage cuts, if legal proceedings
ensue, because now you are remiss in gathering sufficient evidence to inform
your decisions. Answer What the supplementary question shows is that it is believed by many that we are cutting what people get. Oxfordshire County Council is not, we will continue to meet eligibility need. Paragraph 1 states that we have overarching statutory responsibility for safeguarding the adult population. Paragraph 2 ... view the full minutes text for item 54/15 |
|
|
Questions with Notice from Members of the Council Minutes: 16 Questions with
notice were asked. Details of the
questions and answers and the supplementary questions and answers (where asked)
are set out in Annex 1 to the Minutes. In relation to Question
15 (Question from Councillor Harris to Councillor Hudspeth) Councillor Hudspeth
gave a commitment to organise a meeting of interested councillors across the
County |
|
|
Senior Officer Appointments Report by the Chief Human Resources Officer (CC9) As a result of
the current Chief Executive leaving the Council at the end of September 2015,
it is a legal requirement for the Council to appoint a new Head of Paid
Service. At the last meeting of Council on 14 July,
the Council commenced the statutory procedure for making this appointment,
nominating Mr Peter Clark, the Chief Legal Officer. Council also noted that if
it wished to appoint the Chief Legal Officer as the Head of Paid Service then
it would also need to make a nomination to the post of Monitoring Officer. This
is because the law does not allow the same person to be both a Monitoring
Officer and a Head of Paid Service for the same authority. As a result, Council nominated Mr Nick
Graham, the Deputy Head of Law and Culture, to be the successor Monitoring
Officer. These nominations were subject
to consultation with Cabinet Members. No objections were made to either
appointment and so this report sets out the procedural requirements for Council
to finalise these senior officer appointments. Council is RECOMMENDED to confirm
the following: (a)
that the Chief Legal Officer be appointed as
the Council’s Head of Paid Service; (b)
that the Deputy Head of Law and Culture be
appointed as the Council’s Monitoring Officer; (c)
that both
appointments take effect on the cessation of the current Chief Executive’s
employment with the Council. Additional documents:
Minutes: At the last meeting of Council on 14 July, the
Council commenced the statutory procedure for making the appointment of Head of
Paid Service, nominating Mr Peter Clark, Chief Legal
Officer. Council also noted that if it wished to appoint the Chief Legal
Officer as the Head of Paid Service then it would also need to make a
nomination to the post of Monitoring Officer. This was because the law did not
allow the same person to be both a Monitoring Officer and a Head of Paid
Service for the same Authority. As a
result, Council nominated Mr Nick Graham, the Deputy Head of Law and Culture,
to be the successor Monitoring Officer.
These nominations were subject to consultation with Cabinet Members. No
objections were made to either appointment. Council had before them a report (CC9) which set out the procedural requirements for Council to finalise these senior officer appointments. RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Hudspeth, seconded by Councillor Rose and carried by 58 votes to 0, with 1 abstention) to confirm the following: (a) that the Chief Legal Officer be appointed as the Council’s Head of Paid Service; (b) that the Deputy Head of Law and Culture be appointed as the Council’s Monitoring Officer; (c) that both appointments take effect on the cessation of the current Chief Executive’s employment with the Council. |
|
|
Treasury Management Outturn 2014/15 Report by Chief Finance Officer (CC10). The report sets out the Treasury Management activity undertaken in the financial year 2014/15 in compliance with the CIPFA Code of Practice. The report includes Debt and Investment activity, Prudential Indicator Outturn, Investment Strategy, and interest receivable and payable for the financial year. Council is RECOMMENDED to note the
Council’s Treasury Management Activity in 2014/15. Minutes: The Council had before them a report by the Chief Finance Officer (CC10) which set out the Treasury Management activity undertaken in the financial year 2014/15 in compliance with the CIPFA Code of Practice. The report included Debt and Investment activity, Prudential Indicator Outturn, Investment Strategy, and interest receivable and payable for the financial year. During debate, the Shadow Cabinet Member asked a number of detailed questions
which the Cabinet Member, Councillor Lawrie Stratford agreed to respond to in
writing. The questions were as follows: 1. Is lending to other local
authorities genuinely safe; 2. In the light of our cash balance
of £341m and his recent criticisms of councils' cash balances, are we at risk
of being penalised by the Chancellor; 3. While growth at 3% sounds
impressive (Para 7), doesn't the trade deficit of 5 or 6% of GDP pose risks;
and 4. In view of the economic
slow-down in China, should we reconsider the inclusion of Overseas-China
Banking Corporation in our list Lending List? RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Stratford, seconded by Councillor Hudspeth and carried nem con) to note the Council’s Treasury Management Activity in 2014/15. |
|
|
Partnerships Update Report Report by the
Head of Policy (CC11). This Annual
