consultation – Page 47 – The NEN

Police Scotland – Your Say, Your Way event

Have your say on making Police Scotland service centres work for you

Age Scotland has been contacted recently with information about events that Police Scotland are hosting across Scotland. The purpose of these events is to engage with the community to talk about contacting the Police through their call centres. They want to know what barriers there are and how we can improve things for everyone.

The main focus of the event is for people with communication needs that prevent them having equal access – for example:

· British Sign Language users

· people who are hard of hearing

· people without speech or who have issues with their speech

· people for whom English is not their first language

· people who have a physical disability that causes issues when using the phone / email systems to contact the police

· people with learning disabilities

· people with mental health issues

(Please note these are only some examples)

The Edinburgh event will take place on Monday 2 March (see poster, below) at Norton Park from 11am – 4pm.

PD_Invite_A5

Sorry for the short notice on this. Please can you circulate this invite to all your contacts / service users / staff and encourage them to attend.

This is a great opportunity for them to have their say on the way they prefer to communicate with Police Scotland both in an emergency and non-emergency situation.

There are a limited number of spaces at each venue please can you encourage people to book now to ensure their space is secured.

If you have any questions about the events please contact :

Constable Stephanie Rose A462

National Safer Communities, Equality and Diversity

Scottish Crime Campus

Craignethan Drive, Gartcosh G69 8AE

01236 814710

Laura Dunkel

AGE Scotland,

Community Development Officer (Edinburgh and Lothians)

Tell George Osborne what he can do with his Budget!

Did you have your say on the city council’s budget proposals? Have you got the taste for balancing the books? Well, you now have the opportunity to give Chancellor George Osborne some timely Budget advice. Read on …

What would you like to see in Budget 2015?

The government is seeking your views on what you would like to see in Budget 2015, which will take place on Wednesday 18 March.

The government encourages open and transparent policy-making, and welcomes original and innovative ideas. Your views will be considered by HM Treasury as part of the policy-making process.

Please submit your representation by filling in our short survey.

If you would prefer to submit your representation as a file attachment, please email budget.representations@hmtreasury.gsi.gov.uk

For information on the correct procedure for submitting your representation, please view the guidance.

To allow for full consideration in advance of the Budget, any submission should be sent to HM Treasury by Friday 13 February

Follow HM Treasury on Twitter for all of our latest news and Budget coverage.

Granton & District CC to meet 26 January

Please note that the next meeting of the Granton & District Community Council will take place on Monday 26th January at Royston & Wardieburn Community Centre at 7.00 pm.

Agenda: CCAgenda _Jan2015

Various items will be discussed:

Update on the cuts
Granton Harbour Development
Waterfront Development
20 mph campaign.

Hope to see you there.

Dave Macnab,

Secretary, Granton and District Community Council

http://grantonanddistrictcommunitycouncil.com/

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/GrantonDistCC

Edinburgh TUC urges city council to demand extra powers

Edinburgh Trade Union Council has urged the City of Edinburgh Council to demand extra powers and additional finance from the Scottish Government. Responding to the city’s budget consultation, Edinburgh TUC secretary Des Loughney said city politicians of all parties should lead and promote a campaign to retain good quality public services.

Statement from Edinburgh Trade Union Council about proposed draft Council Budget 2015/2016

Council Income 2015/2016
The Council states that its income from Council Tax will be £209m and the income from the Scottish Government and rates will be £731m. The income from the latter sources is
£12m less than the previous year. There has been no allowance from these sources for an increase due to inflationary costs. Such an allowance would be around £50m. Although we have been told that the Scottish Government would compensate local authorities for the Council Tax freeze there is no evidence that this is the case in 2015/2016.

The total savings/cuts that the Council is proposing to make is £22m. If the Scottish Government permitted the Council to increase the Council Tax by 5% and if it increased
rates similarly then the £22m reduction would not be necessary. It is therefore well within the powers of the Scottish Parliament to fund/allow local authorities to avoid these cuts.

