Agenda and minutes

Apologies were reported on behalf of Alderman Ekin and Councillors Keenan and Kyle.

No declarations of interest were reported.

(Aldermen R. Newton and Rodgers attended in connection with this item.)

            The Committee was reminded that the Council, at its meeting on 3rd June, had, at the request of Alderman R. Newton, agreed that the undernoted minute of 21st May, which related to the C. S. Lewis Festival, be taken back to the Committee for further consideration:

      “The Committee was reminded that the Council, at its meeting on 3rd April, had referred a Notice of Motion seeking support to mark the 50th anniversary of the death of C.S. Lewis to the Committee for further consideration. At the meeting on 23rd April, the Director had agreed to consult with a range of groups in the east of the City with a view to formulating a report which would outline the extent of support which the Council might provide towards marking the anniversary.

      The Director reported that the East Belfast Partnership Board, in conjunction with a range of local stakeholders, intended to mark the anniversary by hosting a festival which would take place from 18th till 23rd November. He outlined the scope of the programme which had been drawn up for the festival, which included drama, film screenings, selected readings, a writers’ workshop and a ‘lamp parade’ in the grounds of Campbell College. He indicated that the total cost of the festival would be £80,000 and, accordingly, he recommended that the Committee agree to provide support towards the event in the sum of £10,000.

      The Committee adopted the recommendation.”

            With the permission of the Chairman, Alderman R. Newton outlined the extent of the forthcoming C.S. Lewis Festival and emphasised its cultural importance in the marking of the anniversary of the death of the author. Given the significant link between Belfast and C.S. Lewis, he requested that the Committee consider enhancing the extent of the financial assistance which had been granted to the Festival at its meeting on 21st May.

            The Director reminded the Committee that, at its meeting on 23rd April, it had agreed that the Council would not stage the Belfast Business Awards in 2013, a decision which had created an underspend of £30,000 within the Department’s budgets for 2013/2014. He suggested that the Committee might wish to reallocate this underspend to enhance the Council’s contribution to the C. S. Lewis Festival.

Accordingly, it was

Moved by Councillor Hussey,

Seconded by Councillor Webb and

      Resolved – That the Committee agrees to allocate a further £30,000 to the East Belfast Partnership Board to assist in the staging of the C. S. Lewis Festival in November, 2013.

The Director reminded the Committee that the Department for Social Development had, in February, published a report which had outlined the impact which the recession had had on city and town centres across Northern Ireland. In particular, the report had highlighted that the number of vacant shop units stood at 19%, compared with an average of 11% throughout the rest of the United Kingdom. In response to the findings of the report, the Minister for the Department for Social Development had initiated a campaign viz., ‘Towns and Cities First’ which sought to coordinate the promotion of city and town centres through a range of regeneration initiatives. One of the key aspects of the initiative would be a media campaign which would promote city and town centres. It was reported that the cost of that campaign would be approximately £25,000, £15,000 of which would be contributed by the private sector. Accordingly, the Director recommended that the Committee agree to contribute a sum of £10,000 towards the ‘Towns and Cities First Campaign’.

The Committee adopted the recommendation.

The Director reminded the Committee that, at its meeting on 18th September, 2012, it had agreed to develop an Integrated Economic Strategy for Belfast and agreed also to form a Project Steering Group to oversee its development. He provided an overview of the work which had been carried out in conjunction with a range of agencies in the development of the Strategy and indicated that it was anticipated that it would be submitted for the Committee’s consideration at its meeting in August.

The Committee noted the information which had been provided  

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Background Information

1.1    Members will be recall that, at its meeting on 5 March, that at it was advised that work was to commence on developing a new retail plan for 2013/14.  It was agreed that a full review of the results of the current year’s plan along with a stakeholder engagement and consultation process was required to re-shape the plan in line with current needs.   A review of current retail support has been completed and engagement with retailers has highlighted business development needs that could be addressed through the Retail Action Plan 2013-2014.

2.1    Retail Action Plan 2012-2013

         The retail action plan for the 2012-2013 was approved by the Development Committee on 17 April 2012. This included a range of business support, marketing and promotion and networking initiatives to support local independent traders. A funding allocation of £210,000 was set aside for this work.  The majority of this was set aside for development support to help traders’ groups to become operational and to engage in targeted promotional activity.  It was intended that the Council’s resources would help lever other funding and that it would be used to create sustainable business associations that would not be wholly reliant on public support. The remainder of the budget was set aside for retail mentoring, Market Start Up Programme and establishment of a retail forum.

