(i) To answer questions from members of the public pursuant to Procedure Rule No. 10.
(ii) To answer questions from members of the Council pursuant to Procedure Rule No. 11
Minutes:
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NO.1
Under Procedure Rule No 10, Mr R Bilcliff asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
"Have you received any enquires by interested parties to run Tamworth Golf Course?"
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
In March 2014 following the closure of the course the Cabinet considered 3 options: 1) Close the course, 2) Open it temporarily under TBC management and consider the long term options; 3) appoint an external management company on a lease to operate the course and consider the long term options. As part of the consideration of Option 3 the Council spoke to many reputable external golf operators. The responses indicated that given the situation at the course the Council would need to pay an external operator circa £100k pa for a short term lease agreement. Cabinet therefore decided to operate the golf course ‘in-house’ for two years which offered a quicker and less costly option to re-open the course. During the comprehensive process to review the future options for the course the Council again contacted a number of golf companies to inform the options appraisal. The Council also received enquiries from a range of sources enquiring about future commercial opportunities at the course. The majority of these were highly speculative eg one man who ran a pub in Fazely wanted to run the Golf Course.
During the options appraisal interest was shown by several reputable companies and their views were considered in the work undertaken by FMG Consultancy in the options appraisal. Key issues arising were the requirement for capital investment and the potential of future risk to the Council’s revenue budget if the course still didn’t get going. These factors and the opportunity to meet other strategic needs led cabinet to the right decision to close the course and redevelop it for housing with parkland. This is the only option that supports the future needs of the town. The Council has had a small number of enquiries post the decision to close but again these have been speculative and not supported by a business case.
Supplementary question:
The decision to close the Golf Course and Councillor Thurgood sent letters to residents this is not end of the Golf Course. What are the pre-requisites for an interested party to take control of the course?
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
A business case would be a good start.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC NO.2
The person asking question 2 was absent so the question was not tabled although the Leader of the Council will send a written response.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.1
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor P Standen asked the Portfolio Holder for Operations and Assets, Councillor R Pritchard, the following question:-
"Could the Portfolio Holder for Operations and Assets please confirm what the income and usage were for council run car parks between 3pm-6pm Monday Friday for the previous financial year?"
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:
The car park machines became fully networked to a back office monitoring system on 1 September 2013.
Since that time we have been able to monitor the usage by car park in each hourly time band. Previously it had not been easy or accurate to monitor.
Full reports are now available and taking the available data up to the last report, I can confirm that if we estimated the data over a full 12 months period the income after 3pm is £111,528 per annum.
This is budget income already in the council Medium Term financial Strategy, so to offer free parking after 3pm would require over £330,000 being removed from the council’s budget.
Supplementary question:
I believe that an element of free car parking during the day time will help in regenerating the town centre and think that it would be a good idea to trial free car parking in Council owned car parks between 3pm-6pm Monday to Friday in the weeks running up to Christmas this year? Will the portfolio holder look into this?
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:
The controlling group for a long time has offered free parking on the two busiest Saturdays before Christmas. Its very difficult to give away free parking outside that it would mean money being taken away from other services. So if members can identify savings from other areas we will look into it.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.2
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor P Standen asked the Portfolio Holder for Economy and Education, Councillor S Claymore, the following question:-
"Could the Portfolio Holder for Economy and Education please advise what medium to long term plans are in place or are being considered to secure Tamworth Assembly Rooms for future generations in the event of Tamworth Council failing to obtain funding from Heritage Lottery Fund or similar funding sources prior to the building become unsafe for public use?"
Councillor S Claymore gave the following reply:
The Council is pursuing a number of external funding opportunities to support the conservation and redevelopment of the Assembly Rooms. We are currently preparing a bid which includes the wider Creative Quarter to go via the Local Enterprise Partnerships for the second round of the Single Local Growth Fund. Alongside opportunities for external funding the council is also exploring the option (subject to a viable business case) to prudentially borrow capital funding to support the project. It is also conceivable that future capital receipts could be used to support works at the Assembly Rooms. The Council has allocated £400,000 as match funding for the Assembly Rooms Heritage Lottery bid.