report to Council aims to set out some of the key activities over the past year
of both the Oxfordshire Partnership, and a number of the key formal
partnerships within which the County Council plays a part. This report
provides an update on the Oxfordshire-wide partnerships which are critical in
progressing key countywide priorities, enabling partners to work across the
themes of a thriving Oxfordshire, including economic growth, health and
wellbeing, thriving communities, and support to the most vulnerable. Each partnership report addresses the
following points: the current focus for the Partnership; the personnel
(Chairman and supporting staff) of the Partnership; the Partnership's governance arrangements; the
Partnership's key achievements in the last year; the aims for the Partnership
in the year ahead; the key challenges for the Partnership and how these will be
addressed going forward. Council is RECOMMENDED to note the report. Minutes: The Council had
before them an Annual report which set out some of the key activities over the
past year of both the Oxfordshire Partnership and a number of other key formal
partnerships within which the County Council played a part. The report
provided an update on the Oxfordshire-wide partnerships which were critical in
progressing key countywide priorities, enabling partners to work across the
themes of a thriving Oxfordshire, including economic growth, health and
wellbeing, thriving communities, and support to the most vulnerable. Each partnership report addressed the
following points: the current focus for the Partnership; the personnel
(Chairman and supporting staff) of the Partnership; the Partnership's governance arrangements; the
Partnership's key achievements in the last year; the aims for the Partnership
in the year ahead; the key challenges for the Partnership and how those would
be addressed going forward. RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Hudspeth, seconded by Councillor Rose and carried nem con) to note the report. |
|
|
Director of Public Health Annual Report Report by the Director of Public Health (CC12). The
annual report summarises key issues associated with the Public Health of the
County. It includes details of progress over the past year as well as
information on future work. It is
an independent report for all organisations and individuals. The
report covers the following areas: Chapter
1: The Demographic Challenge Chapter
2: Health, Houses and Roads Chapter
3: Breaking the Cycle of Disadvantage Chapter
4: Mental Health Chapter
5: Lifestyle and Health: We are what we eat, drink, smoke and do Chapter
6: Fighting Killer Diseases The
report has also been considered during July 2015 at the Oxfordshire Health
Overview & Scrutiny Committee the Oxfordshire Health and Wellbeing Board and
Oxfordshire County Council’s Cabinet. Council is RECOMMENDED to receive
the report. Minutes: The Council had before them the 8th
Annual Report by the Director of Public Health which summarised
key issues associated with the Public Health of the County. It included details
of progress over the past year as well as information on future work. It was an
independent report for all organisations and individuals. The
report had also been considered during July 2015 at the Oxfordshire Health
Overview & Scrutiny Committee the Oxfordshire Health and Wellbeing Board
and Oxfordshire County Council’s Cabinet. RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Hibbert-Biles, seconded by Councillor Hudspeth and carried nem con) to receive the report. |
|
|
Report of the Cabinet Report of the Cabinet meeting held on 21 July 2015 (CC13). Minutes: The Council
received the report of the Cabinet. In relation to paragraph 7 (2015/16 Financial
Monitoring & Business Strategy Delivery Report – May 2015) (Question from Councillor
Smith) Councillor Stratford gave an assurance to ask Councillor Nimmo Smith to provide Councillor Smith with a written answer
to the following 2 questions: Transport & highways budgets for
projects – when will we see how that money will be spent? What is being done about the A40 crossing
and traffic calming in Quarry Hollow? In relation to paragraph 8 (Public Health
Annual Report) (Question from Councillor Phillips) Councillor Hibbert-Biles gave
an assurance to provide Councillor Phillips with a written answer with details
on why the 7 Health targets will not be met. |
|
|
Connecting Oxfordshire: Local Transport Plan 2015 - 2031 Connecting Oxfordshire: Local Transport Plan 2015-2031 (LTP4) was approved by Cabinet on 21 July 2015 and recommended for adoption by Full Council at its meeting in September 2015. This replaces LTP3 that was adopted as Council policy on 5 April 2011 and subsequent approved revision on 10 July 2012. The 16 year timescale of the Plan gives major benefits in terms of providing a transport strategy that covers the period of the district councils’ Local Plans and allows for long term planning of major infrastructure. Connecting Oxfordshire has been developed over the past 18 months, in response to the rapidly changing national and local growth, economic development, infrastructure planning and funding agendas. The aim has been to develop a comprehensive policy and strategy framework to maximise opportunities for Oxfordshire, building on the success over the past two years on City Deal and other initiatives, and complement the Oxfordshire Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) and supporting documents.