         Review of Trader Group Support

2.2    We worked with 12 groups over the course of last year who drew down a total of £135,000 and we also provided direct advisory support to other groups. From our review there are a number of issues with funding trader groups/business associations in current format:

-   We need to be assured that the Council’s investment is maximised and that it can be measured. One issue that has been identified is the difficulty in measuring the impact of investment in the trader group activity given the absence of baselines and targets. On the other hand programmes like market start up have clear targets and we have been able to demonstrate that they have significantly exceeded them. The current trader groups have a mixed composition and are not solely retail focused therefore the current marketing/promotional focus doesn’t necessarily meet the needs of the mix of group members:

-     Strandtown Traders – 41 paid members, 78% retail, 22% non-retail

-     Lisburn Road Business Association – 34 paid members, 82% retail, 18% non-retail

-     Ballyhackamore Business Association – 30 paid members, 69% retail, 31% non-retail

-     Finaghy Business Association – 36 paid members, 73% retail, 27% non-retail

-     Castlereagh Business Association – 30 paid members, 70% retail, 30% non-retail

-     West Belfast Traders – 108 non-paying members, 58% retail, 46% non-retail

-     The implication of this is that if the policy direction is towards retail support, there is on average one third of businesses in these groups that are not retailers and therefore cannot benefit fully.

-     Some of the groups do not have the capacity to manage and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4b

            The Director reminded the Committee that the Council, at its meeting on 4th February, had referred a Notice of Motion in respect of social deprivation in Belfast to the Committee for its consideration. At its meeting on 29th April, the Committee had agreed that the matter be referred to the political parties on the Council for comment to help inform the extent and scope of any strategy which might arise in this regard. 

            The Committee was informed that a number of Parties had highlighted the requirement that any poverty strategy would need to focus on educational underachievement, employability issues, skills development and contribute also to an improvement in the quality of life and provide enhancement to the local economy. The Director indicated also that, arising from the briefings, the issue of the requirement for the Council to address the issue of poverty had been raised.  

            However, given the Council’s role as a civic leader, it had been suggested that it would be best placed to address the issue through its local area working groups and through the community planning process. The Committee was advised that such an approach would maximise the impact which the Council could make on the work of a range of organisations and stakeholders which included poverty as a key theme and help improve social and economic conditions across the City.  Accordingly, the Director recommended that the Council’s anti-poverty strategy be expedited through the local area working groups and the community planning process.

            The Committee agreed to this course of action.

The Committee noted the contents of a report which provided an overview of the work of the Members’ European Union Working Group and agreed that it be authorised to appoint a Member to represent it at the undernoted events:

·         the Eurocities Economic Development Seminar in Brussels from 7th till 9th October; and 

·         theEurocities Annual General Meeting in Ghent, Belgium, from 27th till 30th November.

     The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1  Relevant Background Information

1.1    In February 2011, Committee approved research to be commissioned to identify the factors that influence people’s decisions to live in the Belfast City Council area. The main reason for the proposed research was that Belfast has experienced a sustained period of population decline since the 1960s. While this decline has slightly reversed in the last ten years (2001-2011), the population trend of the BCC area remains much less rapid than the in the rest of the Belfast Metropolitan Area.

1.2    The agreed objective of the research was to ‘assess the attitudes of current and former residents, commuters and visitors on the attractiveness of the City’. The intention was that the results would provide the Council with an insight into the reasons for population decline and enable it to develop plans to boost the City’s viability and attractiveness as a place to live. 

1.3    Perceptive Insights was commissioned in 2012 to undertake this research to address the following questions:

      What factors have contributed to people leaving Belfast and specific areas within the city?

      What is the profile of those people leaving the city (and which areas) and what made them relocate?

      What is the profile of those people moving into the city (and which areas) and what made them move to Belfast?

      What practical policy interventions need to be taken to retain and increase population in Belfast? Specifically those for Belfast City Council.

1.4    The study encompassed a literature review looking at push and pull factors that have impacted on peoples choices about where they have chosen to live and an attitudinal study to investigate the current profile of current and past residents of Belfast City Council, those who live in the areas surrounding Greater Belfast, and commuters, who work in Belfast but live elsewhere.

2       Key Issues

2.1    The total population of Belfast City Council has remained fairly static since 1991, when 279,237 people lived in the area. It fell by 0.66% in 2001, to 277,392 before rising again by 1.29% to 280,962 people in 2011 (a percentage change of +0.62%).  In contrast the population change over the same time period (from 1991 to 2011) for all Northern Ireland is +15.8%.   All of the surrounding Councils in the Belfast Metropolitan Area have witnesses much greater changes in population, with Lisburn seeing a 20.8% rise and Carrickfergus a 19.4% rise.