It is important to note that the Assembly Rooms needs more than just the essential repairs as without modernisation and improved commercial space the annual revenue subsidy will become too great to sustain.
Supplementary question:
I would ask the portfolio holder to work for the preservation of this historic Tamworth building and where possible involve all members of the council, an issue like this should be above party politics; Too much of our heritage was lost in past decades by short term thinking; I hope this building will be available to future generations and becomes a useful living asset to the people of Tamworth rather than a dead shell of a building.
Councillor S Claymore gave the following reply:
Absolutely thank you very much.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.3
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor C Cooke will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
"On 14th December 2011 a Cabinet meeting determined a restricted agenda item, numbered 11, entitled ‘Sale Of Land To The North Of The B5000.’ In it a number of items relating to the proposed selling, factual content of the report and conditions of sale have caused me concern. However, after nearly three years, and a planning application and appeal later I am still not able to identify those concerns because this item remains restricted. I am sure that all and any information that allowed this agenda item to be restricted in the first place has now in any case been made public by later events. This agenda report should not remain restricted. Does the Leader of the Council share my concern and will he assure me that he will review council policy with a view to providing a method whereby such restricted reports may become reclassified and de-restricted?"
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
Thank you Mr Mayor,
Councillor Cooke, I am afraid I do not share your concern on this occasion.
Then with regard to the second point, the CEO has responded previously and I believe it went something like this
The report to which you referred was presented to Cabinet on 12 December, 2011 under the Restricted Items (Public Excluded) as it related to a commercial transaction. The decision was made, the minutes approved and signed as an accurate record at the following meeting of Cabinet. Neither I, nor the Solicitor of the Council or other CEOs I’ve spoken to have ever come across a report being ‘de-restricted’ or the process for doing so.
If it helps, you are entitled to a copy of the report indeed; you could have had a copy in December 2011. I understand that our I/T protocols do not allow for ‘Restricted’ matters to be sent to you via a private email address but I can certainly arrange for a copy to be made available next time you are in Marmion House.
I am advised that the land referred to has subsequently been sold. The Council no longer own the land and has no interest in it. A search of the Land Registry will disclose the owner of the land and the price paid. I can confirm that the Council received £175,000.00 for the land; less fees and costs amounting to a net Capital Receipt of £166,520.00.
Supplementary question:
Thank you Mr Mayor I would agree with Councillor Cook on things that you said, however that’s not quite the question I was asking. I understand that the £175,000 with the reduction of costs would be part of the restrictions except for the fact that you now have made it a public thing. So what I am really asking is would you agree with me that there is a difference between exempt information that is as defined is schedule 12a of the 1972 Local Government Act and confidential information that when Committee is asked to exclude press and public and this should be properly voted on by the Councillors are allowed at that time to ask for an item to be heard in public regardless of falling into schedule 12a then you could at that point in time say that this item will not be exempt. Do you agree?
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
I have to be honest Mr Mayor, those three years I didn’t spend at law school has really hampered me here. I am sorry Councillor Cook I am going to be absolutely honest with you I am not entirely sure what you are asking however I give you a guarantee, contact me tomorrow and me and you will make an appointment to see the Solicitor. We’ll talk it through and see if there is an opportunity to do something along these lines.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.4
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor C Cooke will ask the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor S Peaple, the following question:-
"Cllr Peaple recently had a letter in the Herald claiming that somehow it was local Labour councillors, and not myself, who were to be credited with reducing by £85 per resident the parking set-up fee for a proposed town centre controlled parking zone. Should Councillor Peaple ask me I would be very happy to show him how my actions led to that reduction. But, for now, I am curious and I ask him, why does he believes his Labour councillors should take all the credit?"
Councillor S Peaple gave the following reply:
In responding to Councillor Cooke’s question, I am informed that any changes are due to alterations in the scheme and regulatory amendments by the government. I note too, that Councillor Cooke does not challenge the other part of my letter where I publicly stated that he had supported the Conservatives in imposing budget cuts on the most vulnerable in society. I would recommend that as a Glascote Councillor he should be asking me for support to keep the library open but of course he cannot as he voted to shut it.