Looking further ahead the Scottish Parliament could pass legislation to allow local authorities to generate funds which would not be paid by citizens of the City. One of the
ways would be a hotel bedroom tax which is already operated by some European cities. At a level of £2 to £5 per night per adult the tax would be easy to collect and generate significant amounts. The income could be used specifically to support tourist services. This would, however, release resources for other services. It is our understanding, from what experts state, that a tax at the level specified would have no impact on the number of tourists coming to Edinburgh,

Another possible tax is the so called supermarket tax. Supermarkets make considerable profits from the purchases of the people of Edinburgh. These profits do not presently
remain in the city. We think that it is only right and just that in the age of austerity that Scottish local authorities have the power to impose a levy on local supermarket profits and
that this money is earmarked to tackle poverty and inequality in the city.

Comment: the cuts are unnecessary – the money can easily be found if there was the political will of the Scottish Government. The Council must lobby the Scottish Government to provide more money or to allow the Council to generate more money.

The Council must not be fobbed off by the Scottish Government saying that the problem is solely due to Westminster cuts. This is not true. We believe that there would be political support from the public for more money if the context was properly explained.

Additional Income 2015/2016

We believe that the Council’s description of its income and expenditure neglects describing the additional income that is necessary for the Council to honour its policy commitments
regarding poverty and inequality.

In the area of Social Care the Council requires £7.445m
more than it is budgeting for in order to provide recipients with the Social Care they require, at the current quality of service. If the Council was to tackle in-work poverty of
those voluntary and private sector workers who provide Social Care it would need an additional £15m. This would ensure that all people providing Social Care were employed on basic local authority terms and conditions.

Comment: the Council should maintain its policy of reducing poverty and inequality. It should tackle in-work poverty.

Expenditure 2015/2016

The Council’s description of possible savings/ cuts did not provide an impact assessment which the public, never mind trade unions, required to make a proper judgement. There is
no useful information on loss of jobs, loss of wages, loss of job security, impact on in work poverty, impact on the Council’s general anti poverty strategy, and impact on equality or
impact on quality of services.

The Council does not describe, for example, the increase in expenditure that is required to meet increasing demand for social care services. Money needs to be made available for
an increasing volume of demand but also, as recommended by the Care Commission and SSSC, to employ staff on reasonable terms and conditions. Some sources have estimated that the Council may need over £15m to do this in 2015/2016 but this is not mentioned or commented on.

An overall assessment of the savings proposed seems to suggest that the ‘third sector’ will be required to save £4m directly through cuts in grants although other savings may be
required indirectly. £4m is equivalent to about 200 full time jobs but it is impossible to say how many real jobs are under threat or whether savings will be achieved by wage freezes
or cuts in other terms and conditions. There will not necessarily be forced closures of whole organisations.

The biggest element in the savings/cuts package is ‘workforce savings’ referring to the Council’s own staff. This seems to total some £6.6m. The main element of this is cutting
sickness absence. From a trade union point of view we think it is glib to state that sickness absence can be cut without a cost to staff morale, to having a disability friendly workplace
or a workplace where you can work until you retire. After cutting sickness absence for years the City Council as an employer now mean making working life very difficult for
those who are disabled or relatively old (that is 50+).

Comment: If the Council expected us to make a considered comments on their draft budget they needed to supply us with a lot more information including a detailed impact assessment in relation to Council anti poverty and equality policies.

The purpose of an equality impact assessment has been defined as:

‘Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) is a systematic and evidence based process which verifies that the Council’s policies and practices are equality proof and not discriminatory.’

We suspect that some of the savings/cuts proposed in the Council’s draft budget will have a negative and discriminatory effect on older people, women and disabled people.

Our overall recommendation and plea to the Council is that its Budget Meeting on 12/2/15 consider a motion to the Scottish Government demanding extra powers and additional finance to render unfair and counter-productive cuts and savings unnecessary.

The Council must call on all Edinburgh MSPs and MPs to support its motion regardless of political party. The Council should convene a civic conference and ask a range of community organisations to back its demand for extra resources.

The Council should lead a campaign to make sure we keep the services we need for a decent quality of life. The Council should actively promote good public services whether provided directly by the Council or indirectly by subcontracting.

Des Loughney
Secretary, Edinburgh TUC

Have your say on school streets schemes

A public consultation is now live as part of a new pilot school streets initiative in Edinburgh.

A total of 31 schools expressed an interest in taking part in the pilot, which is designed to improve the environment around schools and encourage safer and healthier ways for pupils to travel to and from school.

While Cramond Primary in the Almond Ward expressed an interest in taking part, no schools from Forth or Inverleith will be involved in the pilot.