It is next proposed to be updated in spring 2016. In the meantime, the LTP will continue to inform our strategic infrastructure planning work, bids for Growth Funding and other sources, and the updated Strategic Economic Plan. Thereafter, LTP4 will be reviewed and updated regularly (at least on an annual basis), with any interim changes being made with the agreement of the Deputy Director for Strategy & Infrastructure Planning and Cabinet Member for Environment, provided that these are presented to County Council for approval within 12 months.
This report outlines the further changes to LTP4 since approval by Cabinet in July 2015. This includes a proposed timeline for a revised County Rail Strategy (for adoption in spring 2016), and updates to the Local Area and Supporting Strategies, including Freight, as requested at July Cabinet. The annexes to the report have been circulated to all Members of the Council only and are available at www.oxfordshire.gov.uk. Council is RECOMMENDED to: (a)
adopt Connecting Oxfordshire:
Local Transport Plan 2015-2031 (LTP4) as council policy; and (b)
instruct
the Deputy Director of Environment and Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning), in
consultation with the Cabinet Member for Environment, to keep the document
under review and to make any necessary changes, subject to any such changes
being reported to County Council for approval within 12 months. Additional documents:
Minutes: With the agreement
of Council, Councillor Nimmo Smith accepted the
proposed amendment by Councillor Fooks as follows: “This Council passed a
motion in April 2014 recommending that LTP4 should recognize the need to reduce
pollutants from road traffic. Whilst
admitting that air quality “may well get worse with increasing traffic levels”,
LTP4 seriously underestimates the impact on health of exposure to NOx gases and
Particulates. LTP4 estimates that 13,000
premature deaths a year are caused by overall combustion emissions, with road
transport being the biggest source, although the estimate until recently was
that 29,000 premature deaths are caused each year due to particulates alone.
Even this figure is less than half the latest estimate
by the “Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants”. Council therefore requests
that LTP4 should be strengthened in its aims to reduce air pollution by more
positively: ·
Encouraging walking and
cycling; ·
restricting diesel vehicles
in town centres; ·
working more proactively
with the city and District Councils to develop and enact Air Quality Action Plans; ·
introducing low-or
zero-emission mass transit vehicles.” Following debate, the
motion as amended was put to the vote and was Agreed
by 32 votes to 25, with 2 abstentions. RESOLVED: (on a motion by Councillor Nimmo Smith, seconded by Councillor Hudspeth and carried by
32 votes to 25, with 2 abstentions) to: (a)
adopt Connecting Oxfordshire: Local Transport Plan
2015-2031 (LTP4) as council policy; and (b)
instruct the Deputy Director of Environment and
Economy (Strategy & Infrastructure Planning), in consultation
with the Cabinet Member for Environment, to keep the document under review and
to make any necessary changes, including the amendment by Councillor Jean
Fooks, subject to any such changes being reported to County Council for
approval within 12 months. |
|
|
Motion From Councillor Laura Price “Since
May 2015 several of our Community Hospitals have undergone changes to the
services they deliver and how those services are delivered. Individually these
changes have not been deemed appropriate for public consultation and
communities have been left feeling cheated of an opportunity to engage. These
hospitals form an integral part of the work of Oxfordshire Adult Social Care
and are crucial in providing seamless appropriate and timely care for
vulnerable elderly and disabled people in the County. This
Council, therefore, asks that in their role as commissioner, the Oxfordshire
Clinical Commissioning Group and Oxfordshire County Council urgently
co-ordinate a full public consultation on the future shape of Oxfordshire's
Community Hospitals before further incremental changes damage the public's
relationship with these vital services.” Minutes: With the consent of Council, Councillor Price moved and Councillor Heathcoat seconded her motion as amended below in strikethrough: “Since May 2014
several of our Community Hospitals have undergone changes to the services they
deliver and how those services are delivered.
