In accordance with Procedure Rule 11, questions must be submitted at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. Any questions considered urgent will only be accepted with the agreement of the Mayor prior to the meeting.
Minutes:
The following questions were submitted and discussed:
1) Why has the litter figure for Q4 2012/2013 risen to 15% (Target 9%) from a figure of 6.79% in 2011/12, and why has the detritus figure risen to 15.02% from 9.32% in 2011/12? Submitted by Cllr David Becket
Response from Cllr Ann Beech, Portfolio Holder for Environment and Recycling:
Cllr Beech agreed that she was a little disappointed with the figures but that they were still at distinction level. Cllr Beech stated that improvement was desired and that officers had been asked to provide a report on current working practices which would be distributed to all Members and from which it would be possible to see where improvements could be made. Investments had been made in the service including the purchase of a new road sweeper and litter campaigns had been run. Resident satisfaction with the cleanliness of the streets and open spaces had risen and it was thought that greater resident participation had helped on this, Cllr Beech thanked Simon Long, Community Development Officer for his help with this. Elected Members were encouraged to report any problem areas and it was stated that a review was also being looked at regarding refuge collections.
2) Why is the second round of the site allocations consultation running late, and by how many months? Question submitted by Cllr Nigel Jones.
Response from Cllr Terry Turner, Portfolio Holder for Economic Development, Regeneration and Town Centres:
A revised timetable had been released in February 2012 but unfortunately the 2nd draft option stage was now behind schedule. Cllr Turner stated that this was due to a more rigorous consultative approach being carried out and the diversion of officer time and resources to deal with legislative and structural changes. A revised timetable would be considered by Cabinet in the near future.
a) Supplementary questions from Cllr Nigel Jones:
Will the lack of a detailed local place increase the risk that the Council will not have enough control regarding where building takes place in the Borough?
Cllr Terry Turner stated that unfortunately due to cuts from Central Government the Council had to prioritise.
3) Will you agree that the council is unable to demonstrate an up-to-date 5 year plus 5% supply of deliverable housing sites? Question submitted by Cllr David Becket.
Response from Cllr Terry Turner, Portfolio Holder for Economic Development, Regeneration and Town Centres:
Cllr Turner stated that a report had been discussed regarding this at the last meeting of the Planning Committee and that this was not a new situation for the Council. The methodology for calculating the percentage had changed in 2009/10 and the Borough was currently experiencing the highest rate of building since 2006/07. Cllr Turner stated that building houses reduced the number of sites available and that a 20% buffer rather than a 5% buffer now had to be allowed for. Each year a 5 year supply had to be shown which was continually reduced by new building.
a) Supplementary question from Cllr David Becket:
Would you agree that if the previous Site Selection Policy had not been disregarded then the Council would not be in this Positions?
Cllr Turner stated that this was not the case.
4) Will you agree that the failure of this council to get its planning act together brings the risk of the government taking over our planning function? Question submitted by Cllr David Becket
Response from Cllr Terry Turner, Portfolio Holder for Economic Development, Regeneration and Town Centres:
This was not the case, the Council was significantly above the threshold and there was no reason to consider it to be at risk.
a) Supplementary question from Cllr David Becket:
Did the Portfolio Holder agree that the Council had come close to the threshold in 2006.
Cllr Turner stated that as he was not a Member of the Council at the time he was unable to comment on this.
5) In the report considering the future of the Mayor’s car, what alternative vehicles were considered and did the council look at a low-emission low-running cost vehicle? Question submitted by Cllr David Becket
Response from Cllr Gareth Snell, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Communications, Policy and Partnerships:
The report in question had been considered by the Revenue Investment and Budget Support Panel and therefore only budgetary considerations had been debated.
a) Supplementary question from Cllr David Becket:
The annual servicing costs had been detailed as £300, was there confidence in this amount?
Cllr Snell stated that all work would be carried out by the Council’s depot and that the figure of £300 would be adhered to.
6) A range of KPIs in the most recent (2012/13 Q4) Quarterly Performance Repot show that the Council is failing to meet its targets in a diverse number of areas. Can the Leader assure us that the development of the formatting of this report will continue to give councillors the information they need to scrutinise properly the Executive’s performance, or is there truth in the rumour that the smiley faces in the Performance Report are being abolished because they are not smiling any more? Question submitted by Cllr Mark Holland.
Response from Cllr Gareth Snell, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Communications, Policy and Partnerships:
The smiley faces had been removed and the changes made to enable greater detail to be provided in the performance reports. A red, amber, green system would be used in the future and where a figure was lower than expected, detail as to the reasons why would now be included.
a) Supplementary question from Cllr Mark Holland:
Could the Leader reassure him that the scrutiny process was robust in this area?
Cllr Snell stated that greater cross party attendance at meetings would make it more robust.
7) What assessment would the Portfolio Holder for Finance and Resources make of the impact on revenue and collection rates of Cabinet’s decision on the report, ‘Technical Reforms to Council Tax’, made on 16th January 2013, and when does Cabinet next intend to review its policy on council tax discounts and premiums? Question submitted by Cllr Mark Holland.
Response from Cllr Gareth Snell, Leader of the Council and Portfolio Holder for Communications, Policy and Partnerships:
Cllr Snell referred Cllr Holland to Appendix A of the report. The Council kept 12% of the amount collected with the majority of funds going to other organisations including the Fire Service and the County Council. It was hard to make any estimations regarding collection rates after only three months but they appeared to be improving compared to the same time the previous year.
There were no plans at present to review the Council’s policy on council tax discounts and premiums but the scheme was looked at annually. Members and Officers were however fully aware of the current issues including the number of property rich/cash poor residents in the Borough.
a) Supplementary question from Cllr Mark Holland:
As authority to make decisions regarding areas such as council tax exemptions had now been delegated to local authorities would this Council be taking any action?
Cllr Snell stated that due to reductions in central funding all partners including the Fire Service and the County Council had to make cuts and that we were currently dealing with the best option possible.