(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, Alice Couchman will ask the Portfolio Holder for Operations and Assets, Councillor R Pritchard, the following question:-
“How much money had the Council saved by removing staff from the public toilets in the Castle Grounds?”
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:-
Thank you for your question, I do not have the information to hand thus a written response will be supplied.
Supplementary Question:-
“Given that the toilets in the Castle Grounds are now closed due to vandalism can you say that this cost of unstaffed toilets was worth the saving?”
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:-
I cannot agree this could have happened with staff in place.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 1
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor M Couchman will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“As you are aware a considerable number of healthy mature trees have been cut down in Hayle and Medway. Can you tell me what environmental works are to be undertaken to improve the eyesore that residents have to endure?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Councillor Couchman you will already know that the Head of Landlord Services along with Senior Managers from Street Scene met with yourself on the 6th February to discuss and agree a series of actions in relation to Belgrave.
Actions included, which are now completed included:-
In addition as you are aware the planned/preventative tree maintenance programme for 2014/15 has already been communicated and completed. For Belgrave this included the works identified above.
Supplementary Question:-
“I have been told by officers that there is no budget for any environmental works, would you not agree that there should have been a plan and this is just not good enough for the residents?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Over the last few years the Council has seen a marked increase in tree related requests from residents predominately within HRA estates throughout the Borough.
Many of these estates were built between the mid 1970’s through to the mid 1980’s with the associated landscaping undertaken following construction work. Unfortunately this included dense tree planting in many cases, inappropriate tree species such as Oak, Ash, Plane, Lime, Sycamore, Alder etc which now almost 40 years on are resulting in issues for both Council tenants and property owners.
Following felling, tree stumps remain which is not unusual and in this area has not posed any health and safety issues. In some areas the stumps will be ground out to prevent trip hazards but only where this is assessed as necessary.
Officers are currently reviewing, under the HRA planned environmental works, whether any additional landscaping is required. This will be discussed in consultation with the residents if applicable and approved through the existing approvals process
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 2
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor M Clarke will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“Why did The Leader of our Council consider it necessary to abolish the Commissioning Board?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Simple answer is we haven’t, we have evolved it
Tamworth Borough Council has been the recognised lead authority on the subject of “commissioning” for some years.
Following a successful venture into Voluntary & Community Sector commissioning, Cabinet approved the further evolution of commissioning in June 2012 when the board was re-established as a Public Sector Commissioning Board thereby broadening the remit to include public sector providers in the market.
On 23rd October, 2013 Cabinet approved the Terms of Reference for the Public Sector Commissioning Board and the first Public Sector Commissioning Framework.
More recently, following the adoption of Locality Based Commissioning as a local early intervention/prevention model by all strategic commissioning bodies and all. 8 districts in Staffordshire, Cabinet approved Terms of Reference for a Commissioning Hub within the Tamworth Strategic Partnership and a revised commissioning framework giving the ‘partnership’ greater influence over the aligned funding.
That same report of 11th December, 2014 acknowledged the role of the VCS commissioning board and recognised the need for a broader, more collaborative approach to utilising funding (£500,000+).
Consequently, Cabinet agreed to disestablish the VCS Board and that it be superseded by the Commissioning Hub. The Hub operates to the standards set by the National Commissioning Academy.
Supplementary Question:-
“You did use the word abolish. The Regional Commissioning Board was here in Tamworth. The original Commissioning Board was a cross-party committee comprising members, staff and service providers who discussed and agreed funding. Why did the Leader believe it acceptable to leave his 25 colleagues and others outside the commissioning process, with decisions now in the hands of just the five one-party cabinet members and some new external Hub?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
All I can say is that it has evolved! It is a model of excellent cross partnership working. The Chief Executive has done wonderful work. I am the Chair of the Tamworth Strategic Partnership and we can meet and you can discuss further representation.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 3
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor P Standen will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“Does the Leader of the Council agree with the comments made by Brandon Lewis MP when a Local Government Minister that Public toilets are an important local service?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Yes
Supplementary Question:-
“I’m glad that the Leader agrees that the public need public toilets. Does the Leader of the Council also agree with Brandon Lewis’ criticism of Councils closing down public toilets that they are taking the lazy option and should make savings elsewhere in the Councils budget?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
He was elected in 2004 and completed nearly 11 years. If Brandon Lewis wants to contact us to tell us how to set the budgets he is more than welcome.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 4
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor G Hirons will ask the Portfolio Holder for Operations and Assets, Councillor R Pritchard, the following question:-
“Seeing as the Cultural Quarter work is not due to start until January 2016, why have the Aldergate public toilets already been closed?”
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:-
The Council set in the 2014/2015 budget a reduction of the operating expenditure of the public conveniences; this was driven in part by the redevelopment programme of the Assembly Rooms area, in part because we have duplicate provision adjacent to each other in the Phil Dix Centre/Aldergate facilities and the huge variation in use of the public toilets. The main driver was high operating costs for two sites.
