(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, Margaret Clarke of Tamworth will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“At the recent Conversation Staffordshire meeting in Tamworth, representatives of the governing bodies of Burton Foundation Trust, South Staffs and Seisdon Peninsula CCG, and Staffordshire County Council were soundly informed by Tamworth residents and senior nursing staff, that Patient Choice does not exist in Tamworth as our GP Surgeries do not refer patients to the Sir Robert Peel Hospital. For their part these representatives quickly agreed to inform all GPs to include our hospital in all future Patient Choice situations.
Within your remit as a Local Authority, what are Tamworth’s Borough Councillors and Council Officers willing and able to do to assist in promoting the expanded use of our hospital, please?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
This is actually quite complex. I think the first thing to reflect on is that the NHS Choice agenda relates to a large extent on which Trust patients choose to be referred to. The provider trust will then offer an appointment at an appropriate venue depending on the service the patient is being referred into.
For this reason patients in Tamworth will be referred to either Burton or Heft. The other reason is that often the community hospitals will not have access to the full suite of diagnostic machinery and equipment that might be expected from a DGH, and therefore the community hospitals are often used for follow-up appointments following diagnostics undertaken elsewhere.
I don’t think there is any distortion relating to use of the hospitals. All the information and intelligence suggests that we have the wrong services in those hospitals, which mean that patients have to go elsewhere- at least initially. The plan is to review how we use the hospitals and what services we have in them, the CCG, GP’s and Trust are working together to develop a credible plan.
Personally I think the NHS as a whole needs to use its buildings better. But evidence and need must support this long term.
Margaret Clarke asked the following supplementary question:-
“This Council has adopted a strong Safeguarding Policy to protect Vulnerable People. At the present time all of Tamworth residents are vulnerable; no 24-hour treatment available; no easy public transport to our hospital; not enough staffed services at our hospital.
It takes the same number of doctors to treat a patient: if you reduce the one, the other increases.
When asked by residents what further services and facilities are ready and available at the Sir Robert Peel Hospital, the Matron Mr Philip Hards gave an enormous list of what our hospital could do for Tamworth residents, given the staff to man all the available services.
Can we afford to look this ‘Gift Horse’ in the Mouth?
Will this Council communicate to the Foundation Trust, the CCG and our County Council the need for these services by all Tamworth residents, and strive to persuade them to effect provision of the manpower sorely needed, please?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
As I have of course confessed in this Council Chamber many times before I am not actually an expert on the NHS or Trust or CCG’s. I know quite a lot of things on public services but the NHS has never been one of my expertise. I would be happy to meet with Margaret at a time and place of our mutual choosing to discuss this through.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 1
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor S Peaple will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“Following his references to Disabled Facilities Grants at the Budget Seminar, would the Leader confirm that Tamworth Borough Council has accepted Staffordshire County Council’s scheme to top slice the grant by 15%?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Stop, pause and remove all foul languages from what I am about to say. A simple answer Councillor Peaple no we have not!
Councillor S Peaple asked the following supplementary question:-
“Can you tell me whether the Leader of Cannock Chase Council is incorrect in claiming to be the only Council that has not accepted the scheme?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
I can confirm that practically every District Council is not too happy with the scheme and I can also confirm that the Chief Executive of this Council has been having conversations with the Department of Communities and Local Government on that matter who were quite surprised to hear about the top slicings of the DFG’s. The matter is not finished yet.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 2
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor T Madge will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“The CCG have issued a 12-month contract termination notice to Burton Hospitals Foundation Trust over the future of services at the Sir Robert Peel Hospital. I fear Tamworth is in danger of losing not only more services but quite possibly the hospital itself. I recently emailed every councillor asking that we all come together as one and inform the CCG we strongly oppose this. To date I have had just three responses. I would be interested to hear your thoughts as leader of the Council on the potential threat to our local hospital?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
Firstly, as I have been away for the past week in Barcelona can I thank Councillor Pritchard for helping research the answers I have tonight.
