Issue - items at meetings - Questions on Notice

Issue - meetings

Questions on Notice

Meeting: 22/11/2017 - Council (Item 69)

Questions on Notice (to be circulated at the meeting if any)

 

To deal with any questions on notice from Members of the Council, in the order in which they have been received.

 

A period of up to 15 minutes is allocated for the asking and answering of questions.  This may be extended at the discretion of the Chairman with the agreement of the majority of those present.

 

Minutes:

Questions submitted by Councillor C. J. Bloore

 

Could the leader of the Council tell us when did he find out the County Council wanted to decrease the District Councils share of income from the proposed Business rates pilot scheme? Could he tell me who took the decision to reject the proposal and did he consult the Deputy Leader and if so did she support the reduction or not?”

 

The Leader responded that the Section 151 Officer emailed her recommendation to all Group Leaders on 20th October 2017.  This detailed the potential financial gain for the Council of a 50:49:1 split in favour of the district.  On the afternoon of Monday 23rd October she was advised that the County had undertaken some further detailed work on the impact of the initial business rate split proposal and that County felt the proposed allocation was not acceptable and requested a 40:59:1 in favour of the County Council.  The Section 151 Officer advised that this would not be financially beneficial to the District.

 

The original terms were agreed at the Worcestershire Leaders’ Board and the leader had advised the Chief Executive and the Section 151 Officer to enquire if other Leaders were of the same mind to reject the proposal.  The response was unanimous to reject this and the County Council had been advised accordingly.  No other consultation took place and the bid was submitted on the original terms.

 

Question submitted by Councillor S. R. Colella

 

“Why has the Leader committed this Council to taking on additional housing from Birmingham City Council and on what authority?”

 

The Leader responded that he had not done this.  Authority was given in the Bromsgrove District Plan which contained the following policy with regards to the Green Belt and the needs of the conurbation, not Birmingham City.

 

BDP4.2

 

A Local Plan Review including a full Review of the Green Belt will be undertaken in accordance with BDP 3 in advance of 2023 to identify:

 

c) Land to help deliver the objectively assessed housing requirements of the West Midlands conurbation within the current plan period i.e. up to 2030.

 

This policy had been consulted on widely through the plan process and also discussed at length as part of the examination in public.  Without such a policy it would have been highly likely the Bromsgrove District Plan would not have met the duty to co-operate or have been found sound by the inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State.  In approving the Plan at its various stages of production, and finally adopting the Plan in January of this year, the authority for this policy was given by the Council as a whole.

 

Councillor Colella responded that he did not believe that if other Members had been aware that this was within the Plan that it would have been approved and that this should have been made clear at the January meeting of the Council when it was considered.  He suggested that at no point had it been  ...  view the full minutes text for item 69