Agenda item

Cllr Snell presented the Cabinet report from the Leader of the Council. The Leader had written to the LEP regarding the concerns raised at the last meeting in relation to representation on the Board. No response had yet been received but there had been a meeting between leaders on 3^rd September where representation had been discussed.

It was noted that there was an error in the Local Plan Consultation and that the date should be 1 October rather 1 November.

Town Centre Partnerships

Cllr Sweeney stated that he had noted the leaflet from Rob Wallace and questioned whether the Council had written any more labour policies for Rob Wallace. The Leader confirmed that there would not be any repetition of this.

Cllr Jones queried what was meant by a Portas Partner Town.  The Council had not been successful in its second bid to become a Portas Town but Cllr Snell stated that those who were not chosen had been invited to be partners if they had support from the local MP. The Council would have access to support and resources but not cash. Paul Farrelly has agreed to support this.

Cllr Jones asked a supplementary question regarding when this was likely to happen. Cllr Snell responded that this had not yet been established but it was hoped that it would take effect as soon as possible.

Cllr Howells asked a question regarding what the employment brief was for the Town Centre Manager including the Job Description, targets, budget and whether the cost would be within the £30,000.

Cllr Snell responded that there would be a brief from the Partnership Board and advice from the private sector regarding this.  £30, 0000 would be enough for the rest of the year and discussions were being held regarding obtaining funding for the future. The budget would be discussed around the needs of the partnership not the Council. Targets would be published for Members to scrutinise and to ensure that the Councils contribution was being used effectively. A full written answer regarding this would be provided.

Community Interest Company

Cllr Tagg welcomed Jon Mitchell as Chair, questioned whether there would be a representative from the taxi trade involved and when the CIC would be up and running.

Cllr Snell stated that the Partnership was all but done; the membership had been suggested by Mitchell in consultation with the portfolio holder. Any one could be a member of the strategic board and Cllr Boden would look into the possibility of a member of the taxi trade be included.

Cllr Tagg raised a supplementary question regarding whether the Partnership would be taking on the Council’s agenda. Cllr Snell confirmed that the Partnership was aware of the agenda and that processes were in line and would be taken on if all parties were in agreement. Cllr Loades requested assurance that Board had an executive member. Cllr Snell confirmed that a portfolio position had a place on the Board. Cllr Loades further queried whether a report on findings would be made and whether a Chief Executive was to be appointed. Cllr Snell agreed that here would be a written answer to this supplementary questions.

Cllr Loades further requested assurance that the money paid to the CIC was grant money rather than a loan or other financially risky funding. A response to this would be provided in writing.

High Speed 2

Members queried what was meant by softer opposition mean. Cllr Snell stated that Cabinet had taken on board scrutiny comments regarding High Speed 2 and that the Government had committed to Lichfield thus making it prudent for the Council to dialogue regarding this. Members requested that if it was decided to take this approach it be discussed with the Full Council as Members wanted to be part of the process due to the fact that it was a flat objection last time.

Cllr Holland sated that he did not think there would be any economic benefits and that there would not be a station built in this area, he questioned what the benefits could be. Cllr Snell stated that the plan would not be endorsed if there were no economic benefits and the Council would revert to a flat objection but this would be discussed with Members first.

Cllr Jones questioned how this approach could show the Council wanted a station or no HS2 it at all. Cllr Snell stated that this was a pragmatic approach not weakness. If the plan showed no benefits then the Council would revert to a strong objection but we were currently in a better negotiating position than just saying no. Cllr Howells queried whether the Leader had considered loss of services if the service was built with no station. Cllr Snell stated that this was a more manoeuvrable position. Cllr Howells added a supplementary regarding whether the Council had received correspondence from Government on this issue. Cllr Snell confirmed that we had.

Cllr Sweeney raised concerns regarding a 2/3rds reduction of services to Stoke and what benefits this could have. Cllr Snell stated that it was too early to ascertain this.

Older People

Cllr Howells expressed concern that this had not been advertised properly and queried whether the Leader was aware that only 10 houses had taken opportunity of it. Cllr Howells requested information on what was planned to increase opportunity. Cllr Snell responded that If any members had more constituents eligible then to please let him know.

Cllr Howells asked why the service had not been advertised in Parish Councils and 1 Stop Shops. Cllr Snell stated that he was keen to explore all ways of communication and that Cllr Howells comments would be noted.

Cllr Miss Cooper queried whether the service would be means tested and whether the Leader thought that the handyman response scheme was effective. Cllr Snell confirmed that the service was means tested as it was an extension of the existing scheme and that £10,000 had to be enough for 200 people. Any complaints regarding the Handyman scheme needed to be taken up with officers. Cllr Robinson requested that the Leader keep Members briefed on the parish communications.

Cllr Cornes queried whether the service included private households. Cllr Snell confirmed that it did. Cllr Cornes further queried whether Aspire property dwellers could benefit from the scheme. Cllr Snell stated that Aspire had a parallel scheme and that a report on this would be circulated. 

Cllr Fear asked the Leader whether he welcomed the reduction in red tape; Cllr Snell confirmed that he did. Cllr Fear queried whether there would be new tests and expressed concern that these could lead to upset being caused.

Cllr Snell stated that there would not be new tests and that he believed changes would be to the rolling programme, the Council would continue to be sensitive.

Local Plan Consultation

Cllr Jones requested clarification regarding whether residents were allowed to nominate any site for inclusion. The Leader confirmed that residents could nominate to any site and it would be subject to consideration.

Locality Cabinet

Members queried whether the open sessions would allow questions on any issue or just agenda items. It was confirmed that Cabinet Members would be available for all questions and issues for an hour before the actual Cabinet meeting, in meeting rules would however apply.

Cllr Robinson queried whether meetings of the Cabinet would to move around the Borough. Cllr Snell confirmed that meetings were already planned for Madeley and Whitmore.

Cllr Howells requested information on the additional cost that locality Cabinet meetings would have. A written answer would be provided regarding this.