Agenda and minutes

Apologies were reported on behalf of Alderman McKee and Councillor O’Neill.

            The minutes of the meeting of 6th December were taken as read and signed as correct.  It was reported that those minutes had been adopted by the Council at its meeting on 3rd January.

·        Councillor McCusker declared an interest in respect of item 3 (c) Request from Crumlin Star Re Strangford Avenue, in that he was a member of the Crumlin Star Social Club; and 

·        Councillor Austin declared an interest in respect of item 5 (b) Front Line Advice Service, in that she was associated with an organisation that that received funding support.

(Mr. S. Skimin, Head of Cleansing Services, attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0     Purpose of Report or Summary of main Issues

1.1       The purpose of this report is to further update the Committee on the Motion that was brought to Council on 1st September 2016 with regard to dangerous breeds of dogs and to provide an interim report on the work that is being undertaken to review how the Council handles any future cases involving dangerous breeds.  The Motion called for a review of breed specific legislation to avoid the removal from their owners of prohibited dogs that have not posed a danger to the public, as follows:

            ‘This Council calls upon the Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs to conduct an urgent review of Breed Specific Legislation.  Recent tragic events in England demonstrate the need for effective controls in respect of dangerous dogs.  However, the removal from their owners of dogs that have not posed a danger to the public should be avoided.  The Council supports and encourages responsible dog ownership and those who exercise appropriate care and control of their dogs.’

1.2       The Council wrote to the Minister for Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs, Minister McIlveen MLA, about the Motion on 5th October. 

2.0       Recommendations

2.1       The Committee is asked to;

·        Note the contents of the report.

·        Agree to receive a presentation on the key issues from Mr Peter Tallack at the start of February’s Committee meeting.

3.0       Key Issues

3.1       A reply from the Minister’s office has been received. The Minister has stated in her response as follows;

            ‘The Department understands that the Council is currently reviewing its handling of a high profile case involving the seizure, assessment and return of a pit bull.  We would be interested in learning of the findings of that review, and will then consider whether the existing legislative provisions could be reviewed to allow the impact of seizure on dogs and their owners, to be more effectively managed, while ensuring appropriate protection for the public.’

3.2       An internal officer group has been reviewing the legal policy and processes involved in dealing with cases of suspected banned breeds. Members of the group sought and have received a report from an expert on identifying and dealing with banned breeds of dogs, Mr. Peter Tallack, regarding the risks to public safety and the welfare considerations about the Council seizing dogs, suspected to be a banned breed type, under the Dangerous Dogs (Northern Ireland) Order 1991.  Mr Tallack has extensive experience in investigating serious dog attacks. This report provides further background and information and best practice in advance of seeking the opinion of Legal Counsel in relation to the potential liability to the Council in allowing a dog from a banned breed to remain at home with its owner, pending legal proceedings for exemption.

3.3       Members are reminded that there is now a legal process which will allow the dog to be placed on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5a

            The Assistant Director advised that, at the meeting of the Strategic Cemetery and Crematorium Development Working Group held on 5th December, the following key issues had been considered:

·        economic appraisal on the proposals regarding the future cremation options;

·        review of the burial policy; and

·        update on the Loughview Park Cemetery Planning Application.

            Following a query from a Member, the Assistant Director confirmed that a permanent memorial to mark Plot Z1 at the City Cemetery was being progressed.

            In response to a query, regarding the economic appraisal on the proposals in relation to the future cremation options, the Director of City and Neighbourhood Services confirmed that the draft document had been received by the Council on 28th November and was currently being assessed in line with the governance under the Council’s agreed three stage approval process for all capital projects.  He advised the Committee that consideration of the economic appraisal had been placed on the agenda for the Party Group Briefings scheduled to be held at the end of January.

            Several Members advised that they had been contacted in relation to members of the public no longer being allowed to use the waiting area at Roselawn Crematorium without purchasing refreshments and asked officers to investigate this complaint further.

