Agenda and minutes

The Deputy Chairman welcomed the Chief Commoner to the meeting and also welcomed Mr de Sausmarez to his first meeting following his recent appointment to the Markets Committee.

Apologies were received from John Scott (Chairman), Karina Dostalova, Deputy Brian Harris, Alderman Julian Malins, Deputy Dr Giles Shilson, Angela Starling and Mark Wheatley.

Apologies were also received from the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection.

There were no declarations.

To agree the public minutes of the meeting held on 29 October 2015.

The public minutes of the meeting held on 29 October 2015 were considered and approved as a correct record.

Joint report of the Chamberlain and the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection.

The Committee considered a joint report of the Chamberlain and the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection detailing the revenue and capital budgets overseen by the Markets Committee.

The Deputy Chairman drew Members’ attention to two typographical errors within the report, one on page 19 of the agenda pack where the heading should read Forecast Outturn 2015/16 as opposed to 2017/18 and a further error in the heading of Appendix 4A which should read ‘Original 2015-16 to LAB 2015-16’.

RESOLVED: That, the Committee:

1.         are content that the latest 2015/16 revenue budget reflects their objectives and       approve the budget for submission to the Finance Committee;

2.         are content that the provisional 2016/17 revenue budget reflects their objectives and          approve the budget for submission to the Finance Committee;

3.         approve the draft capital budget; and

4.         authorise the Chamberlain to revise these budgets to allow for changes to the         Additional Works Programme and in respect of recharges as well as any changes      from Markets Service Reviews, City of London Procurement initiative savings and     Carbon Trading Allowances. If the revisions vary by more than 10% of total             expenditure a further report will be submitted to the Markets Committee for approval.

The Chamberlain to be heard.

The Chamberlain was heard relative to a recent request from this Committee to alter the future presentation of their Revenue Outturn Reports.

The Chamberlain made reference to the fact that this Committee had made the point that they were more commercially focused (where income was key) and that this was accepted and acknowledged by the Chamberlain’s Department. The same also applied to other areas such as the three City School Boards and the Barbican Centre Board. The Chamberlain assured Members that, in these areas, officers were happy to assist in providing Members with management information in the most understandable and useful format practicable. However, there were some ‘red lines’ in terms of the budget approval procedures and the financial systems currently used to generate this information. The Chamberlain reported that these systems adopted a Local Authority format with expenditure as ‘king’. She explained that this was a statutory responsibility and was necessary in terms of the setting of council tax. She explained that the local government regulations and CIPFA definitions dictated how the budget books appeared.

The Chamberlain went on to state that whilst there was much that could be done around managing information and that work was already taking place in terms of looking at how budgets were presented to both the Finance Committee and the Court of Common Council going forwards, this process was not straightforward and would take some time. Members were informed that the City Corporation had already purchased a data interrogation tool and officers were currently exploring what this tool was capable of. She added that, until this had been explored in full, data interrogation was very manually intensive.

A Member stated that the accounts for three statutory funds were already produced in separate formats each year and questioned why this was not therefore

Report of the City Surveyor.

N.B. This Item is to be read in conjunction with the appendix at Item No. 12.

The Committee received a report of the City Surveyor providing a summary of three operating incidents that occurred on the Smithfield Market condenser water cooling system in July, August and September 2015.

In response to a question regarding the current, artificially low, operating temperature of the system, the City Surveyor reported that he had discussed this matter with the SMTA at a meeting in August 2015. Since this meeting, he had put together a schedule of the system’s performance over the summer months and the Superintendent would be writing to the SMTA with this information explaining the City’s plans to raise the operating temperature of the system. He stated that he did not envisage these plans being problematic.

In response to questions around the replacement and routine inspection of fridge and freezer equipment, the City Surveyor reported that there were plans to replace key components of the operating system (pump and pipes) beginning next year, He added that the maintenance and replacement of tenants’ equipment was, however, their responsibility. He acknowledged that not all tenants’ equipment was functioning as well as officers would like.