2.2    While Belfast City Council saw a 0.9% increase in the number of households this compares to 12.2% for the rest of Northern Ireland and is a much less than most of the other councils within the BMA. In addition, household size is smallest for Belfast (2.3) in 2011 compared with both Northern Ireland (2.5) and the other council areas within the BMA. It should be noted that across all areas there has been a fall in household size since 2001.

2.3    The analysis shows that those wards in west Belfast are most likely to have experienced the highest levels  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4e

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

1       Relevant Background Information

1.1    Members will be aware that the Belfast Tourism Monitor is an integrated monitoring and evaluation project carried out by Millward Brown Ulster, aimed at measuring the volume and value of tourism in Belfast on an annual basis.  The importance of the data collated through the Tourism Monitor cannot be underestimated in terms of highlighting the economic impact and importance of tourism to the City’s economy.

1.2    The data collected from the Belfast Tourism Monitor informs the future development of tourism for the city by providing primary research for Belfast Visitor and Convention Bureau (BVCB), the Council and the wider tourism industry.  The Tourism Monitor research is made available to the tourism industry through the Council’s website.

1.3    Copies of the Belfast Tourism Monitor 2012 are available on request.

2       Key Issues

2.1    Belfast Tourism Monitor

         The Belfast Tourism Monitor for 2012 has been completed.  The report highlights the following top-line facts and figures;

                                                                2012                        2011

2.2    It is estimated that the overall impact of direct and indirect tourism expenditure on the Belfast economy is almost £524 million (£506m in 2011) with a total of 9,370 (9,032 in 2011) full-time equivalent jobs being supported by the tourism industry.

2.3    The Republic of Ireland (ROI) market continues to be the dominant market in Belfast tourism (73% of all out of state trips). Great Britain (GB) accounts for a further 22%, leaving 5% of overnight visitors to the City having come from outside the British Isles.  Furthermore the ROI market accounted for 94% of all day trips.

2.4    Two thirds of out of state overnight visitors to Belfast City (1.17 million) stayed in commercial accommodation (hotels; guest houses; B&B’s; youth hostels; self catering accommodation), staying for an average of 1.76 nights in the City.  The remaining third (33%) of overnight visitors stayed with family and friends, for an average of 2.96 nights

2.5    The majority of day trips to Belfast are accounted for by the local market, those living elsewhere in Northern Ireland.  In 2012 there were an estimated 4.19 million day trips to Belfast made by Northern Ireland residents.

2.6    1.75 million out of state overnight tourists visited Belfast and spent one or more nights in the City.  Of this number 583,000 were business visitors (including 88,000 conference delegates).

2.7    Day trippers spent a total of £190.2 million in Belfast City, £129.7 million of which was accounted for by indigenous visitors.  The contribution of out of state day trippers was £61.02m.

The Committee noted the information which had  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4f

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Relevant Background Information

1.1    Members will be aware that at a meeting of the Development Committee on 18 December 2012, it was agreed that the Council would become one of the sponsors of the NI Connections to participate on the NIC Board.  NI Connections is a recently established organisation under the auspices of Invest NI designed to connect with the Diaspora.  Membership of NI Connections allows Council the following benefits:

·         Strategic alliances with other key international stakeholders in the city.

·         An opportunity to develop a ‘Belfast ask’ list for NI Diaspora.

·         Developing lucrative links with NI Diaspora

·         Marketing of the Council’s information and stories to the NI Diaspora.

·         Participation in NIC events throughout the world.

·         Cooperation of NIC Council at the council’s events.

·         Leverage of the Council’s investment in Diaspora relationships and opportunity to build on the synergies that exist with others in NI.

1.2    Members will also be aware that the Cultural Framework 2012-25 states that Belfast City Council will take a leadership role on strategic alignment and coordination at city level, articulating linkages across creative industries, arts and culture and tourism to realise opportunities.  We also work with partners in positioning Belfast as a creative and cultural city.

1.3    There is a critical link between Belfast’s creative and cultural industries and the visitor economy.  The showcasing and marketing of indigenous artistic excellence enables Belfast to be profiled on the world stage as a thriving, vibrant and distinctive city and facilitates Belfast’s repositioning as major international authentic tourism destination.  Our creative and cultural businesses act as ambassadors for the rich culture and internationalism of Belfast.  Positive local, national and international media coverage through showcasing at home and abroad increases the profile and exposure of the artist, hence increasing their ability to do business on a global stage by targeting key international markets, increasing sales and attracting investment.