            Following consideration the Committee:

• approved and adopted the minutes of the meeting of the Strategic Cemeteries and Crematorium Working Group held on 5th December 2016;
• noted that Party Group Briefings would be taking place at the end of January on the proposals regarding the economic appraisal and future cremation options;
• noted that a permanent memorial to mark Plot Z1 at the City Cemetery was being progressed through the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee and that engagement would take place in due course regarding the actual memorial; and 
• agreed that officers would submit a report to a future meeting of the Strategic Cemeteries and Working Group on the new tender arrangements for the café at Roselawn Crematorium which would include details regarding the use of the waiting area and the current pricing structure.

            The Assistant Director reminded the Committee that the Council had previously agreed to enter into Partner Agreements at seven sites. She explained that the information presented was on six of the seven sites, as details from Ulidia Playing Fields (Rosario Football Club) were still outstanding.  She confirmed that the club had been formally written to requesting the outstanding information and they had confirmed that the information would be forwarded immediately. The Director then provided an update on the progress in relation to the Agreements for July – September 2016. 

            The officer reminded the Committee that funding of up to £20,000 per annum was available for each partner for the delivery of a programme (supporting the Sports Development Plan).  She reported that successful applicants had submitted plans to improve sports development outcomes at each site and that financial support had been approved at all of these sites.  Full Quarter one and Quarter two payments, plus initial payments of 80% from Quarter three budgets, had been made at six of the seven sites.  She added that only Quarter one initial payments had been made to Rosario FC.  The officer explained that changes to the club’s personnel had resulted in the recently submitted mandatory information not having met the required standard, however, a Council Sports Development Officer was currently assisting the club to resolve these outstanding issues, and it was anticipated that the payments to Rosario would be approved during the current quarter. 

            The officer drew the Members’ attention to a table which indicated the outputs at the sites as reported by the partners up to the end of September 2016 and highlighted that in the initial year of transition from the Facility Management Agreements there was evidence of growth in the level of diverse use and extensive partnership working.   

The Committee noted the information which had been provided.  

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0     Purpose of Report or Summary of main Issues

1.1            The purpose of this report is to update Committee on the transfer of the land from DfC following expenditure of c. £0.5m by DfC on capital work to upgrade the area.

2.0       Recommendations

2.1       The Committee is asked to;

·        Note that the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee has granted approval to accept the transfer, on terms as outlined below, from DfC following completion of capital works to enhance the site.

3.0       Main report

3.1       Key Issues

            The DfC own the land at Springfield Dam.  DfC commissioned AECOM to undertake a feasibility study in partnership with the Council to develop high level concept plans for the site. The Springfield Dam site shares a boundary with the Council’s Springfield Park and there is an opportunity to create a larger enhanced and integrated open space at this location. The feasibility study produced two options; the estimated construction cost for option 1 is £448,513.71 and for option 2 is £1,215,511.01.  DfC have funding available in this financial year for option 1 and they are keen to start spending the estimated total construction costs for Option 1 before 31st March 2017; if expenditure is committed and commenced prior to 31st March 2017 the full cost can be accrued by DfC in  Financial Year 16/17.  There is no funding currently available for option 2.

3.2       Option 1 comprises the basic framework to improve access and provide for recreational use of the site.  The proposed paths will provide for circulation between the Dam and Springfield Park and also link into proposed new entrances to the site. This will facilitate ‘loop’ walks in the locality.  The proposed recreational facilities include a proposed building for classroom/training/recreational/storage use, fishing stands and an activity trail.

3.3       At its meeting on 21st Oct 2016 the Committee agreed in principle to the transfer of land and property assets from the DfC, or other central government bodies as appropriate, upon completion of identified capital projects, subject to the conditions of transfer as set out in the report and specifically on agreement on revenue budgets at the time of the transfer, with up to three years agreed maintenance costs being provided as a minimum, depending on the nature of the asset.

3.4       The following Heads of Terms have been agreed with DfC in respect to the transfer of Springfield Dam to the Council:

·        DfC to provide BCC with copies of satisfactory title and confirmation that there are no restrictions, onerous conditions or charges in the title which would preclude the proposed works.

·        BCC will appoint consultants to design Option 1 of the Springfield Dam project.

·        BCC will secure planning approval and statutory approvals as required for the scheme.

·        BCC will appoint the contractor to complete the works.

·        DfC will fund all costs including design, statutory approvals and construction.

