Agenda item

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NO. 1

 

Under Procedure Rule No 10, Ron Brown will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor Carol Dean, the following question:-

 

What level of reporting conformity does our Council maintain at Departmental level with standard methods in Industry and Commerce via Published Plans, Prioritised Goals, Measured Achievements and Assessed performance, in timely fashion at every stage?

 

Response:-

 

Thank you for your question, Mr Brown

 

The council has a robust performance management framework in place which aims to ensure that the various elements of the council’s performance assurance and control are planned and occur in a coherent and consistent manner.

 

At the heart of the framework is the Corporate Plan which includes our vision and priorities which provide a focus for all the authority’s activities and services.  Integral to the success to deliver the corporate plan are service plans which identify the outputs, actions and performance indicators necessary to deliver services to the community. 

 

The Council uses a web-based performance management system; Pentana which strengthens the implementation of the performance management framework by enabling efficient monitoring of progress against corporate priorities. Pentana acts as a single repository for all performance information such as priorities, outcomes, objectives, performance indicators, risks and service plans.  This allows for improvement, efficiency and consistency in performance monitoring and reporting.

 

In terms of reporting performance each quarter, achievement of key indicators, progress against corporate plan actions and corporate projects the status of corporate risks and financial matters are reviewed by Corporate Management Team through the Quarterly Performance Report. This report is then presented to Corporate Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet on a quarterly basis who present their response to performance issues at meetings which are open to the public.  The report is made available on the Council’s website.

Assistant Directors and Heads of Service monitor progress against service plan actions and performance indicators.

 

Personal Development Reviews form the vital link between an individual and the achievement of service and corporate priorities, outcomes and objectives.  The annual process ensures that each employee has a clear understanding of how his or her role fits into the organisation as a whole and emphasises that they play an important part in ensuring that these objectives are met. 

 

Supplementary

 

My  main concern is the time it takes for all of this information to reach the public eye

 

Answer

 

We have a specific schedule we have to go through.  I think in all the work we do we try to make things as timely as possible but if there are any specific times when you think there as been an extraordinary amount of time for things to happen I would be interested to hear from you. 

 

 

 

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NO. 2

 

Under Procedure Rule No 10, Ron Brown will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor Carol Dean, the following question:-

 

Does our Council Leader accept that Social Media and Texting is now the primary vehicle for extensive dialogue between its Residents, and thus recognise that its already-adopted use of Social Media to broadcast information is not, actually, bidirectional communication?
(Our Council thus has no idea about what the vast majority of Residents feel about such broadcast content, even if they "survey" it via old-fashioned techniques?)

 

Response:-

 

Tamworth Borough Council delivers services to local residents, especially to the most vulnerable in our communities.

We have many ways residents talk to us about those services and their needs, including, phone, email, web chat, face to face at the Assembly Rooms and though outreach services in peoples’ homes. Indeed, we have a report going through the governance processes right now proposing an increase in our face-to-face services, with a proposal to increase add to the service at the Assembly Rooms with a service once again at Marmion House. This is because we’ve consistently heard local people tell us a service at Marmion House again is needed; we cannot continue to ignore those voices.

 

It would be wholly inappropriate to have these conversations with customers on social media, people’s individual issues must at all times remain private.

 

Along with the many thousands of points of contact I’ve just described, we engage with the community in many ways including through our tenants’ groups and also councillors through their surgeries and by talking to people when they attend our events, shows and receive a direct service from us.

 

We’ve had lots of people engage over the summer, as people have shared their thoughts and feelings about council’s priorities for the future. People were able to come to a number of events or complete a short survey to help us shape the future of Tamworth.

 

Combined, this contact and engagement means we do hear the voices of our communities.

 

So onto social media, we follow the same approach as all public services in the UK; sharing information about the work of the council on social media, just as we do in local press, newsletters, information leaflets, guides and letters.

Of course, our teams monitor information and comments on social media to shape how services are delivered and the actions we take.