With regard to the current operating temperature of 20 degrees centigrade, the City Surveyor stated that there had been no formal agreement on this but that it had become the ‘norm’ for some time. He clarified that the system was originally designed to operate at 28 degrees centigrade and that current plans were to slowly increase the temperature to approximately 25 degrees as a reasonable compromise.

The Superintendent of Smithfield Market reported that his staff were currently discussing obligations with tenants and had sought a clear steer on their servicing and regular maintenance cycles. The matter as also being discussed with the Comptroller & City Solicitor to ensure that the City Corporation were fulfilling their obligations.

In

Proposal to move Smithfield Market

Mr Streeter questioned whether thought could be given to moving Smithfield Market from the City to the suburbs. He argued that the market had outgrown its current site, that the pollution from lorries was unacceptable and that a development of the market could further regenerate the area. He concluded by stating that he felt that this issue had been the ‘elephant in the room’ in the City for some time.

The Deputy Chairman reminded Members that a Strategic Review of the Markets would be progressed in the near future and was intended to look at issues such as these.  The review would involve wholescale reviews of how the markets operate including things such as transport needs and location.

Mr Streeter thanked the Deputy Chairman for his response and stated that he awaited with anticipation a timetable for this future review.

Superintendents’ updates

A Member questioned if the Committee could receive Superintendent’s reports/updates at each future meeting. Others agreed that this would be a useful addition to each agenda. It was suggested that each of the Superintendents be asked to give brief oral updates on current issues at their Market at every Committee meeting going forwards. Members were satisfied that oral updates versus written would provide them with the most up to date information possible.

Markets Committee Risk

The Committee received a report (tabled) of the Director of Markets and Consumer Protection to provide Members with assurance that risk management procedures in place within the Department of Markets and Consumer Protection are satisfactory and that they meet the requirements of the corporate Risk Management Framework.

A Member questioned some of the risks with target dates of 31 December 2015 stating that this was just a month away and it appeared that there was still much to be done to meet the target risk scores in this time.

With regard to the Risk entitled ‘East Poultry Avenue’, the Superintendent of Smithfield Market provided the Committee with some historical background to the issue. He reported that he had now met with colleagues from the Department of Built Environment to examine how the risks here could be addressed and lowered. He added that this matter was still subject to an overall review. The immediate past Superintendent of Smithfield Market confirmed that a great deal of work had already been undertaken against this risk including the installation of signage and the defining of certain areas in terms of things such as right of way. However, people obeying the regulations that were now in place, was an ongoing issue.

The immediate past Superintendent went on to report that a number of traffic calming measures had been explored in this area including the installation of speed humps and mini roundabouts however, due to forklift truck use and their small wheel base these had subsequently been dismissed.

The Member thanked Officers for the update on this matter but highlighted that this sort of information should be summarised within the risk update column of the report.  He went on to point out that some of the risks listed were also without any target

MOTION - That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act.

RESOLVED – That under Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the following items of business on the grounds that they involve the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in Paragraph 3 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act as follows:-

To agree the non-public minutes of the meeting held on 29 October 2015.

The non-public minutes of the meeting held on 29 October 2015 were considered and approved as a correct record.

Joint report of the Comptroller and City Solicitor and the Chamberlain.

The Committee considered a joint report of the Chamberlain and the Comptroller and City Solicitor considering the feasibility of introducing and levying an additional administration charge whenever administrative or legal action is taken to pursue a debt owed by market traders or to deal with a breach of the lease.

Non-public appendix to be read in conjunction with Item No. 6.

The Committee received a non-public appendix to Item 6 on the agenda.

Report of the Superintendent of Smithfield Market.

The Committee considered and approved a report of the Superintendent of Smithfield Market regarding a request from the Chairman of the SMTA for an extension on the agreed concessionary period for parking at Smithfield Market during the Christmas Period 2015.

There were no questions raised in the non-public session.

Items concerning interim rent settings at Spitalfields Market and lease terms for a property at the Poultry Market were raised.