Supplementary question:
I am just a little flummoxed as I know that if I try to answer the question that he was asking me you’ll probably stop me. I’ll keep it to the subject. Is Councillor Peaple aware of what my action was that prevented the controlled traffic regulation order being made a traffic regulation order which his group supported and would have cost every resident £185.00 and now that order is coming through and will only cost the residents £100.00 which is still in my view too much, but nevertheless it got a reduction. Could he answer that?
Councillor S Peaple gave the following reply:
Thank you Mr Mayor I am more than happy to answer that. Councillor Cooke’s idea of doing something about the town centre scheme was to block it. Now I used to live in the town centre and I know how hard it was for people to park in that area and I think it demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of what the people in the town centre might feel. I have simply reminded him that as a Glascote Councillor I am disgusted to find his name on the list of those who voted for the budget at County which is leading to closure of services in some of the most vulnerable areas of this town and having abandoned water fluoridisation since becoming a member of a group, I would recommend that he finds something more relevant to the people of Glascote than worrying about the town centre car parking which actually we all manage quite well without it. Thank you Mr Mayor.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.5
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor M Couchman asked the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
"Could the Leader of the Council tell us if he has had a reply to his letter to County Councillor Alan White?"
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply
Councillor White has emailed me to confirm that funding for Thomas Hardy Court to meet residents planned and assessed care needs will continue unaffected whilst the service is reviewed. There was no wider response to what I believe was effectively ‘cost-shunting’ exercise.
Following the County’s announcement of supporting people funding cuts officers presented a detailed report to Cabinet on 31st July. As is now a matter of record I insisted that a letter went with the Cabinet report as it needed saying. All related Supporting People Funding provided by the County will be withdrawn in March 2015 for the council’s sheltered housing. As a result officers’ recommendations to undertake a full sheltered housing review were approved and a further report is expected to Tamworth’s Cabinet in March 2015 which we are still fully consulting on the future service delivery options. I was pleased to see that our focus will be on supporting all residents living within our sheltered schemes so that their views clearly inform the outcomes to that review.
As the leader I have continued to express my concern with the Countywide handling of SP funding cuts and have made clear that I felt the transitional plans, community based impacts assessment and general communication were inadequate. Officers here at Tamworth have had very long representations to the County and I am hopeful that innovative solutions can be found to continuing the future provision of health related support to residents of our sheltered schemes.
You will also know that Councillor Greatorex has also taken up a cabinet support role with the County on health and social care. As Tamworth’s previous portfolio holder for housing and vulnerable people I am hopeful this will help shape the County’s thinking going forward and can only help people of Tamworth.
I would also urge Councillor Couchman to speak to the Director of Housing & Health if she requires more specific detail.
The outcomes I 100% support but how they are getting there I am uncomfortable with.
Supplementary question:
Can I thank Councillor Cook for a very detailed response. I do feel I agree with you that this is a cost shunting exercise. I would ask that you keep me informed on this very important issue. I do have regular meetings with the Director Housing and Health and I would like to be kept informed as this affects the most vulnerable members of our community.
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
I have no problem keeping any member of this Council informed on consultation on the vulnerable people of this county. The most vulnerable and most needy in this society are bigger than any political football. Thank you Councillor Couchman.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.6
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor M Couchman will ask the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Waste Management, Councillor M Thurgood, the following question:-
"Why is the enquiry phone number for waste management enquiries an 0845 number and not a freephone as is housing repairs, or a local call rate for people contacting Marmion House?"
Councillor M Thurgood gave the following response:
The service was originally set up with an 0845 number as part of our ongoing Waste Management partnership with Lichfield District Council. To-date there has not been any Resident complaints that I am aware of.
After discussions with the previous portfolio holder, Cllr Doyle, there is a workstream already underway to replace the 0845 number with 0345 number. To clarify, 0845 is considered a local rate for landline numbers only and 0345 is a local call rate for all numbers, including mobile phones.
Supplementary question:
Thank you for your response. I may be mistaken but I was under the impression that businesses were no longer allowed to use 0845 numbers. Thank you.
Councillor M Thurgood gave the following response:
Thank you. We will continue to work on this issue.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.7
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor D Cook will ask the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor S Peaple, the following question:-
“Cllr Peaple, noting your comments in the Tamworth Herald recently (posted on-line 27th August) where you said
“However, if affordable homes are built in the town centre the council will get no capital but extra bonus money. Do we need the Assembly Rooms at the cost of building houses for new arrivals wishing to commute?”