Individually these changes have not been deemed appropriate for public
consultation and communities have been left feeling cheated of an opportunity
to engage. These hospitals
form an integral part of the work of Oxfordshire Adult Social Care and are
crucial in providing seamless appropriate and timely care for vulnerable
elderly and disabled people in the County. This Council,
therefore, asks that in their role as commissioner, the Oxfordshire Clinical
Commissioning Group lead on a full public consultation on the future shape of
Oxfordshire’s Community Hospitals and that Oxfordshire Council fully engage
with the process Following
debate, the motion, as amended was put to the vote and was carried nem con. RESOLVED: (nem con) Since May 2014
several of our Community Hospitals have undergone changes to the services they
deliver and how those services are delivered.
Individually these changes have not been deemed appropriate for public
consultation and communities have been left feeling cheated of an opportunity
to engage. These hospitals
form an integral part of the work of Oxfordshire Adult Social Care and are
crucial in providing seamless appropriate and timely care for vulnerable
elderly and disabled people in the County. This Council, therefore,
asks that in their role as commissioner, the Oxfordshire Clinical Commissioning
Group lead on a full public consultation on the future shape of Oxfordshire’s
Community Hospitals and that Oxfordshire Council fully engage with the process
before further incremental changes damage the public’s relationship with these
vital services. |
|
|
Motion From Councillor Kevin Bulmer “As we all know, this Council
is facing extreme pressure to reduce expenditure, to the extent that we are now
considering closing some of our Household Waste Recycling Centres
in order to save some £350,000
annually. An alternative to these
closures would be to charge residents for their use. However, long-standing
legislation from the Civic Amenities Act 1967 to the Environmental Protection
Act 1990 has required local authorities to provide free-to-use household waste
recycling centres for their residents to dispose of
household rubbish and recycling. The government’s
2011 waste review upheld this principle. The government is concerned
these charges will inconvenience residents; increase fly-tipping and back-yard
burning; and make recycling harder for people rather than its stated objective
of making it easier. The government believes that residents should continue to
have free access to household waste recycling centres
in their local authority area. However, when the alternative
to ‘free access’
becomes ‘no access’,
this argument loses some of its impetus.