The Local Transport Strategy 2014-19 contains a commitment to pilot school streets at up to five schools.

However, given the volume of interest from schools across the city, a list of ten pilot schemes covering 11 schools was drawn up and was agreed by councillors in October.

These locations have been experiencing on going road safety issues caused by too many drivers bringing their vehicles too close to the school gates.

The pilot schemes will prohibit traffic on streets outside or around school entrances at specific times of day.

The benefits of implementing school streets are:

• Increase in walking and cycling and active lifestyles for pupils and parents/carers
• Reduction in traffic speed, congestion and pollution around the school gates
• Responding to demand from parents and residents.

Councillor Lesley Hinds, Transport Convener, said: “There’s a huge appetite out there for this initiative and our next task is to finalise the details of how the schemes might work. We’re looking for as much feedback as possible from people in each of the 11 school communities, including local residents.

“Please have your say in our online consultation or pop along to one of the many drop-in sessions we’ve got planned early in the New Year.”

An online consultation is now live and will run until Friday 27 February 2015.

A series of drop-in information events will also be held in each of the schools during January and February.

School Streets Drop-in Sessions Diary

January 2015
8th – Clermiston Primary School, 3-6pm
13th – Buckstone Primary School, 3-7pm
14th – Duddingston Primary School, 3-6pm
15th – Sciennes Primary School, 3.30-7pm
20th – Abbeyhill Primary School, 3-6pm
21st – Cramond Primary School, 3-6.30pm
27th – St Peter’s RC Primary School, 4-6.30pm
28th – Towerbank Primary School, 3-6pm.

February 2015
3rd – Bonaly Primary School, 4.30-7pm
4th – St John’s RC Primary School, 3-6pm
25th – Colinton Primary School, 3-6.30pm

Budget: Council ‘needs to think again’

‘Thinking needs to be done, not only in this city but across Scotland. This is the important missing element in this consultation.’

Granton and District Community Council has urged the city council to think again over proposed budget cuts. The community council’s response to the budget proposals follows a local consultation conducted by community councillors last week.

Community council secretary Dave Macnab said: “We have submitted this response to the city council on behalf of those who attended our local consultation exercise. When the people within our area found out scale of the cuts – for they are cuts, calling them savings is double speak – they were appalled.

We are calling on all councillors and in particular those who represent us in Forth to oppose the cuts. The council needs to think again.”

GDCC_December_Budget_response

Granton & District CC’s budget response reads:

Dear Sir/Madam,

City of Edinburgh Council – Budget Consultation

Background

1.1 As part of the Council ‘Budget Challenge’ consultation 2015/16 the Council outlines that it faces a budget challenge which ultimately means that “we need to save £67 million over the next three years”. The main thrust of the consultation as far as we can see has been the encouragement of the citizens of Edinburgh to go ‘on line’ and ‘take the budget challenge’ which is an on line platform that encourages people to decide what services they want to cut.

1.2 Granton and District Community Council were not convinced that having an on line consultation exercise was sufficient to get the views of all of the people of Edinburgh given the scale of the cuts that are being proposed. Whilst we acknowledge that there were a series of ‘drop in’ events for people across the city, the focus of these was on showing people how to view and work the budget ‘game’.

This means that people who do not have regular access to IT – often older residents and those who do not have access to IT – will miss out on the opportunity to have their say. It is our view that the scale of the proposed budget cuts will have a disproportionate and negative impact on these very people – often the poorest in our communities. As a consequence we decided to undertake our own consultation exercise.

Granton and District Community Council – Consultation

2.1 We organised a drop in day for Tuesday 9 December at Royston & Wardieburn Community Centre – we were in the centre from 9.30 – 6.30 pm.

2.2 To promote the event we distributed 2000 leaflets across our community council area that highlighted the purpose of the event etc.

2.3 We also placed posters across our community to advertise the event. We also made full use of social media – including our web site and twitter account.

2.4 We drew up a list of some of the key proposals (that the council had identified in the consultation document) that we considered would have severe and negative impact within our area and asked people to comment on these – via post-its, voting stickers, and by talking to us. We noted down what they said as well as have them write down their concerns. Not everyone used the ‘voting stickers’.