To confirm your position, are you advocating the end of the Assembly rooms for town centre housing?”
Councillor S Peaple gave the following
reply:
My view as there is a significant shortage of social housing in Tamworth and that if the Assembly Rooms could be used to meet that need, then a full appraisal should be undertaken now that your bid for development grant has not been successful so as to retain the building but change the use.
Supplementary question:
I’m not entirely sure it’s a supplementary but I’m taking that as a yes?
Councillor S Peaple gave the following reply:
On the basis that Councillor Cook has said on many occasions that he wishes items to be above politics my view is that we have very big problems to face and if he turns it into a political question then he’s most welcome but it shows that he is only a politician and not capable of rising above that. Thank you.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.8
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor M Greatorex asked the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor s Peaple, the following question:-
"Could the Leader of the Labour Group answer the following question?
Given his group’s continuous attacks on the national cuts led by the Coalition, and especially the cuts to the Revenue Support Grant (RSG) given to local government since 2010, and your group’s attacks every time this controlling group sets budgets based on and around the national cuts, could the Leader of the Labour Group say if he has been involved in any policy discussions with his Labour colleagues, both local and national, around this subject and are his feelings or his party’s policy that the cuts are too high?”
Councillor S Peaple gave the following reply:
Councillor Greatorex asks the question as to whether I have been involved in national policy discussions; whilst I would like to congratulate Councillor Greatorex on his elevation to a Cabinet Support Role he is perhaps losing perspective if he believes that Mr Miliband rings me personally for advice: the Labour Party has committed to the “spending envelope” but not how that money is apportioned between departments. If Councillor Greatorex wants to know why we disagree with the manner of the cuts being imposed, he needs only to ask his Leader Councillor Danny Cook who was quoted by the Herald as being disgusted at the cuts being made by Councillor Greatorex and his county colleagues, their impact and whose view of the Secretary of State, is highly critical.
Supplementary question:
Do you not feel that this marries up to a letter issued on 25 August 2014 by Hilary Benn MP? Does the Leader of the Opposition agree with the comments made by the Shadow Secretary of State in the letter I referred to where he says it will not change or does his opinion differ from the Shadow Secretary of State.
Councillor S Peaple gave the following reply:
It strikes me that the Councillor has indulged the Council by reading out this letter. We all know that the Labour Party has committed to match the Conservative Party spending pledges and we all know that the impact will not take effect to year two rather than year 1 of Government because as we know a Government will struggle to change much in the first year anyway. Whilst it’s very comfortable for Councillor Greatorex to stand there and say it’s not my fault to target the vulnerable and needy but it’s got to happen and you’ve got to do the same. I personally think that it’s about time that the Members opposite faced up to what they supported.
We have a Conservative controlling group here which is not made up of millionaires as they will tell you. Not all of us started life in a Council flat but many of them will understand what it is like to be in a difficult financial situation at times with different parts of your career and family and everything else and I think it’s getting close to realising that they can’t admit that this is what they voted for. Now I appreciate that Councillor Cook and Councillor Pritchard want to have a chat while I’m speaking and they want to email this over to the Herald telling them what I’ve just said.
From Councillor Greatorex’s point of view what I would suggest is this; I would stop trying to make cheap political points by reading out statements from long letters which as you said have been sent out to Leaders of Councils. I’m not the Leader of the Council; let’s hope I am in the future, so I might be able to help. But let’s be clear I’m not so I haven’t had that letter and if you want to tell me about a letter then by all means send it to me and I will reply to you in detail.
Our position is Mr Mayor that we will do our best to help those who are most vulnerable despite the financial constraints and I fully expect that a Labour Government, whilst we won’t be able to fund as generously as we did before, will attempt to give more funding to those areas that will provide the social need and give less funding to something else which is what was contained in my original answer.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.9
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor T Peaple asked the Portfolio Holder for Community Development and Voluntary Sector, Councillor S Doyle, the following question:-
"Are you aware of the problems concerning many residents of Amington regarding the Amington Rec and if so what possible solutions have you considered?"