In spite of the noted success of kerbside
recycling in Oxfordshire, there are still a million-plus trips made to HWRCs in
this county annually. Clearly, a nominal charge of a pound a time would
generate far more revenue than the £350,000
savings target. This
Council calls upon the Leader of the Council to send a letter to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
requesting an urgent re-evaluation of the government’s stance,
thereby to enable LAs to charge residents to use HWRCs, in order to prevent
their closure.” Minutes: Councillor Bulmer moved and Councillor Harrod seconded the following motion: “As we all
know, this Council is facing extreme pressure to reduce expenditure, to the
extent that we are now considering closing some of our Household Waste
Recycling Centres in order to save some £350,000 annually. An alternative
to these closures would be to charge residents for their use. However,
long-standing legislation from the Civic Amenities Act 1967 to the
Environmental Protection Act 1990 has required local authorities to provide
free-to-use household waste recycling centres for their
residents to dispose of household rubbish and recycling. The government’s 2011 waste review
upheld this principle. The government
is concerned these charges will inconvenience residents; increase fly-tipping
and back-yard burning; and make recycling harder for people rather than its
stated objective of making it easier. The government believes that residents
should continue to have free access to household waste recycling centres in their local authority area. However, when
the alternative to ‘free access’ becomes ‘no access’, this argument loses some of its impetus. In spite of the noted success of kerbside recycling in Oxfordshire, there are still a
million-plus trips made to HWRCs in this county annually. Clearly, a nominal
charge of a pound a time would generate far more revenue than the £350,000 savings
target. This Council calls upon the Leader of the Council to send a letter to the Secretary of State
for Communities and Local Government requesting an urgent re-evaluation of the
government’s stance, thereby to enable LAs to charge
residents to use HWRCs, in order to prevent their closure.” Following debate, the motion was put to the vote and was agreed by 38 votes to 16. RESOLVED: accordingly. |
|
|
Motion by Councillor Roz Smith “This Council recognises the invaluable
work undertaken by volunteers running village halls and community centres
throughout Oxfordshire. The community buildings the volunteers look after
provide facilities such as lunch clubs, exercise classes, pre-schools, libraries
and other activities to improve health and wellbeing. Austerity measures and budgets cuts have
meant grants towards the costs of improving and maintaining the village halls
and community centres are diminishing. The volunteers have to fund raise even more
vigorously to maintain and upgrade the buildings they look after. Most building
work on village halls and centres is liable for VAT at the standard rate of
20%; so, for instance, a village hall committee raising funds for a £100,000
extension has to find another £20,000 for the VAT bill. This is a tax on
voluntary effort. This Council agrees to show support for the
National Village Halls Forum campaign to reduce the VAT rate for building
improvements to charitable organisations by writing to all Oxfordshire MPs to
ask them to support the campaign to reduce this tax burden on charitable
organisations looking after our village halls and community buildings when
considering the next national budget.” Minutes: With the consent of Council, Councillor Smith moved and Councillor Johnson seconded her motion as amended by Councillor Bartholomew below in bold italics and strikethrough: “This Council recognises the invaluable work undertaken by volunteers running village halls and community centres throughout Oxfordshire. The community buildings the volunteers look after provide facilities such as lunch clubs, exercise classes, pre-schools, libraries and other activities to improve health and wellbeing. Austerity measures and budgets cuts have meant grants towards the costs of improving and maintaining the village halls and community centres are diminishing. The volunteers have to fund raise even more vigorously to maintain and upgrade the buildings they look after. Most building work on village halls and centres is liable for VAT at the standard rate of 20%; but usually parish councils are able to claim this back. However, in some instances charities or community groups not aligned with parish councils could, for example, have to find another £20,000 for the VAT bill on a £100,000 extension. for instance, a village hall committee raising funds for a £100,000 extension has to find another £20,000 for the VAT bill. This is a tax on voluntary effort. This Council agrees to show
support for the National Village Halls, by instructing the Chief
Financial Officer to write to parish councils clarifying the VAT position and
by writing to all Oxfordshire MPs to ask them to support calls to reduce the
VAT burden on charitable organisations looking after our village halls and
community buildings
when VAT cannot be reclaimed. Following debate, the motion, as amended was put to the vote and was carried nem con. RESOLVED: (nem con) This Council recognises the invaluable work undertaken by volunteers running village halls and community centres throughout Oxfordshire. The community buildings the volunteers look after provide facilities such as lunch clubs, exercise classes, pre-schools, libraries and other activities to improve health and wellbeing. Austerity measures and budgets cuts have meant grants towards the costs of improving and maintaining the village halls and community centres are diminishing. The volunteers have to fund raise even more vigorously to maintain and upgrade the buildings they look after. Most building work on village halls and centres is liable for VAT at the standard rate of 20%; but usually parish councils are able to claim this back. However, in some instances charities or community groups not aligned with parish councils could, for example, have to find another £20,000 for the VAT bill on a £100,000 extension. for instance, a village hall committee raising funds for a £100,000 extension has to find another £20,000 for the VAT bill. This is a tax on voluntary effort. This Council agrees to show support for the National Village ... view the full minutes text for item 64/15 |