Outcome of the Consultation

3.1 Despite the terrible weather conditions we had 52 people who spoke to us. Every person we spoke to were “astonished”, “amazed”, “had no idea” of the scale of the cuts.

Clearly the on line budget consultation has not resulted in the people within our community having any idea of the scale or specifics of the cuts proposed and the impact on what this means in real terms. This was our fear and so it has been realised. The real impact needs to be clearly articulated by the Council before any decisions are made.

3.2 The qualitative data is outlined in Appendix 1

Consultation Conclusions and Recommendations

4.1 It is clear that the council does not have enough income to deliver the services for the people it serves. Yet nowhere do we see that there has been any thinking done to increase income. The focus is on cutting services. We believe this is a one dimensional approach.

4.2 We do not believe that sufficient impact assessment evidence has been produced to provide a clear socio-economic evaluation on most proposals.

4.3 We therefore call on the council to approach the Scottish Government with a view to obtaining additional grant funding to cover the services for the people of Edinburgh. If the Scottish Government cannot provide this – then they in turn should be advised to approach the UK Government for emergency funding.

4.4 We believe this city is facing a funding crisis and moving money from one area to another is divisive and will not solve the fundamental issue which is insufficient income. Given the changing demographics and growth in overall population as the race to ever further house building continues, the pressure on the city infrastructure and public services is at breaking point. The squeeze on council finances will continue and people will continue to suffer. Therefore a more fundamental approach to local authority funding is needed and this thinking needs to be done, not only in this city but across Scotland. This is the important missing element in this consultation.

4.5 We think it worth reminding the council and our elected representatives of a report of the Communities and Neighbourhood Committee of 24^th November that highlighted the levels of poverty and inequality across this city:

Some 22% of all households in the city live on incomes below the poverty threshold, slightly above the Scottish average
24% of all Edinburgh households lived in fuel poverty in 2012. This equates to some 53,600 households in the city.

4.6 There is an irony in that one of council actions to help deal with poverty and inequality as outlined in this report stated:

“Ways to improve neighbourhoods are crucial and include place making and building community capacity. Examples are given of community learning and development to help with basic skills and to support community organisations, advice work to help poor households retain stable accommodation, improving the insulation of homes to reduce fuel poverty, and community safety actions to make residents feel safer by reducing anti-social behaviour.

Whilst one of the council budget cut proposals is:

“Carry out a full service review of CLD reducing the level of staffing at all grades, realigning staff against emerging neighbourhood models of work, prioritising service…..there may be some reduction in community based programme…..”

Clearly these two things are contradictory.

4.7 We consider that the only way that our city will meet people’s aspirations in terms of reducing poverty and inequality is by way of a fairer, more progressive tax system. When you take account of direct and indirect taxes, those on low incomes in the UK are being hit hard, while billions of pounds each year is lost through tax avoidance and evasion (by the richest). Progressive tax reforms would help to address inequality at root as well as redistributing economic power.

4.8 There has been under-investment in public sector, in technology, in infrastructure, in education for years. It is enlightening to quote the words from Nobel Prize-winning economist Professor Joseph Stiglitz who served as Chairman of the Economic Advisors under President Bill Clinton and Chief Economist at the World Bank:

“One should remember austerity has almost never worked. This is an idea that’s been tried over and over again; back in 1929 Herbert Hoover tried it, succeeded in converting the stock market crash into the Great Depression – there were some other factors too. The IMF has tried this experiment; in East Asia I saw it in the years that I was at the World Bank; they tried it in Latin America; each time it succeeded in converting downturns into recessions, recessions into depressions”.

Whilst we recognise that these wider economic issues are not within the remit of the city council we make this statement as part of a wider debate that we consider needs to take place in Scotland and is the economic and social context in which the current cuts are being proposed.

4.9 We call on the council not to implement the current proposals. Everyone that we spoke to said no. There was a strong view that the council have not thought hard or innovatively enough and do need to take a stronger step in supporting the people in rejecting the current economic paradigm and seek a new approach that supports the aspirations of the people of this city. We reject the budget proposals as currently outlined and call on our elected representatives within Forth and beyond to reject them.

Granton and District Community Council
http://grantonanddistrictcommunitycouncil.com/
Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/GrantonDistCC

Disability supporters urged to respond to Edinburgh's budget consultation

Local Disabled People’s Organisation Lothian Centre for Inclusive Living (LCiL) has responded to the City of Edinburgh Council’s (CEC) budget consultation and is encouraging other organisations and individuals to do the same.