Councillor S Doyle gave the following reply:
As the Portfolio holder for Street Wardens I have been aware of the reporting of issues in that area for some time and instructed the Street Wardens to help where possible – Please remember that the Street Warden is not a Police role but Environmental Enforcement and Education and matters around the environment.
Also through Council Officers and through two of the Councillors in Amington, Councillor Thurgood & Councillor Rowe, who have raised the issues as and when events have occurred and been reported by local Residents etc.
Possible solutions considered:
The Council does take its role in the prevention and reduction of ASB very seriously and works extensively with various Partners, such as the Police & voluntary bodies, to tackle the root causes and reduce the levels of ASB not just in Amington but across the town.
I would also add that a certain amount of perspective is required when dealing with such sensitive issues.
There is often no straight forward solution to the issues raised, especially in open areas where different generations of the community have conflicting views.
It is the Council’s view that all open space is available for use by all members of the community and, whilst it would be unreasonable to expect excessive litter, noise or anti-social behaviour after dark, during the summer months it is to be expected that areas such as the Rec are used until late into the evening by the younger members of the community.
Is there anyone in this room who hasn’t spent time in a park as part of their youth on a summer’s evening?
I know I spent many a summer’s evening in the parks as a teenager as it was the only place me and my friends could go that wouldn’t bring us into conflict with Adults.
From the Council’s perspective I can inform you of the measures that have been taken to date and we will look to support in the future as well:
· On top of the regular Patrols by both the Police and Street Wardens and Street Scene additional patrols have been provided and reports closely monitored of either litter or ASB.
·
Currently the gates are left open of an evening,
since 2009, to allow the Police instant access when dealing with
issues raised, this has been done to assist Officers in being able
to respond quickly and effectively and avoid injury to them-selves
when climbing gates.
And more on top of this are delivered every year by TBC and our Partners and we now have some of the lowest ASB levels this town has seen.
However we should never rest on our laurels though and continually seek to address or prevent issues from occurring, I believe as the Portfolio Holder that as part of my role I should actively encourage new ideas, either from the public or also from the employees of the Council.
· This can be seen in the approach taken at Wilnecote Cemetery which was a Resident led initiative.
· The Street Wardens - Mucky Pup Campaign aimed at educating the Public on dog waste and dog handling and reminding them of their duty to the Community to tidy up after their pets
Finally, the area will continue to be visited in the course of normal duties and beats and if any residents who were not present when the Police undertook their contact visits would like to complete a survey and/or meet the local officers, we would be happy to pass on their details.
Supplementary question:
I don’t at this time have a supplementary except to ask given the number of the responses that I have had, would you accept that perhaps more may need to be done regarding the Rec.
Councillor S Doyle gave the following reply:
Thank you Mr Mayor, I am happy to sit down with you anytime you like to discuss the issues that have been raised by the residents, I have never had a problem with that, Like I have said we are not a police force, we can work with the police and highlight to them where we see issues occurring and if you have a large number of residents that have got a particular issue then we can work to look to resolve that. Thank you.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.10
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor J Faulkner will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
"At the Joint Scrutiny (Budgets) Committee held on 28 January 2014, there was projected a deficit of £2,546,000 from a General Fund Net Expenditure in 2017/18 of £9,328,000. What criteria will the Conservative Cabinet use to determine where cuts will be made or additional revenue raised in order to produce a balanced budget by 31 March 2018?"
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
Mr Mayor, members have previously been advised that a number of key pieces of work have been commissioned by the Executive Management Team (Cabinet/CMT) under the umbrella of the Sustainability Strategy.
The strategy incorporates a range of outcomes based work streams designed to provide tangible contributions towards tackling any future deficit over the five year period “sooner rather than later”.
These work streams will focus upon generating “sustainable” outcomes and not simply ‘one off’ efficiencies. Our intention is to use innovation, managed risks and long term efficiencies to help to achieve a balanced budget by working with officers, across boundaries and involving all tiers of the organisation.
Supplementary question:
I am sure that Councillor Cook is aware of the recent report on budget responsibility entitled Crisis and Consolidation in Public Finances that states there will be a 23% cut in public expenditure. Being realistic this is going to affect front line services. We need to be clear on the criteria to be used for who this is going to fall on. Do you agree?