·        BCC will agree to take ownership of the site at nil cost to the Council on completion of Option  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6b

            The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 11th October 2016, it had agreed that an update report on Crumlin Star Football Club’s request to upgrade facilities at the Strangford Avenue Playing Fields would be submitted to a future meeting.

            The Assistant Director outlined that Crumlin Star had asked the Council if it would investigate the possibility of bringing pitch three and the associated pavilion up to Intermediate League Standard, which would enable the Club to play its home games at Strangford Avenue.

            The Members were also advised that the Club had indicated that, if successful, it would explore other investment options to assist with the enhancement of the facility and proposed that the Council would remain responsible for the maintenance of the pitch but that the Club would pay for the use of the facility.

            The Members were asked to note that, whilst it appeared that technically the facility could be brought up to an existing Intermediate Ground Standard, there remained a number of issues around funding, planning (including potential local opposition), and the displacement of existing users.

            The Assistant Director advised that officers from the Council had recently met with a representative from the IFA who had responsibility for Ground Criteria for a preliminary assessment, and she highlighted that the following points had arisen at the meeting:

·        in order to meet the standard the facility would require a perimeter high level fence around the pitch as well as the spectator rail, the league do not stipulate the height of the fence, a height of at least 1.8m is normal.  The spectator rail is normally 1.2m high.  The high fence would require planning approval.  This would need to extend around the pitch, to enclose the playing surface, the run off area and the circulation spectator;

·        the existing changing pavilion was currently fenced in with a 1m fence.  The IFA appeared satisfied with this.  The fence was camouflaged by hedging;

·        the pavilion appeared to be compliant with current criteria in terms of size and the accommodation for match officials.  However, as the pavilion had a separate changing area and shower facilities it would not meet the ground criteria.  To make it Intermediate League compliant, it would be necessary to restrict the use of the pavilion to two teams, one team would use block 1-3 and the other block 4-6, during Intermediate League games; 

·        Strangford Avenue was currently booked on Saturdays by the South Belfast League and Belfast and District League.  Both of those leagues would be displaced from this facility on those occasions when Crumlin Star would be playing.  There had been no discussion with either of those Leagues to date;

·        the Intermediate Ground Criteria required dug outs; and

·        an estimated cost for the works would be in the region of £50,000;

            The Assistant Director also asked the Members to note that officers had met with representatives from the IFA Intermediate Committee.  She reported that the Chairman of the Committee had advised that there was an ongoing review of  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6c

            The Director of City and Neighbourhood Services explained that in cases where the Council leased a land or property asset to a community/third sector organisation a rent would be payable to the Council, in line with the provisions as set out in the various leases, and in accordance with the Council’s statutory requirements in relation to disposal (including leasing) under the Local Government Act 1972 Section 96.

            He continued that, at the Community and Recreation Sub Committee meeting of 7th March 2006, which had subsequently been ratified at the Council meeting of 12th May 2006, it had been agreed that the six independently managed community centres would be paid their allocated grant payment net of rent. In those instances a rental value would still be assessed, as provided for in accordance with the lease provisions, and added to the overall grant amount but the actual amount paid out would be net of rent.  He reported that the independently managed community centres included:

·      Shaftesbury Community Centre;

·      Grosvenor Community Centre;

·      Ballymacarrett Community Centre;

·      Carrickhill Community Centre;

·      Denmark Street Community Centre;

·      Percy Street; and

·      AnMunia Tober in respect of a facility at Glen Road (this had been agreed at a later date).

            The Director advised that, in order to try and simplify the current arrangements, it was proposed that, where appropriate, all community/third sector groups, both present and future, which were in receipt of Community Services Revenue or equivalent Grant Aid and had a lease agreement with the Council for either land or buildings, should be paid the grant net of rent in those instances where the grant aid was in excess of the rent.  He also reminded the Committee that a Community Asset Transfer Policy was currently being progressed by the Council, therefore, the arrangements might be subject to change.

            He reported that, in addition to the current independently managed centres, it was proposed that a similar arrangement would be put in place in respect of leases held by the following groups:

·        Lower Old Park Community Association;

·        Finvoy Street – Walkway Community Association; and

·        Whitecity site – Whitecity Community Development Association.

            The Committee agreed that, in order to simplify the different lease arrangements, all those groups which were in receipt of Community Buildings Revenue grant, as part of the Community Development Grant Programme, and which had a lease for Belfast City Council land or buildings, would be paid their revenue grant net of rent.