Supplementary

 

If residents took the initiative and began establishing a social media group for these purposes would the elected council collaborate with enthusiasm or obstruct its progress

 

Answer

 

I think we are always open to hearing from members of the public and lota already contact us for social media, if we need another platform I don’t know, but if people think they did I wouldn’t stand in the way.  We all of us are on social media and are contactable through that route, through emails our telephone numbers published as well.  I am struggling to see how people can’t have a dialogue with us, but we are open to anything else that maybe felt to be needed. 

 

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC No.3

 

Under Procedure Rule No 10, Mark Hopkins will ask the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness Planning Councillor Ben Clarke, the following question:-

 

On Monday the 2^nd of September North Warwickshire council granted permission for two developments on land next to Tamworth, one of these developments is for 1300 homes. This development partially sits within and therefore undermines the Meaningful gap, which could then open the flood gates for thousands more homes and putting intolerable pressure on Tamworth’s already strained infrastructure.

 

Would the leader agree that this development poses a major risk to the infrastructure of Stonydelph, Wilnecote and Amington, if not the whole town?

 

Response:-

 

Thank you for the question, if I could start by clarifying that the application is within a strategic housing allocation defined by Policies LP37 and H5 of the North Warwickshire Local Plan adopted in 2021.  This allocation is for a minimum of 1270 dwellings and the proposal is for 1370, including a 100-bed care home. The North Warwickshire Local Plan has a strategic gap, the purpose of which is to “maintain the separate identity of Tamworth and Polesworth with Dordon; ‘in order to prevent their coalescence”. There are no new buildings proposed on this land, but there is a link road proposed in order to implement the primary access into the allocated land from the B5000. The strategic gap policy provides the protection in the North Warwickshire Local Plan for the gap to be retained between settlements.

 

Staffordshire Highways have been working with the Warwickshire Highways teams to assess the impact of proposals on the existing highways network. There are no objections from the statutory consultee and their assessments indicate that there would be no severe impact on the road network if the proposed package of mitigation is provided. Such mitigation would be delivered by the developer via the Highways Act as part of a S278 agreement.

 

So to answer your question:

 

• Yes, when you have development there will always be an impact, however for a development to be refused on highways impact, the impact would have to be determined as severe, and it hasn’t been.
• When undertaking assessments, highways teams take into account the latest road traffic data including those assessments undertaken to support new development.
• The only issue for consideration by the Tamworth planning committee are the offsite highway works to the bellmouth junction at Robeys Lane/Glascote Road. The works involve improving the junction. It is not within the scope of planning committee to make a decision based on what may or may not occur in the future. They can only consider the application in front of them and on its merits.

 

Supplementary

 

Bearing in mind the huge infrastructure overload and damaging experience because of similar border area house buildings at the top of Ashby Road many residents feel that the North Warwickshire planned B5000 development will create an even worse distress for the Northeastern side of the borough.  So, what steps would the relevant borough council executives take to block such building and developments that cross borders.

 

Answer

 

Developments that cross borders require collaboration form all sides.  In terms of your question that is something for the planning committee to consider and they can only consider on its merits and Highways authority have said its not a severe impact but this will be up to the planning committee to decide. 

 

 

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NO.4

 

Under Procedure Rule No 10, Mark Hopkins will ask the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning Councillor Ben Clarke, the following question:-

 

The approved planning application on Robeys Lane for 1300 home would require a new island on the corner of Chilton Road leading to B5000 , Is it the council’s intention to reject this proposal due to part of it being in Staffordshire?

 

 

Response:-

 

Thank you for the question. An application will be bought to the next planning committee whereupon Members will discuss the proposals and determine if the proposal is acceptable in planning terms.

 

In arriving at a suitable highways scheme, the application has been through several consultation exercises with Staffordshire and Warwickshire County Council highways departments who have been working together.