2       Key Issues

2.1    Members are aware that work is continuing on the development of an International Marketing Framework for Belfast alongside over 20 stakeholders across trade and investment, tourism and educational sectors.  A key aspect of this Framework centres on the North American market and securing economic return on a range of initiatives for Belfast. 

2.2    Belfast had active international relations with North America between 1998-2006 and had previously civic links with a range of cities including New York.  Council also had led trade missions to New York on several occasions as well as supporting tourism development and cultural promotions. 

2.3    As part of a new draft North American Action Plan, officers are working on the delivery of an outward trade mission to the west coast with up to 15 companies in October 2013.  A re-examination of the value of the Nashville Sister City link, the potential of a link with Austin and a review of the MoU with ITLG has also been completed as part of officers work to date and the results will be included in the forthcoming framework due to  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4g

The Committee was advised that Bocconi University, Milan, wished to award its annual Sports Business Academy Award to a range of bodies, including the Council, for the work which had been carried out in the securing by Belfast of the opening stage of the 2014 Giro d’Italia cycle race. The Director reported that the prestigious award had recognised the Council’s ability to use sport as a driver for social and economic change. He indicated that the invitation to attend the ceremony had been extended by the Mayor of Milan to the Lord Mayor and that the event would take place on a date to be determined in July. 

The Committee agreed that it be represented at the event by the Right Honourable the Lord Mayor (or his nominee) and that one officer would be authorised to attend also.

The Director reminded the Committee that, at its meeting on 6th December, 2012, it had agreed to provide, in principle, financial assistance in the sum of £25,000 for the staging of the Circuit of Ireland Rally in 2013. However, given that the organisers had failed to secure adequate funding to stage the event in 2013, it had been postponed.

            It was reported that a further request had been submitted by the Circuit of Ireland organisers seeking the Council’s support, in the sum of £25,000 per year, to stage the event in 2014 and 2015. The Director indicated that it was proposed that a special stage of the event would take place in the Titanic Quarter.  He pointed out that no provision had been made within the Department’s budget to support the event in the current financial year and, should the Committee wish to provide support, it would be a matter for the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee to consider if it wished to make funds available for this purpose. He reminded the Members that a number of similar requests for financial assistance had already been submitted to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee seeking additional resources to fund City events.

            The Committee agreed, given the potential benefit which the event would provide to the City in terms of tourism and publicity, that a request for assistance be forwarded to the Strategic Policy and Resources Committee for its consideration.

The Committee was reminded that, at its meeting on 4th June, it had deferred consideration of a report which had sought permission to undertake a tendering exercise for the hire of marquees and temporary structures for Council-wide events. That decision had been taken to enable further information to be submitted in respect of the viability of purchasing a marquee outright. In addition, the Committee had requested that information be submitted on the steps which could be taken to manage any contract entered into might be managed by the Council in a co-ordinated fashion.

            Accordingly, the Committee considered a report in this regard and the City Events Manager outlined the principle aspects of the proposed tender. He indicated that the annual cost of the contract was estimated to be £108,000.  Should the Council wish to purchase outright its own marquee, he indicated that the cost would be approximately £650,000. In addition, there would be significant costs incurred in training staff and maintenance and storage. Such costs had not been incorporated within the current departmental estimates nor factored within corporate financial estimates.

Moved by Alderman Stalford,

Seconded by Councillor Hussey and

     Resolved - That the Committee agrees to initiate a tendering exercise for the hire of marquees and temporary structures for Council-wide events for a five-year period and agrees to delegate authority to the Director to appoint a suitably qualified contractor.

The Committee considered the year-end update on the Departmental Plan for the period ending 31st March, 2013.  The Director clarified a number of issues in respect of the Plan and undertook to update individual Members on various matters which had been raised.

Noted.

The Committee considered the Department’s quarterly finance report for the year ending 31st March, 2013.

Noted.

The Director provided an overview of the performance figures for both the Waterfront and Ulster Halls for the period 1st April, 2012 till 31st March, 2013.  He outlined the programme of events which had been staged at both venues during that period and provided figures in respect of the income derived through conference and box office sales.

The Director indicated that the performance figures for both the Waterfront and Ulster Halls had been encouraging, given the current economic climate.  He pointed out, however, that the income from conferences continued to remain below target, which had highlighted the requirement to enhance the conference facilities at the Waterfront Hall.  At the request of the Committee, the Director agreed to submit an update report in August regarding the progress which had been achieved on the proposed extension project and the other capital projects within the Investment Programme. 