            The Assistant Director reminded the Committee that the Whiterock Community Corridor capital project had been agreed as a project on the Council’s Capital Programme by the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee at its meeting held on 22nd November 2013. She advised that the aim of the project had been to redevelop the 0.7 acre vacant site at Whiterock Close for the provision of facilities for the local community.

            She advised that, to date, a new play park, a multi-use games area (MUGA) and a newly landscaped open space with gardens, seating, footpaths and lighting had been completed.  The project had been developed in consultation with a range of stakeholders, including local community representatives and residents. 

            The officer reminded the Committee that, at its meeting in August 2008, the former Parks and Leisure Committee had agreed to a policy framework for managing requests to (re) name parks and leisure facilities. She advised that the proposed consultative approach would be delivered in line with the policy, with the intention that the name proposed for the play park would be assessed against the agreed criteria set out within it.

            The Assistant Director outlined the process to name the new play park.  She explained that the suggested naming proposal recommended a four week consultation period, during which local schools would be asked to submit suitable name suggestions.  The responses would then be assessed by a panel of judges who would shortlist the submissions down to three.  The public would then be asked to vote for their favourite between 12th January and 1st February.

            The Members noted that the name proposals for the play park would be determined by the majority votes for each, with an update report being submitted to the People and Communities Committee at a future meeting for its consideration within the context of the Belfast City Council Naming Policy.   

            The Committee agreed to the naming process for the new play Park at Whiterock Close.

The Committee was advised that officers wished to seek a Committee position in regard to the notice of motion which had been raised at the Council meeting on 1st November 2016.  The Committee was reminded that it had been proposed that the Council would work collectively with the Department of Infrastructure (DoI) to develop a strategic political and costed plan for the Comber Greenway on part of the recently launched Strategic plan for Greenways within Northern Ireland.

            The Assistant Director explained that the Comber Greenway covered three Council areas: Ards and North Down Borough Council; Lisburn and Castlereagh City Council; and Belfast City Council.  She reported that, whilst the DoI was responsible for the Greenway, the three Councils’ did provide assistance, which was essential in order to maximise the valuable benefits of the resource.

            In order to progress the motion, the Committee:

·        agreed that Belfast City Council officers would request to meet with the Department of Infrastructure (DoI) officials to try and establish the Department’s  commitment to the Comber Greenway within its strategy;

·        agreed that, if the approach was positive, officers would aim to create a Steering Group with the DoI and the other relevant Councils. Should the other Councils not be interested then the Steering Group would focus on the Belfast section of the Greenway only;

·        noted that the aim of the Steering Group would be to develop a costed plan for the Comber Greenway that would identify contributions and responsibilities; and

·        noted that if the DoI did not engage positively then the motion would need to be reconsidered;

·        agreed that the Committee would receive an update report on the progress in due course.

            (Mr. T. Walker, Head of Waste Management, attended in connection with this item and also for the following item: Supplementary Waste Storage Guidelines for Houses and Apartments in Belfast.)

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0     Purpose of Report

1.1      This report provides an overview of the NI Environment Agency (NIEA), Northern Ireland Local Authority Collected Municipal Waste Management Statistics, Annual Report 2015/16.

1.2       The report contains the validated data on Belfast’s recycling rate and its performance in meeting the legislative obligations contained within the NI Landfill Allowance Scheme (NILAS), which measures the diversion of biodegradable (primarily food & garden waste) waste from landfill.

1.3       These figures are used to determine the progress of NI in relation to meeting the legal requirements outlined in the Waste Framework Directive (i.e. 50% household recycling rate by 2020) and also compliance with the Landfill Directive.

2.0       Recommendations

2.1       The Committee is asked to;

·        Note the contents of the report.

3.0       Main report

3.1       Key Issues

            Recycling Rate – Members may recall that at the Committee meeting of 9 June 2015, during discussions on the Interim Waste Plan 15/16, it was noted that the recycling rate was projected to decrease from 44% (2014/15) to 40%.  Over the 2015/16 financial year, the total amount of household waste collected was around 142,000 tonnes with 57,000 tonnes being recycled or composted.  This resulted in a final validated recycling rate of 40%, in line with projections.  The comparative performance of Belfast is displayed in Figure 1.