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:
Thank you Mr Mayor This country has problems Mr Mayor, that’s not news. It has large national debt but more importantly in 2010 what was identified as a structural debt, basically, year in year out with taxation revenues to Government the government still managed to spend more money than we’ve made. That becomes structural debt it’s built into your budget. Removing it as been a national concern but the Conservatives campaigned on it in 2010 when they became the head of the coalition. It was honest and up front. Yes pain is going to come; it is its going to come to every Authority in every way. The golf course is the first service that this council as actually ceased to operate as of the 1st October, not many council’s can claim that. What I would remind members of this council; and I’m, happy to provide these figures to any who want it, the balances left at any budget period in May 2004 at the end of a Labour Term, were £503,000 enough money to pay staff for less than 20 days in an emergency. In May 2011 after I had been Leader for nearly 2 years that sat at £5,000,000, I do not need a lecture form opposite about how to manage budgets. Thank you Mr Mayor.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.11
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor J Faulkner will ask the Portfolio Holder for Environment and Waste Management, Councillor M Thurgood, the following question:-
"On 3 April 2014, the Cabinet of Tamworth Borough Council agreed to the proposal to no longer permit the disposal of food waste in the green wheelie bins. The savings projected were:
2014/15 £6,800
2015/16 £179,000
2016/17 £192,000 and similar amounts thereafter.
Will the portfolio holder give me the latest projections of savings from this decision?"
Councillor M Thurgood gave the following reply:
The anticipated savings are still as predicted in the April Cabinet report that you refer to.
This will be continue to be evaluated on a regular basis to ensure the level of savings predicted are being realised, as part of our good management of our waste collection service. So to confirm that is £377,800 across the 3 year budget.
Supplementary question:
I refer Councillor Thurgood to a propaganda piece that was but out by the Conservative party 23rd April 2009, concerning bringing back weekly bin collections which basically was the introduction of putting food waste into the green bins and we’ve just heard that were talking in terms of between £180,000 - £190,000 pa for removing. So over 5 years would the portfolio holder not agree with me it’s a pretty poor decision to spend £900,000 on something which is quite so trivial.
Councillor M Thurgood gave the following reply:
Thank you for your supplementary question. Well whilst I cannot comment about something that I was not involved in, in 2009 I can confirm that we obviously as a council review what we do on an annual basis if not all the time as part of or sustainability strategy and when it became clear through our research and working with residents less than 20% of Tamworth and Lichfield residents were actually putting their food waste in their green bins, we made the decision to remove it. It was a total 1500 tonnes of food waste in comparison to 20,000 tonnes of green waste that was being put into bins on an annual basis. So we made the decision to remove that. Now in total not necessary going into landfill it is actually going into an incinerator so generating 23 mega watts of electricity which is the equivalent of £30,000 worth of power a year, so actually we will take the decision when something’s not being used, like golf courses or anything else, we will close it or we will do whatever we need to do to get the best for the residents of Tamworth and Lichfield. Thank you.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO.12
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor M Clarke will ask the Portfolio Holder for Community and Voluntary Sector, Councillor S Doyle, the following question:-
“May I ask the Portfolio Holder to advise Council of the responses from our many Voluntary Groups who are tenants and hirers of the Carnegie Centre and the Philip Dix Centre, now that they have been advised they will have to move into Marmion House? I appreciate that this was a late question Councillor Doyle”
Councillor S Doyle gave the following reply:
Thank Mr Mayor. Thank Councillor Clarke. As you’ve said this was a late question that I’ve only just received. I was made aware that the groups have been advised that they would be moving buildings but I’ve not aware of any feedback as yet but I’m perfectly willing, as I’ve said to Councillor Tom Peaple, if you prefer either a letter or we can sit down and go through the actual responses I’m open to it. 2:30 on a Friday is usually my free slot for seeing people. Thank you Mr Mayor.
Supplementary question:
Thank you Councillor Doyle. I think you and I can perhaps iron out some of the problems that are arising for some of our voluntary groups.
Councillor S Doyle gave the following reply:
Thank you Councillor Clarke for your understanding.