The Committee noted the information which had been provided 

            The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Relevant Background Information

1.1    Members will be aware that the Investment Programme includes a significant focus on promoting economic regeneration within the city.  In addition to “business as usual” activity for many units, there have been commitments to undertake a considerable number of new projects. 

1.2    Many of these are complex in nature and involve engagement with external partners and delivery agents.  In addition, given that the investment in the capital schemes must be incurred by end 2015 in order to draw down the available resources from the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), there is now some pressure on resources within the teams responsible for ensuring their delivery.

1.3    These projects require specific skills sets in terms of project management capacity, ability to build relationships with external agencies and to develop and oversee collaborative projects, ability to engage with potential end-users and ensure that this input is reflected in project design, and technical skills to understand construction management processes.

2       Key Issues

2.1    The Economic Development Unit (EDU) in the Development Department has been leading on a number of the most significant Investment Programme projects.  These include:

-       The development of the Innovation Centre at Forthriver Business Park

-       The establishment of a creative hub in inner North Belfast

-       The development of a demand stimulation programme for businesses to promote access to ultrafast fibre connections and to up-skill the businesses to ensure that they can take advantage of the new technologies

-       The development of a methodology for introducing social clauses into all future council contract and ensuring that these opportunities can be accessed by local residents

-       Promotion of procurement opportunities for council and other public contracts to maximise take-up by local businesses

-       The development of the bursary scheme to promote access to education, training and employment for young disadvantaged people in the city

-       Engagement with partners to develop a collaborative approach to employability and skills development across the city in order to support inclusive economic growth and improve the demand and supply of skills

-       Development of an integrated economic strategy (IES) with Invest NI to create a collaborative programme of work to enhance the city’s competitiveness and coordinate resources around delivery.

2.2    All of these activities are being undertaken in addition to the core programme of support around business start-up and growth as well as export development and social economy support.  The current annual operational budget is £1.5million but the additional activity will be in the region of £15million overall. 

2.3    This has placed a significant burden on the team of 9 staff (one Economic Development Manager, six Economic Development Officers and two Project Assistants) and has created a situation whereby letters of offer for existing activity are at risk of not being delivered while staff are accumulating significant hours of flexi leave that are unsustainable in the medium to long-term.

2.4    In addition to the staff issues, this scenario presents a range of potential risks including  ...  view the full minutes text for item 6.

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1      Relevant Background Information

1.1      In 2012 Members agreed a framework for the Youth Forum’s future programme of work and noted it was timely to consider placing the Youth Forum on a more stable footing, agreeing the programme costs for the next two year period.

1.2      The Council has provided support on a temporary basis since 2006 to the Youth Forum and this paper seeks permission to formalise and create a new substantive post entitled ‘Young People Co-ordinator’  in the Children and Young People Unit.

1.3      Originally the role was to provide support and develop the Youth Forum and with the support of Youth champions animate the democratic and political engagement of young people. From inception the role has evolved and continues to support the Youth Forum whilst extending to co-ordinating most of the opportunities and engagement of young people in projects, initiatives supported by the Council e.g:

·         Manage over 50 engagement opportunities for young people annually;

·         Deliver city wide events;

·         Administer up to £60,000 Ur City 2 grant aid in neighbourhood renewal areas;

·         Support officers throughout the council to effectively engage young people in service design and delivery, projects, etc.

           Strategic development

2.1      Last month Members received an update on Children and Young people which detailed the strategic direction to link up the Council’s priority of Children and Young People through a corporate framework to better deliver services to children and young people. The substantive role is required to support the delivery of the related programme of work to better realise aspiring, assertive and enterprise young people in a safe and welcoming city.

           Addressing a need

2.2      This need was previously resourced via the temporary post Youth Forum Co-ordinator as part of a package of dedicated temporary resources to establish the Youth Forum. The Youth Forum has been in existence since 2006 and the temporary post has been extended year on year and has been included in Departmental estimates.  The need has not reduced and the body of work continues to grow in effect becoming core business unique to the Council’s position.

2.3      Since inception, the temporary post has been filled via internal secondment with related substantive posts that were back filled.  Given the importance of our work to ensure the participation and active engagement of youth people in the city, we believe the creation of a substantive officer position will better ensure effective service continuity and skills development and retention.