            Fig 1: Comparative household waste recycling rate 2015/16

3.2       The decline in the Council’s recycling rate is primarily due to a number of factors, including continued growth in the amount of waste generated, the impact of additional waste tonnages from households which transferred under local government reform (LGR), and ongoing challenges within the local market place.

3.3       Post the Great Recession, the five years leading up to 2013/14, councils across NI witnessed a 15% reduction in the amount of waste collected.  Since then, this trend has reversed with waste rebounding by 6% in three years.  These increasing volumes of waste bring ongoing financial challenges and, in some instances, neighbouring councils have changed their operating practices to mitigate this impact.  This has affected the volume and types of waste being deposited at Household Recycling Centres (HRCs) in particular, including Belfast’s, and has also increased waste tourism between councils.

3.4       As part of the LGR process around 21,000 households transferred to Belfast.  In December 2016, the 2015/16 year’s waste data was released which showed that, despite the positive work of the Waste Education team, several of these new neighbourhoods were not participating in the kerbside recycling schemes to their full potential.

3.5       This issue has also been affected by events in the local marketplace.  It has been noted that this is of limited size and that it potentially lacks maturity, as well as having a patchy record with criminality.  The absence of large, multi-national waste management companies such as Veolia, Biffa, Viridor, Suez/Sita  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7b

The Head of Waste Management reported that under the Belfast Agenda the City of Belfast was seeking to grow by 70,000 population by 2035.  He reported that in order to facilitate such an increase the Council needed to give consideration to waste storage throughout the City. 

            The officer reported that, in February 2013, the Council’s Health and Environmental Services Section had approved the publication of supplementary guidance to help architects and developers apply the Northern Ireland guidance in line with the specific collection schemes operating in Belfast.  He advised that this reference document had helped balance the workload of staff with Waste Management, Building Control and the Planning Service, while familiarising the construction industry with the Council’s requirements and expectations.  The officer continued that, with changing times, and in light of experiences using the earlier supplementary guidance, the above services had identified a number of potential amendments/improvements which had subsequently been incorporated into an updated version of the document and he drew the Members’ attention to some of these as follows:

1.     the content had been comprehensively revised and updated to reflect changes which had occurred (for example, the implementation of Local Government Reform and the adoption of 180-litre wheeled bins as standard for the collection of general waste) and learning which had been gained (for example, the advantages of individual recycling bins over communal recycling bins) since the original publication;

2.     the requirements in terms of the proportions of general waste and recycling capacity were adjusted, in light of experience, to be more realistic while still firmly biased towards recycling; and

3.     the format had been revised to be clearer and simpler. 

            The Committee approved:

• the revised methodology to be applied by the Council to calculate the proportions of residual, dry recyclable and food waste which would be incorporated into developments where communal waste containers would be used;
• the publication of the revised information, in the form of a comprehensively updated “supplementary guidance” document, which would be used in Belfast in conjunction with the NI guidance for builders, developers and architects; and
• agreed that a copy of this report be submitted to a future meeting of the Planning Committee for information purposes.

            The Director of City and Neighbourhood Services provided the Committee with an update on the progress being made to manage the corporate risks.

            He reminded the Committee that a review of the corporate risk register and related processes had been undertaken during 2015-2016 and this had included a review and re-score of all the corporate risks, including target risk scores.  For each corporate risk a ‘risk information form’ had been produced which had detailed relevant controls, proposed actions (including timescales) and responsible officers.  He reported that it had also been agreed that management would update the relevant committee on the progress being made to manage the key risks.

             He advised the Committee that the Corporate Management Team had reviewed and, where appropriate, had updated the assessment of the corporate risk and he drew the Members’ attention to the corporate risk map which identified the progress that had been made to manage the corporate risks down to an acceptable level. 

            The Committee was advised that the risks of particular relevance to the People and Communities Committee were as follows:

·        GLL – inability to effectively manage the leisure contract and relationships between BCC, Active Belfast Limited and the Greenwich Leisure Limited - (GLL) to ensure that the key outcomes were achieved;

·        Waste Management -  failure to manage the City’s waste against targets in an affordable manner; and

·        Safeguard all ages – failure to safeguard children and adults from the risk of harm caused by abuse, exploitation and neglect when using Council facilities/attending Council events/or receiving Council services.