 

To provide some context there are 2 accesses proposed for the site, one on Chilton Road and the other on Robeys Lane itself. The only access within the Tamworth boundary relates to the Glascote Road and Bellmouth junction with Robeys Lane. Here it is proposed that a new 3m wide shared footway/cycle path and toucan crossing as a means of safe crossing and promotion of sustainable travel respectively, is delivered.

 

Supplementary

 

I run a local charity in the area and the charity operates over borders.  Over the last year we have had 19 football teams play at North Warwickshire form the Stonydelph area.  Many of these children use the corner of Chiltern Road and cut down the lane to the recreation centre in the very place that highways have agreed to an island.  Can I ask the Councillor to come and look at the facility  and if our council commits to stopping the planned development in its tracks over infrastructure issues would you consider doing that or is it a done deal.

 

Response

 

No, its not a done deal it will be up to the Planning Committee to decide and absolutely I will come out to look

 

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NO.5

 

Under Procedure Rule No 10, Marie Neumann will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor Carol Dean, the following question:-

 

Can Tamworth Borough Council please commit to working with the residents of Amington and the Highway Authority to resolve the issue of cars being forced onto the wrong side of the road due to parked cars and due to exceptionally poor visibility on the Tamworth Road, Amington?”

 

Response

 

 

Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor Sam Smith will ask the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning, Councillor Ben Clarke, the following question:-

 

Can the Portfolio Holder for HH&P Cllr Ben Clarke please provide a yes or no answer to confirm that, following the Strategic Review I announced at Full Council in August 2023, and after a successful, comprehensive, and independent consultation, the current group of Leaseholders as part of that review, will not face the prospect of full roof replacement (also known as ‘renewal’) within the next ten years, as noted by both the independent Consultants and Roof Surveyors report? This is unless a sudden, genuine, unmitigated safety concern arises during this time, as determined by another trusted and independent roofing survey?

 

Response:-

 

I can confirm that in line with the report there are no plans to renew the roofs to those properties inspected in the immediate future.

 

I note that the decision in respect of the recommendations contained in the report of Cambell Tickell are to be considered by Cabinet on the 10th October. As I indicated when this matter was discussed by Corporate Scrutiny on the 13th August 2025 I very much welcome the work undertaken by the consultants and the resulting recommendations. However, I am conscious that a final decision on the recommendations in question has yet to be made by Cabinet.  This matter will be considered at Cabinet on the 10th September and I will be happy to confirm the outcome of the decisions made in respect of this matter after this date. 

 

I also note that whilst the most recent inspection undertaken as part of the review identified a potential remaining life of 10 years for those roofs surveyed this was not a warrantied survey and the report does not guarantee a ten-year life.  The report proposes that the roofs are further surveyed in 5-7 years to assess the condition.  This recommendation can be found on page 6 of the Cambell Tickell report as recommendation (u)

 

Supplementary

 

You mentioned in the near future would you be able to answer that in relation to within the next 10 years as noted by the independent consultants.

 

Answer  

 

Yes, as I mentioned we will be going back out to survey these roofs in 5 – 7 years as recommended in the report.

 

QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 2

 

Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor Sam Smith will ask the Portfolio Holder for Housing, Homelessness and Planning, Councillor Ben Clarke, the following question:-

 

Can the Portfolio Holder for HH&P, Cllr Ben Clarke, please confirm that no current leaseholder as part of the Strategic Review will be subject to a potentially stressful ‘sample’ or ‘test’ case taken to a First Tier Tribunal unless they expressly wish to volunteer for it?

 

Response

 

I can confirm that in the event that a test case is brought forward it will only involve Leaseholders who have been fully briefed and engaged in advance and who have consented to be a party to the test case.  It will be made clear to those Leaseholders who agree to be a party to the test case that it is for clarification purposes only and that there is no intention to undertake any major roofing renewal works at the present time regardless of the outcome of the case. There will be no costs for the Leaseholders in taking this test case forward.

 

I am happy to confirm that should the recommendation to undertake to undertake a test case be agreed then this will be undertaken in collaboration and on a voluntary basis with a leaseholder at no cost to them.