Agenda and draft minutes

To receive any apologies for absence.

Apologies were received from Councillors Hugh Lumby and Tanya Park.

Councillor Ann Briggs was in attendance and substituting as the Conservative Deputy Member.

All Members who believe they have a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in any matter to be considered at the meeting must declare that interest and, having regard to Part 3 Paragraph 1.5 of the County Council's Members’ Code of Conduct, leave the meeting while the matter is discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with Paragraph 1.6 of the Code.  Furthermore all Members with a Personal Interest in a matter being considered at the meeting should consider, having regard to Part 5, Paragraph 4 of the Code, whether such interest should be declared, and having regard to Part 5, Paragraph 5 of the Code, consider whether it is appropriate to leave the meeting while the matter is discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with the Code.

Members were mindful that where they believed they had a Disclosable Pecuniary Interest in any matter considered at the meeting they must declare that interest at the time of the relevant debate and, having regard to the circumstances described in Part 3, Paragraph 1.5 of the County Council's Members' Code of Conduct, leave the meeting while the matter was discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with Paragraph 1.6 of the Code. Furthermore Members were mindful that where they believed they had a Personal interest in a matter being considered at the meeting they considered whether such interest should be declared, and having regard to Part 5, Paragraph 5 of the Code, considered whether it was appropriate to leave the meeting whilst the matter was discussed, save for exercising any right to speak in accordance with the Code.

There were no interests declared at this point in the meeting.

To confirm the minutes of the previous meeting held on 7 November 2022.

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 November 2022 were agreed as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.

To receive any deputations notified under Standing Order 12.

The Committee received five deputations relating to the item on the agenda about future proposals relating to Titchfield Haven National Nature Reserve:

Caroline Herbert

Caroline as a local resident, spoke against the proposals and highlighted the petition which had been submitted to save the Haven Centre (Haven House), and that the Centre had recently been listed as an Asset of Community Value (ACV), and the Hill Head Residents Association (HHRA) were in the process of registering as a charity to take over the Centre.  HHRA had also been in communication with the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust (HIWWT).  She highlighted that the proposals had ignored the public’s views and showed a lack of understanding for those who regularly visited the Centre, the residents who were dependent on it and the proposals were open to Judicial Review.  Caroline stated that Alver Valley Country Park was not geographically close or offered the same experience as an alternative for residents to visit, and Haven House was a warm, safe and tranquil place.

Tracey Viney

Tracey as a local resident, and volunteer at the Nature Reserve, spoke against the proposals.  She spoke about how many of the volunteers were local residents, elderly and living on their own, who value the Centre for social contact.  She highlighted that the proposals were ill conceived, and would not be able to be delivered, such as the proposed hut, uncertainty of seasonal catering provision and future income from donations.  Tracey stated that the findings of the recent Hampshire County Council (HCC) visitor survey indicated that some existing members would not renew their membership, visitor numbers would fall, and it was unrealistic to assume visitor numbers would remain high.  She also highlighted that HCC would only achieve an annual saving of £60,000, which does not provide a best value solution.  She emphasised that the volunteers were extremely concerned about the proposals, but if the sale of the properties did go ahead then it was essential that the proceeds did go to the Nature Reserve.  Tracey concluded by requesting that the proposals should be rejected and the Service undertake a more robust options appraisal, complete a full cost benefits analysis on all the options and develop a more robust financial proposal.

Lynne Murray

Lynne Murray spoke as a local resident opposed to the proposals and referenced the four options which were part of the original business case.  She highlighted that transferring Haven House to a third party was dismissed originally and now this has become an option in the decision report.  Lynne stated that the HIWWT had confirmed in writing their interest, and she highlighted that Councillors should be asking for more information on the proposals.  She spoke about the projected savings as a result of the proposals, and spoke about this being dependent on donations received, and it was likely that some membership income would stop, this would mean that any projected SP23 savings for HCC would be reduced.  HCC’s net cash contribution figure was also queried  ...  view the full minutes text for item 13.

To receive any announcements the Chairman may wish to make.