            He outlined to the Members that management had prepared progress update reports on each of these corporate risks.

            Following a query regarding the monitoring processes for GLL, the Director of City and Neighbourhood Services confirmed that GLL reported regularly to the Active Belfast Limited Board and that the minutes of those meetings were tabled at the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee for noting.  He also advised that on the basis of the ongoing operation of controls and following implementation of the agreed actions, the rating for the GLL risk had reduced and it had now reached its target risk rating.  The Director advised that the risk would continue to be monitored through the corporate risk management process and he agreed to update the Committee on matters regarding GLL which were of direct relevance to the People and Communities Committee.

            The Committee:

·        noted the progress that had been made to date to manage the corporate risks on GLL, Waste Management and Safeguarding and the proposed six monthly process for reporting; and

·        agreed that the Director of City and Neighbourhood Services would update the Committee on matters regarding GLL which were of direct relevance to the People and Communities Committee.

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.0     Purpose of Report or Summary of main Issues

1.1        Purpose of Report:

            The purpose of this report is to invite members to note the correspondence received from The Department for Communities (DfC) on the 16th December with regard to further additional funding for Frontline Advice Services and to ask members to agreed to accept the subsequent offer of additional funds.

1.2  Summary of main issues:

      For members to agree to accept the offer of additional in-year funding of £54,320.00 from DfC. Officers recommend that the additional funding will be allocated to each of the 5 generalist advice consortia based on council’s agreed existing allocation model. To support the allocation, each consortium will be required to submit programme proposals in line with the programme objectives for assessment and approval by officers. 

1.3  In light of the request for continued financial support from the Belfast Advice Group, officers contacted DfC officials to determine if this additional in-year funding could be used to extend the Citywide Tribunal Service contract.  Officials have responded noting this is not permissible, rather the additional offer is conditional on funds being spent on support functions and should be allocated across frontline advice providers in the Belfast area to allow them to purchase support type functions. 

2.0Recommendations

2.1Committee is asked to:

                                               i.          accept the offer of additional in-year funding under the Community Support Programme (CSP) from the DfC detailed the Letter of Variance.

                                             ii.          consider and agree a mechanism to distribute this additional grant across the five advice consortia based on the agreed allocation model and in line with contract conditions.

3.0Main report

3.1Letter of Offer

      Correspondence was received on 16 December from the Department for Communities offering further additional in-year funding under the Community Support Programme for Frontline Advice Services. The letter advises that the Voluntary & Community Unit has secured regional funding of £160k with Belfast’s allocation being £54,320 which is conditional on spend in advance of 31 March 2017.

3.2The funding is ring-fenced for the delivery of any or all of the objectives as part of the LOO. This funding is to enable frontline advice organisations to secure support functions. The funding is in-year and does not require any match funding from BCC.

3.3Proposed Model of Funding

      Given the time-frame for spend, and the established precedent for front line generalist advice support, officers recommend that this funding is administered using the same model applied in relation to the additional funding received for the Welfare Reform Readiness Programme agreed by committee in October.

      The table below details the current 2016/17 grant award for each consortium, the previous agreed uplift and this proposed additional grant uplift based on Council’s existing allocation model. The marginal percentage anomaly has been equally spread across neighbourhood consortia to maximise the available budget.

3.4

            The Committee considered the undernoted report

“1.0     Purpose of Report or Summary of main Issues

1.1       The purpose of this report is to inform Members on the progress of the Live Here Love Here Campaign (LHLH) to date and to propose further support for the campaign.

2.0       Recommendations

2.1       The Committee is asked to

                                             (i)          note the progress made with the LHLH campaign to date and the benefits in collaborating in a wider behavioural change campaign.

                                           (ii)          commit to Belfast City Council continuing to support the campaign for a further year during 2017/18 at a maximum level of £41,000 following a review of the project at this year-end.  This will ensure that the campaign still meets with the aims of the Belfast Agenda. Funding will also be dependent on other contributors maintaining funding at levels which make the programme viable.