A major saving in the operating budget has been the removal of the attendants based at the Castle Grounds and this required consultation and other staff legal and engagement process to be undertaken. This process was started when the commencement date for the Assembly Rooms project was still an estimate. However the staff consultation was not a process you would want to stop and start at will. Its also worth noting that the changes in the toilet operating model has contributed £180,000 towards eliminating the long-term deficit in the council’s budgets and the project is small part of the long term sustainability strategy.
Supplementary Question:-
“Would it not have been a far better idea to keep the Aldergate toilets open until the Cultural Quarter development was up and running and hence be able to provide alternative facilities? Or are public toilets not part of the plan for the Cultural Quarter?”
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:-
There is alternative provision 8 feet away with longer opening hours.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 5
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor G Hirons will ask the Portfolio Holder for Operations and Assets, Councillor R Pritchard, the following question:-
“Do you consider the closing of public toilets to be a loss of vital public services?”
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:-
No, especially when there is alternate provision is feet away in a location with increased opening hours.
Supplementary Question:-
“In the cabinet papers you talked about people being able to use other facilities, such as the Phillip Dix Centre and various businesses around the town. Obviously, The Phillip Dix Centre is in the council’s control, but did you
actually do the work to enrol the various businesses to allow people to use their facilities? In fact the café in the Castle Grounds does not even have facilities to offer its own customers?”
Councillor R Pritchard gave the following reply:-
Several people were spoken to. There is a need to publicise the fact that the toilets in the Castle Grounds are not closed but that the operating hours have changed and that there are alternatives nearby too.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 6
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor S Peaple will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“As the Leader of the Council has chosen to delay the first meeting of the new council for longer than usual after the elections, would he agree now to the scheduling of a meeting of group leaders for the latter end of the week after the election?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Absolutely, will Tuesday 18:00 12th May do?
Supplementary Question:-
“That will do absolutely fine. Does the Leader agree with me that this is a good example of how we adopt a grown up approach to politics in Tamworth?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
I think that you have just answered your own question Councillor Peaple.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 7
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor S Peaple will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“If the Council were successful in obtaining Outline Planning Permission for the proposed development of approximately 1000 houses on the old Golf Course site in Amington before the council elections, does the Leader of the Council believe he has the necessary authority to make a sale of the land to a third party without a further Cabinet meeting prior to May 8th?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Planning permission and the sale of the land at the former golf course to a third party are two separate and distinct matters. They will not happen conterminously. As you are aware the Planning Application for the land will be submitted to the Planning Committee and will be dealt with in accordance with planning regulations and rules.
The sale of the land and process to be adopted in this regard has already been through the decision making process. There have been no fewer than seven reports to Cabinet dealing with the now former golf course site:-
26/03/13, 30/05/13, 24/10/13, 23/01/14, 20/02/14, 03/04/14 and 27/11/14.
On 27 November 2014 Cabinet approved the following in relation to the sale of the land at the former golf course
1. The use of the Home & Communities Agency’s framework agreement (subject to mini competition) to appoint specialist sales and marketing agents to act on the Council’s behalf.
2. The draft heads of terms attached at appendix one, including the land to be retained within the Council’s ownership (plan identified in appendix two)
3. The draft terms that will become part of the section 106 Agreement attached at Appendix three, noting that the conditions of sale require the purchaser to sign a s106 Agreement based on these terms and finalised through the planning application process.
4. Delegated authority to the Chief Executive, Directors of Assets & Environment/Communities, Planning & Partnerships and Solicitor to the Council in consultation with the Leader and Portfolio Holder to approve all final sale documentation.
5. Delegated authority to the Chief Executive, Directors of Assets & Environment/Communities, Planning & Partnerships/Finance and Solicitor to the Council in consultation with the Leader and Portfolio Holder to accept the most financially advantageous offer for the asset.
6. The capital receipt be allocated to Capital receipts and held for either future regeneration or invest to save projects, as set out in the Cabinet report 20 February 2014.
Accordingly the necessary authority is in place to conclude a sale to a third party without any further Cabinet meeting.”
Supplementary Question:-
“I’m delighted that the Leader has confirmed the position. Can I ask Councillor Cook were he not to be in possession of a majority of seats after 8th May would he consider that in such circumstances that he has necessary authority?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Would I sign a document after the election if I did not have the majority. No I don’t think I could.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 8
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor T Peaple will ask the Portfolio Holder for Communities and Public Health, Councillor D S Doyle, the following question:-
“Would Councillor Doyle join me in congratulating the local police on the thoughtful and sensitive way in which they dealt with incidents relating to a party at the band room in Amington on Saturday evening (7Th March) once they were made aware of it?”
Councillor S Doyle gave the following reply:-
Thank you for the most wily and correct question of the night, if you are happy with the response from the Police then so am I.
Supplementary Question:-
“Do you agree that better back room support to the police is required as they were not told of the incident for three hours? In which case do you agree with me that there should be a better way forward?”
Councillor S Doyle gave the following reply:-
I cannot comment on an issue concerning police operations.