I have been a Councillor for many years and over those many years I have heard people saying the Sir Robert Peel hospital may close. All were proved wrong and the hospital is still here.
The NHS is going through huge changes and reforms aimed at improving patient care. The Sustainability & Transformation Programme or STP represents a fundamental review of everything that the NHS does on an area by area basis. The policy of reviewing ACUTE services with a view to transferring resources to COMMUNITY based care.
In short the focus is getting the hospital to the patients, not the patients to the hospital.
Which is something I assume everyone would support?
What we are seeing here is the CCG being open and transparent about their intentions to review the services of a local provider based on data/evidence; professional opinion, future policy and inevitably, financial sustainability.
The proposals contained in the draft STP submitted in October to the NHS will form the basis of the programme which will be released this week.
These will be converted into an Action Plan supported by a robust Communications and Consultation Plan.
So for now, we know that changes to how NHS services are provided and sustained are inevitable; what we don’t know are any of the details of what those changes are, who they affect or when.
Any changes will be subject to full scrutiny and public input.
However before people again say the hospital is closing, let us wait for the details to be released because we may find that the services to local residents improve and, as often been the case, our hospital remains open.
We all support the Sir Robert peel hospital and want to see it offer the best services to local residents and the hospital used to its fullest capacity.
In short, let’s fully see what the intentions and targeted outcomes will be.
Councillor T Madge asked the following supplementary question:-
“I noticed that long list you said that actually financial is at the top of that list and patient care is unfortunately well down that list. All I am asking is that you help support any moves to close this hospital?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
I have been in public service four terms so I have been around a while. One thing I know is writing constant letters to the Herald and hurling abuse at people does not get the answers you want. Myself and Councillor Doyle approached this from a different angle. We are actually going to meet all of the relevant people over the coming month to discuss what is happening in a calm, polite and private manner then I will report back to this Council what exactly is happening. I will give Councillor Doyle a lot of credit as he has been all over this agenda. He has been doing it in a way where we can approach people.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 3
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor T Madge will ask the Portfolio Holder for Housing Services, Councillor M Thurgood, the following question:-
“The housing bond scheme is not working with landlords reluctant to take part. What alternative can you offer the people who would have benefited from the housing bond scheme?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply as Councillor M Thurgood was not at the meeting:-
With high demand for private rented accommodation in Tamworth it is the case that households reliant on housing benefit are finding it increasingly difficult to access this accommodation. Landlords, able to pick and choose tenants favour those who are not reliant on housing benefits.
The Council is working hard to work positively with local landlords through our landlords forum, challenging negative assumptions often made regarding those claiming benefits. In addition the Council’s housing benefits team ensure that benefits are paid quickly and efficiently.
The Council has also taken on management of a number of Private Sector Properties through its Private Sector Leasing scheme. These properties are managed on the behalf of landlords and are used as temporary accommodation for homeless households.
In addition the Council is increasing the supply of new rented housing through its acquisitions programme and new affordable housing building programme.
We are currently reviewing the range of tools used to reduce homelessness, including the bond scheme and will be considering all options to ensure these have the greatest effectiveness in supporting households to meet their housing needs.
Many Members have come across the difficulty in regards the Bond Scheme that is why Councillor Thurgood is making it an important part of the review.
Councillor T Madge asked the following supplementary question:-
“It is interesting to hear that we are going to get improvement. The main things are what short term plans do we have in place to house people that are homeless?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
There is one fundamentally reality that this Council does not have the money to build another 3,000 houses and it doesn’t have the land. What we do have is the opportunity of land through private developers to ensure the houses are built and to push as hard as we can to ensure that they are affordable and private rented units on there. However I know that UKIP has opposed every single planning application in Tamworth from what I can see so why do they sit here and bleat about homelessness. Maybe they should realise the solution is to build houses.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 4
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor R Bilcliff will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“Can the Leader please inform Council what the controlling groups stance is regarding North Warwickshire’s proposed plan to allow a development of some 1,300 houses to be built directly upon our border at Robey’s Lane, making a total of some 2,500 NEW houses in that area?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
I would like to quote North Warwickshire Borough Council Leader, Councillor David Humphreys. He made these comments after the council recently lost an appeal where they had rejected developments on Tamworth's borders near Dordon.