3         Resource Implications

3.1      The draft Job Description will be subject to formal evaluation, however, it is anticipated that an indicative grade for the post would be PO1 (£27,849-£30,011) – PO3 (£31,754 – £34,549). Costs associated with the temporary position are within 2013/14 development budget.  If the new post is approved, it will be added to the substantive staff budget.

           Recommendation

           Members are requested to consider and approve the creation of a substantive post of Young People Co-ordinator.

            The Committee agreed to create the post of Young People Co-ordinator on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 7.

The Director reminded the Committee that, in September, 2012, it had endorsed a new Cultural Framework for Belfast for 2012/2015. As part of the Framework, two small grants schemes had been established, viz., the Arts and Heritage Project Grant and the Community Festivals Fund, and had delegated authority to the Director to award grants under both schemes.

Accordingly, the Committee considered a report which provided an update on the first tranche of awards, the principle aspects of which was set out hereunder:

It was reported that 66 applications, requesting support in the sum of £499,808, had been received within the first tranche. Demand was almost 6.5 times greater than the amount set aside for the funding period. Of those applications assessed, 20 had been deemed to have met the criteria and a total of £106,609 had been awarded.

The Director indicated that 57 applications had been received requesting funding in the sum of £433,568. Of those applications, 19 had been successful and a total of £91,000 had been awarded.

The Committee noted the information which had which had been provided and noted further that information in respect of the grants awarded had been published on the Council’s modern.gov website. 

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Relevant Background Information

1.1    As Members will be aware, the Cultural Framework for Belfast 2012–15 was agreed at September Development Committee and published in October 2012.  Its vision is that by 2020, everyone in Belfast experiences and is inspired by our city’s diverse and distinctive culture and arts. Arts and heritage are valued for enriching quality of life and creating wealth, and the city’s culture and creativity is renowned throughout the world. 

1.2    The Cultural Framework includes a commitment to introduce a Flagship Fund, an additional funding scheme for large-scale arts and heritage projects that respond to a specific need or challenge in the city.    

1.3    £150,000 has been ring-fenced towards the Flagship Fund in the 2013/14 budget, with the same level of support projected for 2014/15 and 2015/16 subject to approval of draft budget estimates.  The Arts Council of Northern Ireland has provisionally agreed to provide match funding of £150,000 per year for three years, bringing the total available budget for the Flagship Fund to £900,000.

2    Key Issues

2.1    Officers from the Tourism, Culture, Heritage and Arts Unit held a workshop with Members on 5 June 2013 to discuss the terms of reference of the Flagship Fund.  The following terms of reference were discussed.  

2.2    Criteria for decision making

         It was agreed that projects must use arts and heritage to address the challenge of social inclusion.  Applicants must demonstrate how projects will support, at least, the Cultural Framework’s Distinctly Belfast and Inspiring communities themes and be cross-community, cross-city, delivered in partnership between arts and community organisations, and benefit hard-to-reach areas and communities

         Staff resources

         The management of the Flagship Fund would be included in the TCH&A Unit work programme.  However, additional administrative and communications support is required from the Central Grants Unit (CGU), and it is therefore recommended that £9,000 per year, or 3 per cent of the total budget, is ring fenced for administration. The total amount of funding available to be given out under the Flagship Fund is therefore £873,000.

         Level of funding  

         Members preferred the option to award a small number of medium-sized grants each year, rather than one high-risk project or a larger number of small grants, which would spread the impact too thinly.

         It is therefore recommended that in 2013/14, three projects are awarded funding up to the value of £97,000.  The projects are expected to run for up to 18 months to allow for extensive development and consultation. The same model would be rolled out in years 2 and 3 subject to approval of budget estimates and a review of quality and performance.

         Members requested that Officers explore the option to renew year-1 contracts in year 2 and year 3, subject to performance reviews.  This would be difficult for organisations to plan and manage the expectations of their partners and would substantially change the terms and conditions of the original grant offer.  However, applicants will have the option to re-apply in years 2 and  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9a

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1.    Relevant Background Information

1.1  The purpose of this paper is to set out a ‘road map’ to consider and agree the options for future delivery of community centre support for the Village area of the city in the context of the broader regeneration decisions linked to the Olympia/Windsor stadia which was considered by the Strategic Policy & Resources meeting in March 2013.  The SP&R agree ‘in principle’ to progress both the Olympia and Andersonstown Leisure Centres to Stage 2 of the Capital Programme to form the first phase of the citywide leisure transformation review, and;

·         To develop regeneration plans in tandem and in conjunction with government departments given the one off strategic opportunity and DCAL community benefit commitment.