CEC budget consultation 2015-16-Nov. 14

The organisation’s full response (see above) , acknowledges the financial pressure under which local authorities are operating but highlights the risks associated with implementing savings proposals which directly impact disabled people, people with long term conditions or older people and/or the organisations supporting them.

Of the council’s 69 savings proposals 25 directly target these services, and taken together represent 32% of the total of the overall suggested savings – almost ONE THIRD.

LCiL argues that In a tough financial environment disabled people, people with long term conditions and older people are the first ones to feel the impact on their quality of life and on their ability to remain active and visible in their community. Targeting cuts to the very services that support them to live independently, and to remain members of their communities, would just lead to more exclusion and marginalisation, and increase the gap between those who have and who have not.

LCiL’s Chief Executive Florence Garabedian said: “There is still time to change the views of those who have proposed these savings and for CEC to explore the negative consequences which these could have on disabled people – people with long term conditions and older people.

“We urge those who are part of this constituency, and their supporters, to make sure their voices are heard before the consultation ends on 19 December.”

The City of Edinburgh Council has published a range of materials about the budget consultation which you can access on the Consultation and Responses Section of the E-library, including:

For further details you can access information on their website at: http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/budget

For an overview of the budget proposals visit here: http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/info/20200/budget_and_finance/1136/budget_proposals_for_2015_2016

Deadline for responses is: 19 December 2014.

City Centre regeneration plans go on display

PUBLIC EXHIBITION FOR £20M CITY CENTRE REGENERATION PROJECT

Initial proposals for a £20m regeneration project in the Register Lanes area on the south east corner of St Andrew Square will go on display at a public exhibition today.

The exhibition at the Voodoo Rooms will present early stage ideas for the area, which will include the regeneration of the currently neglected backstreets off and around West Register Street, and will comprise a complementary mix of high quality office space, hotel, serviced apartments, retail units and restaurants.

Initial plans include the restoration of 42 St Andrew Square, the former RBS headquarters and home to one of the finest examples of an art deco banking hall, which is now on the ‘at risk’ register.

The overall aim is to develop the buildings, which range from Victorian gothic to 1960s functional, as part of one comprehensive scheme that works successfully alongside the plans for the St James Quarter and the objectives of the Register Lanes Study.

Chris Stewart, CEO of Chris Stewart Group, said: “This is an important site and we welcome all views as we shape our ideas and designs. We want to create a vibrancy for the area. To do that, we are looking at a mix of new uses for the buildings; uses that we expect will deliver an economic boost for local traders, together with considerable environmental improvements for the benefit of local residents and visitors to the city.”

Chris Stewart Group has a track record for completing complex transformational projects. The company recently completed the Advocate’s Close development in Edinburgh’s Old Town, which has been awarded the RIAS ‘Best Building in Scotland’ award and has just begun works at Baxter’s Place, in Edinburgh, which is to become a Marriott hotel.

The exhibition will take place in the French Quarter, Voodoo Rooms, 19a West Register Street, EH2 2AA, between 3 -8pm on Thursday 27 November.

Edinburgh: live music matters

Local music professionals have joined forces with officials from the City of Edinburgh Council to discuss the state of the Capital’s live music scene.

At Live Music Matters, an open forum held at the Usher Hall last night, a jam-packed audience of musicians, gig promoters, venue managers and academics discussed the current live music offering in Edinburgh and shared ideas on how to enhance the experience of live music for musicians and concertgoers.

The debate was organised following a commitment in June by the Council’s Culture and Sport Committee to increase understanding and awareness of the live music scene in Edinburgh, in order to capture the key issues and opportunities facing the music community in the Capital.

Council policy on entertainment noise levels, the licensing and provision of live music venues in Edinburgh, and the support of grassroots talent emerged as hot topics for the local music community.

Councillor Norma Austin Hart, Vice Convener for Culture and Sport, said: “It is only right that debate about the city’s music scene is led by the experience and insight of local professionals. The Council-run and operated Usher Hall provides an ideal venue for the Live Music Matters open forum to discuss the current offering that we have in Edinburgh, and ideas for making it even better.