The Chairman was delighted to announce that Hampshire Library Service had been awarded the ‘Library of Sanctuary’ accreditation.  Members heard that this award recognised the work of the Library Service to provide welcoming places of safety for all, and its work to offer sanctuary to people fleeing violence and persecution.  The judging panel, which included individuals with lived experience of coming to Hampshire as refugees, were unanimous in their praise for the work that Hampshire’s Library Service was doing, and commented particularly on the impressive connections that Hampshire’s Library Service has made with partners across the region. 

The Chairman also extended his gratitude to Sue Lapham and Felicity Roe who would both be leaving Hampshire County Council (HCC) this month.  Members heard that Sue has worked at HCC for 36 years, and in the last few years has served the Committee in her capacity as Finance Business Partner for Culture, Communities and Business Services (CCBS), whilst Felicity has worked at HCC for 29 years and held the role of Director of CCBS for four years.   The Chairman highlighted that both will be very much missed, and on behalf of the Committee he thanked them for their dedication, sound advice and excellent leadership, and wished them well in the future.  

To pre-scrutinise a report of the Director of Culture, Communities and Business Services on proposals regarding the future of Titchfield Haven National Nature Reserve and its associated buildings.

The Committee received a report of the Director of Culture, Communities and Business Services for pre-scrutiny, seeking the support of the Committee on proposals regarding the future of Titchfield Haven National Nature Reserve following a period of staff consultation and public engagement (Item 6 in the Minute Book).  Support of the Committee was sought on proposals which would be considered by the Executive Member for Countryside, Culture and Communities and by the Executive Member for Policy, Resources and Economic Development at their respective Decision Days on 8 December 2022.

Members of the Committee were shown a presentation which highlighted key areas of the report.  It was explained that the current operating model of the Nature Reserve was financially unsustainable with a net cost of £136,000 for the 2022/23 financial year.  Attention was also drawn to the estimated running costs over the next three years and the level of investment needed for the Nature Reserve, Haven House and Haven Cottage.  If no changes were made to the current operating model, and it was forecast that with costs increasing, this would mean a total pressure against budget of £1,831,000.  Members heard that the option recommended was ‘Option 4 – Change Focus’ which would prioritise the Nature Reserve and manage without the café, visitor centre and shop.  This would also reduce revenue costs, improve access and was the most viable option.  Officers explained that by closing these facilities and selling Haven House and Haven Cottage, an estimated £2million of capital receipt would be generated.  It was proposed that this would help to reduce revenue costs towards SP23, and invest in longer term management of the Nature Reserve by improved access, visitor experience and retaining a strong customer and volunteer offer. 

Officers also presented details relating to the staff consultation which commenced on 27 September 2022, and Appendix C to the report outlined the main feedback and outcome of this consultation.  In terms of staffing impact, it was highlighted that 50% of staff would retain their employment, and 50% would remain at risk of redundancy, and it was emphasised that officers had done their best to limit the impact on staff and find alternative employment for some.  Members also heard details about the public engagement approach and the high level of feedback and good breadth of responses received from the public engagement survey.  Members noted that a signed petition of 9991 signatories had been received opposing the closure of the visitor centre and café, but it was important to stress that the Nature Reserve itself wouldn’t be closing and very few Nature Reserves have a café as part of their offer.

Officers highlighted the engagement that had taken place with organisations and elected representatives in order to explore any viable solutions.  It was heard that the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) had confirmed that to enter into a partnership was not a strategic priority for them, whilst there had been contact with the National Trust no further communication had been received  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the public be excluded from the meeting during the following item of business, as it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during this item there would be disclosure to them of exempt information within Paragraphs 1,2 and 3 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, and further that in all the circumstances of the case, the public interest in maintaining the exemption outweighs the public interest in disclosing the information, for the reasons set out in the report.

As there was no requirement to go into exempt session, the press and public were not excluded from the meeting.

To consider an exempt appendix in relation to Item 6 on the agenda.

The exempt appendix was considered as part of item 6 on the agenda without being directly referenced, and therefore there was no requirement to go into exempt session.