Angus CouncilTel: 03452 777 778

 

APPENDIX II to the minute of meeting of the Education Committee of 9 March 1999 (Article 3(c) refers)

MINUTE of MEETING of the SPECIAL CASES SUB-COMMITTEE of the EDUCATION COMMITTEE held in the Committee Room, Town and County Hall, Forfar on Thursday 25 February 1999 at 12 noon.

Present: Councillors BRIAN M C MILNE, Mrs KATHLEEN RITCHIE and GEORGE NORRIE.

Councillor MILNE, Convener, in the Chair.

1. EXCLUSION OF PUBLIC AND PRESS

The Sub-Committee resolved, in terms of Standing Order 27(2), that the public and press be excluded during consideration of the following item so as to avoid the disclosure of information which was exempt in terms of Part 1 of Schedule 7A of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, Paragraph 1.

2. VETTING OF SCHOOL CONVEYANCE CONTRACT DRIVERS

With reference to Article 18(b) of the minute of meeting of the Education Committee of 25 August 1999, there was submitted Joint Report No 221/99 by the Director of Planning and Transport and the Director of Education informing the Sub-Committee of the results of vetting checks undertaken on drivers of buses being used in school conveyance contracts. The drivers concerned had been invited to attend the meeting.

The Sub-Committee considered five applications for the issue of accredited drivers/escort passes to the drivers outlined in Report No 221/99 as follows:-

(a) Case 1/99

The Sub-Committee, having noted that the driver was not present, considered relevant information and details of current offences. The Sub-Committee was advised of the existence of a spent conviction and agreed that sight of it was relevant and necessary for the appropriate consideration of the application. Accordingly, information about the spent conviction was circulated to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee agreed to defer consideration of the case and requested that the driver be invited to appear in person at the next meeting of the Sub-Committee to be held on Monday 22 March 1999 at 11.00 am.

(b) Case 2/99

The Sub-Committee noted that the driver was not present and that there were no current convictions. The Sub-Committee was advised of the existence of a spent conviction and agreed that sight of it was relevant and necessary for the appropriate consideration of the application. Accordingly, information about the spent conviction was circulated to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee thereafter agreed unanimously that the application be granted.

(c) Case 3/99

The Sub-Committee noted that the driver was not present and that there were no current convictions. The Sub-Committee was advised of the existence of a spent conviction and agreed that sight of it was relevant and necessary for the appropriate consideration of the application. Accordingly, information about the spent conviction was circulated to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee thereafter agreed unanimously that the application be granted.

(d) Case 4/99

The Sub-Committee noted that the driver was not present and that there were no current convictions. The Sub-Committee was advised of the existence of a spent conviction and agreed that sight of it was relevant and necessary for the appropriate consideration of the application. Accordingly, information about the spent conviction was circulated to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee thereafter agreed unanimously that the application be granted.

(e) Case 5/99

The Sub-Committee noted that the driver was not present and that there were no current convictions. The Sub-Committee was advised of the existence of a spent conviction and agreed that sight of it was relevant and necessary for the appropriate consideration of the application. Accordingly, information about the spent conviction was circulated to the Sub-Committee.

The Sub-Committee thereafter agreed unanimously that the application be granted.