1.3    The preferred option for the Windsor development was for the relocation of the council leisure centre into the new West Stand of the Stadium.  This would be progressed in two phases:

·         Phase 1:  building the new centre in the stadium and

·         Phase 2: redeveloping the existing Olympia site as a ‘sports village’ and boulevard entrance from Boucher Road as part of the wider regeneration plan.

1.4    The regeneration plan is to be progressed with a view to developing significant social capital in the local area by way of community development.  While the current proposal for the replacement leisure facility at Olympia within the stadium does not include a replacement community centre, the overall project has made provision for relocation of the community service from its current site in order to secure services closer to the local population of need.

1.5    Community Services work alongside officers in Property & Projects and Parks & Leisure on the recently established Stadia Project Board.  We supported the recent engagement programme to inform the comprehensive development with particular reference to future community services provision at the Olympia site.

2.      Key Issues

2.1    In order to progress the community element of the scheme, Development Committee now need to examine the complimentarity of community provision at Olympia/Windsor/village area and to research and consider the optimal delivery model noting any locational or investment decision issues.

2.2    It is important that options are framed within the overall strategic framework and action plan for area wide development.

2.3    Officers are seeking the approval of Members to engage external support to research and develop options, to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the identified options, the resources required to carry through and ultimately the prospects for success.  Any proposal should clearly indicate how it could address wider social issues, based on need.  Consultants would be required to provide outline costs for each viable option and to highlight and explore the potential sources of capital and revenue funding.

2.4    It is proposed that the Terms of Reference would include a community based consultation and research exercise to establish what local and city wide needs could be supported through any development option.

2.5    A subsequent report would present a series of recommendations, based upon strategic reviews and consultations on  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9b

The Committee considered the undernoted report:

“1     Relevant Background Information

1.1    This paper is to seek Members’ approval for a revised start date for awards under the Belfast Community Investment Programme (BCIP) and to consider next steps, including provision for Community Services grant aid for the period 2014 to 2015.

1.2    At its meeting on 21 May 2013 Development Committee received an update on BCIP. The paper outlined three key issues:

1.3    (i) Senior DSD officials had informed council officers that they were presenting a submission to the DSD Minister recommending that 2014 was no longer a viable start date for the programme.

1.4    (ii) Given this decision the BCIP project team had begun to prepare an options paper considering alternatives.

1.5    (iii) As it is now not possible for BCIP to go live in 2014 the council needs to consider its management arrangements for its existing grant streams to cover the period April 2014 to March 2015. (These grants would have been subsumed into the new programme and include the Capacity Grant programme, Revenue funding for community facilities, Small grants funding, and funding for the city’s Advice and Information consortia. Most of these streams have been closed to new applicants for the past few years.)

1.6    Members requested that officers report back to Committee in June with details of the Minister’s decisions and, based on this decision, to outline relevant next steps including options for council grant funding in 2014/15.

2       Key Issues

2.1    A final comment on the BCIP timescale from the DSD Minister is not yet available. However, while awaiting this decision, the BCIP project team have carried out an options analysis to determine the likely ways forward for the project (See Appendix One).

2.2    The analysis is based on the foundations that have already been agreed politically during the development of the programme. These include:

1.    An agreed working definition of community development based on the Council’s Community Development strategy.

2.    An agreed outcomes framework which can be used to determine new grant schemes and the measurement of impact

3.    A commitment to a single programme to replace the six legacy grant schemes

4.    A commitment to an annual grant budget of £5.4 million for community development in the city (based on the value of current grant investment).

2.3    The analysis also makes a number of working assumptions which include:

                                  i.        It is assumed that BCIP will be delivered within DSD’s new Urban Regeneration and Community Development framework (which is still to be confirmed). Specifically, this framework will replace existing policy commitments under the Community Support Programme and the Neighbourhood Renewal Programme.

                                ii.        Given the revised start date of April 2015 it is also assumed that, under the transfer of functions, existing DSD responsibility for community development will have passed to the council from DSD. BCIP will also have to incorporate those parts of Castlereagh Borough Council and Lisburn City Council which will have transferred to Belfast by this date.

                               iii.        There is an  ...  view the full minutes text for item 9c

The Committee endorsed the following responses to the consultation exercises as outlined:

Northern Ireland Adult Safeguarding Partnership

– Strategic Plan – Council Response

1.1.1.  Currently, the Council is looking at how the issue of vulnerable adults is managed. In particular, we are considering the longer term resource requirements (using child protection processes as a benchmark) to be effective in minimising the risk to vulnerable adults and how best to support them.