3.0       Main report

            Key Issues

3.1       At a meeting of the Health and Environmental Services Committee on 6th February 2013, a report was considered relating to the Council committing funding to the proposed Civic Pride Programme.  Committee agreed to commit £41,000 of the Council’s existing anti-litter campaign budget to the project for 3 years, subject to appropriate funding from other agencies. On 7th August 2013 the Committee was updated and advised that the commencement of the project was delayed.  Committee agreed that the Council would continue support the campaign for 2014/15 and 2015/16. On 8th December 2015, the People and Communities Committee agreed that Council’s funding for the project would continue for the further year 2016/2017.

3.2       The ‘Civic Pride Programme’ has subsequently been re-branded as ‘Live Here Love Here’ and has been developed by a partnership of organisations including Keep Northern Ireland Beautiful (formally Tidy Northern Ireland), the Department of Agriculture, Environment, and Rural Affairs Tourism Northern Ireland and local Councils. In the current third year of the project, additional supporters, Northern Ireland Housing Executive and Choice Housing have come on board.  In year 3 of the campaign  (2016/17), 7 councils supported the programme:

·        Antrim and Newtownabbey  Borough Council

·        Ards and North Down Borough Council

·        Belfast City Council

·        Derry and Strabane District Council

·        Fermanagh and Omagh District Council

·        Mid and East Antrim Borough Council

·        Newry, Mourne and Down District Council

3.3       The programme is made up of three elements; a media campaign, a volunteering support programme and a small grants scheme.  The aims of the LHLH programme are:

·        To create a movement in the Northern Ireland community focused around the concept of Civic Pride;

·        To effect behavioural change in the public and business community through the promotion of Civic Pride;

·        To improve the quality of the built and natural environments in Northern Ireland;

·        To continuously improve street and beach cleanliness in Northern Ireland;

·        To promote and support local volunteers and volunteer networks to lead Civic Pride initiatives in their local areas;

·        To increase opportunities for volunteering in Civic Pride Initiatives;

·        To encouraging a sense of ‘active communities’/local activism in Northern Ireland;

·        To create a sense of ownership among  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10a

            The Assistant Director advised that a request had been received from the Families at the Waterworks Fishing Club to support the second year of the Celtic World Spey Casting Invitational Challenge Event at the Waterworks Park.  She advised that the committee members at the club had already applied for Belfast City Council Sports Event Grant Funding towards the event, therefore, the People and Communities Committee was being asked to consider costs which would not be eligible through the Sports Event Belfast City Council Grant.

            Several Members welcomed the return of this successful event to the City and praised the work of the Families at the Waterworks Fishing Club.  A Member highlighted that the event would bring world class fishermen from all over the globe to Belfast, with over fifty competitors and 250 spectators estimated daily. 

            The Committee noted that the event would greatly enhance cross community relations and promote the Waterworks Park as a shared space. 

            The Committee agreed:

1.     to host the event on 19th- 21st May 2017 at the Waterworks Park, subject to completion of the appropriate Event Management Plans and on the condition that the Event Organisers meet all statutory requirements, including Public Liability Insurance and provide relevant Health and Safety documentation and Risk Assessments; and

2.     to provide additional funding up to £7,500  to host the event, to assist with the following:

·        £2,000 towards medals, gifts and trophies;

·        £2,000 towards the cost of daily lunches and hosting a reception at the Belfast Castle;

·        £1,000 for the transport of International Competitors;

·        £1,000 for bouncy castles for family engagement;

·        £500 for toilet hire; and

·        £1,000 for a compere for both the event and the competition.

            The Assistant Director informed the Committee that the World Health Organisation (WHO) would be holding its annual Conference and Exhibition in Pécs, Hungary from 1st until 3rd March 2017. She advised that the estimated rate for attending the conference was £600 and confirmed that the cost could be met from within the existing revenue estimates. 

            The Committee was advised that the conference would be strategic and visionary in nature, in preparation for the next phase of Healthy Cities and that it would include a strong political vision, which would be presented by the newly formed Political Vision Group with political participation from the participating cities and networks.

            The Committee granted authority for the Chairperson and the Deputy Chairperson (or their nominees), to attend the annual World Health Organisation Healthy Cities Conference, in in Pécs, Hungary in March 2017.