“What has become clear from the debate is that Edinburgh has a passionate and proud music industry, burgeoning with creative talent, and as a city we need to support this talent.

“Many venue owners and musicians feel that the Council’s current policy on noise levels can be a barrier to the development of Edinburgh’s music scene. To tackle this, we will specifically look at the current rules, and how these rules impact entertainment venues and residents.

“The meeting has also highlighted the importance many people attach to music venues, which goes far beyond sentiment and is really around cultural enrichment. The music community has told us they want Edinburgh’s music venues to be protected, and so we will aim to identify whether that is an option, perhaps through a register of cultural venues.

“Looking at ways to maintain and improve the city’s live music offering is a responsibility we need to face head on, and the Live Music Matters debate is only the beginning. We will now be gathering the comments and ideas from today’s discussion to look at ways we might be able to address them. Working in partnership will be crucial and the meeting today has reinforced that message. We will now set up a task force, called Music is Audible, with representatives from the music industry as well as the council.”

Karl Chapman, general manager of the Usher Hall, said: “The Usher Hall is a well placed venue to host this important debate, not just because it’s cultural importance in developing the arts and live music in the city, but also because it’s owned by the Council.

“The debate has been truly fascinating and I was surprised and delighted to see the tickets go so quickly. It’s been incredibly inspiring to hear everyone’s thoughts from across the industry today. The event has certainly shown there is a demand for a healthy live music scene in the city and the City of Edinburgh Council and the Usher Hall are committed to supporting Live Music Matters by hosting future meetings here in the venue.”

John Stout, promoter at Regular Music, added: “It’s fantastic to see the Council kick off this much needed conversation, and the open forum at the Usher Hall has covered the whole spectrum of live music in the city.

“The contribution that these events make to the local economy and towards making Edinburgh a cosmopolitan city can’t be underestimated. It will be interesting to see what the Council’s next steps will be.”

The debate will continue on social media and residents can share thoughts on Twitter using #livemusicmatters, and on the Council’s blog.

Further updates on the programme will become available later in the year.

The Usher Hall is owned and managed by the City of Edinburgh Council, is an international concert which has a maximum capacity of 2900, hosts around 200 concerts and sells around 220,000 tickets annually.

Dogs: you say NO to compulsory muzzling

Government will explore compulsory microchipping

The vast majority of people who responded to a consultation on responsible dog ownership in Scotland have said they are NOT in favour of compulsory muzzling of all dogs in public places.

The consultation, Responsible Dog Ownership in Scotland, asked members of the public for their views on how to improve public safety in Scotland.

Over 97 per cent of those who responded were against the proposal for muzzling.

Other measures, including compulsory microchipping, were also consulted on and the Scottish Government has published the full responses today (see link below).

The majority of respondents were also in favour of a system of compulsory microchipping and the Scottish Government is now considering the practicalities of introducing this across the country.

Justice Secretary Kenny MacAskill said: “We already have long-standing laws in place to help protect members of the public from dangerous dogs, but this consultation has provided us with the opportunity to see if there is anything more that can be done to strengthen legislation in Scotland.

“Authorities already have the option of muzzling available for dogs in certain cases but this consultation allowed people to offer their views on whether a more general system of muzzling of all dogs is practical or justified.

“It was a radical proposal but it was important that communities across Scotland has the chance to give their views of every option available.

“It is clear from the responses that communities right across Scotland do not think this is a measure that will encourage responsible dog ownership and, as such, we will not be progressing with any policies on this.

“Answers to other aspects of the consultation were much more varied and, as such, it is important that the Scottish Government considers these fully with a view to publishing a full response in the near future.

“It is crucial that our approach fits the needs of our communities. Every incident is one too many – we need to ensure Scotland’s system continues to focus on preventing these tragedies.”

Rural Affairs Secretary Richard Lochhead said: “The Scottish Government recognises microchipping as an effective method of identifying animals and can help re-unite dogs with owners where the dogs have been lost or stolen and the owners of dangerous or out of control dogs can already be required to microchip their dogs.

“The responses to questions clearly show an overwhelming public appetite for some sort of compulsory microchipping scheme. This is really positive however it is only right that we fully explore the practical aspects of this, including costs, before we make a definitive decision and my officials will continue to work on this with a view to announcing a decision in the near future.”

Tag: consultation