1.1.2.  We support most of the objectives and actions within the plan but feel there is further scope to link into other agencies, particularly the Council. Our specific suggestions are shown in the following sections.

1.2.     Specific Questions.

1. 1.    The Strategic Plan sets out 7 themes for the actions necessary to improve services to safeguard adults at risk in Northern Ireland. Do you consider the themes to be appropriate and relevant? - Yes

2   .     Are you content with the wording and scope of the themes?

1.2.2.  Yes, though see 4. Below.

3.        Are you content with the actions included within the themes?

1.2.3.  Yes, though see 4. Below.

4   .     Are there other actions that should be included?

1.2.4.  For the Leadership Theme, the first action may be expanded to include encouraging appropriate non-partner agencies to also have an Alerting Manager. For example, the Council recognises the need for a Senior Manager as an Alerting Manager to have responsibility within the Council for Adult Safeguarding and would be keen to see guidance, job descriptions, etc.

1.2.5.  For the Leadership Theme, the third action may be enhanced by referencing the opportunities that exist by asking Councils to help facilitate work with the Police and Community Safety Partnerships.

1.2.6.  For the Public Awareness and Prevention theme, the Council may be able to support the first three actions either by linking into any of our similar schemes (via Community Safety, Good Relations and Community Services) or by using our Community Centres. These are based in the heart of many of the city’s most at risk areas and could be used as information outlets or to host programmes and events.

1.2.7   For the Access to Adult Safeguarding Services first action, the Council welcomes the development of a more streamlined referral system. In a small number of cases the referral process has not been as clear as required or in comparison to the child protection system. Recording, maintaining and sharing information is a requirement that the Council recognise needs to be improved and that staff need to be trained accordingly.

5.        Are you content with the timescales identified in the Implementation Plan?

1.2.8.  We recognise the need to set realistic timescales and appreciate the volume of work that is involved in delivering the action plan. If any part could be moved forward we feel the appointment of Alerting Managers could be prioritised and delivered in year 1.”

Safeguarding Board for Northern Ireland –

Strategic Plan – Council Response

           We support most of the objectives and actions within the plan. Our specific responses  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10.

The Council supports the effort to update the existing Design Guide issued originally by the DOE in 1997. However, we would comment as follows:

·         The draft lacks the detailed advice of the DOE original.

·         In the covering letter it is stated “…26 councils which then had responsibility for Travellers in their areas”.  That is not correct.  Councils had no statutory duty towards Travellers in site provision.  Any provision made was of a discretionary nature and supported by 100% grant aid provided by the DOE Special Programmes Branch.

·         Some specifications are very prescriptive, such as distances of sites from major roads and distance from overhead cables. The draft needs to provide for best endeavours as individual site characteristics may prevent an otherwise suitable site from meeting exacting standards in all respects. Views of Building Control should be sought given the compliance implications for some of these minimum standard requirements they will be required to administer together with service provision and accessibility standards. Also local environmental health services are referred to (page 21) and therefore views of Environmental Health should be sought also.

·         Reference is made (Page 8) to “local councils and Housing Associations” in regard to shortage of sites but it is unclear as to the role anticipated. Is it implying a future planning role for local councils?  Perhaps is may be referring to actual negotiations, between councils and Housing Associations when making public land available for affordable housing and to the physical provision of an area for traveller site provision which a private developer would not contemplate?  We would like this to be clarified.

·         Throughout the draft  there are references to the need for consultation between the Housing Associations and the local councils with regard to the provision of sites (e.g., paragraphs 1.1, 2.11, 12.4): it is pointed out that local councils in NI have no statutory housing functions and those are discharged by the NIHE

·         Health & Safety - We think this is too prescriptive and that the determination of the remediation of land, if required at all, will depend upon the type of site developed. For example, a transit or emergency halt site would be of minimal disruption and may not necessitate decontamination. It is our view that guidance regarding contamination should not be universal but based on planning condition determined by the nature of the development.

·         Similarly noise considerations should be dictated by the type of site intended as transit or emergency halt sites may not have the same duration of usage and hence noise would not be such a consideration.

·         Reference is made to “local councils” responsibilities for environmental measures that should be considered .The Waste Management sections of local Council’s should be asked to advise on these responsibilities which could be included in the good practice design for each site category.

·         The original design guide included references to the importance of good management of sites provided by councils.  This reference should be included in the draft update

·         The definitions of sites could be improved, perhaps by  ...  view the full minutes text for item 10a