“It has been a long standing aim in North Warwickshire to avoid us appearing to merge into the larger urban area of Tamworth. We’ve had planning policies on this since at least 1989 and have always been supported by local people."
So you can see that they don't support building to our borders.
This position was reaffirmed to myself and the deputy leader, Cllr Robert Pritchard, when we met the council’s chief executive earlier this year.
In terms of our own position as Cllr Stephen Doyle said in a letter delivered to residents in Stonydelph this weekend. We are very concerned by this proposal and we have a long record of opposing development on our borders that offers no infrastructure benefit to Tamworth.
I can't see our position changing on this specific proposal either. We will oppose any development that is bad for Tamworth or brings the town no benefits.
It is worth noting that we must also consider another possibility. What if a planning application is submitted In North Warwickshire and somehow it actually offers infrastructure benefits / relief to Tamworth. It is possible, unlikely, but possible. Then we all may view it differently. But at present I believe as an Authority we are opposed.
I recall speaking with a previous Leader of NWBC, he stated the objective they would like to see with the 500 units built for Tamworth is a few placed on the border of several villages in NW, thus not changing the character of NW as a rural district. This I always agreed with.
Councillor R Bilcliff asked the following supplementary question:-
“Potentially this development if it goes ahead, will add a further 2,000 plus vehicles to the 1,800 plus already envisaged from the Golf course development? Can the Leader please confirm that no agreement will be made by TBC to allow North Warwickshire any access to the internal roads within the Golf course development?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
I could say that it is a matter for the planning committee as a regulatory body rather than myself. However as it is Christmas I will do my very best to answer it. I share Councillor Bilcliff’s concerns same as with Brown’s Lane which was a dump and run of 165 houses on a road off Tamworth with no benefit to Tamworth hence I in front of Lichfield District Council’s planning committee myself and opposed it. Planning must come with some benefits to this Borough. If we are talking about Robey’s Lane possibly the easiest way to access it should be through the new estate on the golf course. But for some unknown reason that I can’t quite remember maybe Councillor Claymore can remind me that the Council still owns I metre around the golf course and can control those roads. I wonder how that was allowed to happen.
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL NO. 5
Under Procedure Rule No 11, Councillor R Bilcliff will ask the Leader of the Council, Councillor D Cook, the following question:-
“Can the leader inform the council when the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) will be placed before council for adoption?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
On the 29th September Cabinet gave approval for the CIL charging schedule to be submitted for an independent examination. In preparing the documents for submission officers have identified some areas where some further work is required.
Depending on the outcome of this work this may need a further round of consultation and consideration by Cabinet. If this is the case we expect to be in a position to adopt CIL in Autumn 2017.
If no further consultation is required we expect to adopt in summer 2017.
It should be noted that there are suggestions that the Government may be looking to change the CIL regime. Officers expect an announcement in the New Year and depending on this announcement it may delay the submission and subsequent examination and adoption.
Councillor R Bilcliff asked the following supplementary question:-
“Newark & Sherwood council was the first council to adopt the CIL regulation way back in December 2011. Can the Leader explain why it has taken Tamworth council so long to adopt the CIL regulation, which was made law on 6th April 2010?”
Councillor D Cook gave the following reply:-
I’m not sure I can fully answer that question to be honest. The Leader of the Council in the main is there to connect the dots. It’s overview, it’s putting the jigsaw together. Next to me is sat the expert. However I would guess why they have taken so long is that we want to get it right. It’s a complicated minefield and we really do want to get it right. There were real concerns with the Anker Valley development. If I remember rightly if you charge CIL on Anker Valley the infrastructure needs would put over £30,000 on the cost of each house to purchase it. It is a complicated minefield. What I would say is if Councillor Bilcliff does have those concerns then please speak to Councillor Claymore as he really is the expert.