Agenda item

Questions on Notice

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:

The Chairman advised Members that due to the exceptional circumstances under which everyone found themselves, the Leader had again agreed to allow one supplementary question in respect of each question asked. He would also allow the time spent on questions to be extended as it had been agreed that the Motions on Notice attached to the agenda for this meeting would not be debated.

Question Submitted by Councillor K. Van der Plank

“A number of trees have been cut down, in Alvechurch and around the District, over recent months which is extremely concerning when we are facing a climate emergency and should be protecting trees and planting more, not removing them.

Why have these trees been removed? What checks are in place to ensure that trees are only cut down where absolutely necessary and how is this being monitored and reported? What plans are in place to ensure new trees are planted to replace any that are removed”

Councillor A Kent responded that after checking with the officers they had come back and stated that they were not aware of any of the trees to which Councillor Van der Plank had referred. However, Councillor Kent advised that he believed that Councillor Van der Plank had raised an important point about trees and their impact on the environment and feeling of well-being within Bromsgrove. He therefore hoped that she would be delighted with the proposal by Worcestershire County Council to plant 150,000 trees throughout Worcestershire.

Councillor Kent further commented that, he could not recall whether Councillor Van der Plank had attended the Strategic Planning Steering Group where Members had discussed the new planning consultation paper; but within that was a proposal to ensure that all the streets are lined with trees on new developments.

Councillor Kent apologised for not being able to answer Councillor Van der Plank’s question in more detail but if she were able to evidence the trees concerned he would ask the officers to look into the matter in more detail.

Question submitted by Councillor C Hotham

“Now that the Bird Box is complete, please could the cabinet member responsible inform council of the final build cost? Thank you”

The Leader thanked Councillor Hotham for his questions and confirmed that the total capital spend was £210K in line with the budget, £100k of which had come from Hintons.

Councillor Hotham’s supplementary question was whether, if the Birdbox was seen as a success, the Council would consider it remaining in situ as opposed to the original plan of it being in place for approximately 18 months, until a more permanent use was found for the site.

The Leader responded that due to the current circumstances, all options were being considered before a final decision was made and that those options would come before this Council in due course.

Question Submitted by Councillor J King

Protecting our Green Belt from Government planning reforms

“Are you concerned about the analysis from Lichfields planning consultants which indicates that the number of new homes to be built in Bromsgrove will almost double to 694 a year under the Governments proposed new formula? What will you do to ensure that Bromsgrove’s Green Belt is protected and that new homes are genuinely affordable for local people to rent and buy?”

Councillor A Kent, as Portfolio Holder for Planning and Regulatory Services responded to the question and advised Councillor King that the analysis from Lichfield was simply repeating the Government’s own figures which had already been worked out and presented by this Council’s officers to Members via the recent Strategic Planning Steering Group. Under the reforms the Council would still be required to produce a local plan and it was under this mechanism that it would be able to consider the protection of the green belt and the appropriate levels and types of affordable housing.

Councillor King’s supplementary question was in respect of houses being affordable on new developments and Councillor Kent responded that up to 40% had to be affordable as this figure was included within the Local Plan.

Questions from Councillor R Hunter

Preparing for a second wave of Covid

“How much of the Governments £89,000 ‘Reopening High Streets Safely’ grant allocated to Bromsgrove has been spent and how are we preparing to protect local people and businesses in the event of a second wave?”

The Leader responded to Councillor Hunter’s question, in two parts, in respect of his first question she confirmed that £7,170 had been spent on 19 sanitiser stations and £352.50 on printing, £7,522.50 in total.

The Leader explained that the Government guidance set out four categories of eligible activities, as these were lengthy in description, she was happy to provide details of these outside of the meeting if Members would like to see them.

It was further explained that a whole range of costs were deemed ineligible, including but not limited to; market stalls coverings and / or new gazebos to enable more businesses to trade outdoors; temporary outdoor furniture to enable businesses to trade outdoors; changes to toilets; cleaning regimes, consumables and staff; purchase or installation of seating; loss of car parking revenue; parklets / erection of seating within parking bays and car parks; new cycle lanes / paths; street wardens / town ambassadors / security to support the reopening of the high street; activities / events of town re-launch.

In response to the second question, the Leader advised that preventative work continued to be the key, Worcestershire County Council had the lead responsibility for responding to the pandemic through its Public Health team and it was the County Council that had been given some limited powers to support additional control measures if required. As part of the response, a Local Engagement Board had been created with membership from the six district councils and the county (the Leader sat on this Board on behalf of this Council). One of its roles was to support the delivery of messages from the dedicated communications cell to its communities to help prevent a second wave of the pandemic. Clearly the behaviour of members of the public would be the key determinant in how the disease was propagated in communities and following the right measures around hand-washing, social distancing and limiting contacts would remain the best measures for preventing the spread of the disease.

Apart from communications, the district council had direct input into the Local Outbreak Management Team via its Environmental Health officers in the shared regulatory service, WRS. A group of WRS officers worked as part of this Team, dealing mainly with outbreaks at business premises. This would continue for the foreseeable future and would also play a key part of managing any outbreak and limiting spread. Those officers were used to dealing with similar situations when they dealt with things like food poisoning outbreaks or diseases such as legionella. The contact tracing processes used in such circumstances were equally applicable to Covid-19 outbreaks. Most of the small outbreaks at business premises so far had related to activities regulated by the HSE for health and safety purposes, so the team had worked closely with those colleagues to help the businesses move into safe operations and to adjust processes to reduce the risk of further outbreaks.

As well as this, at the commencement of any outbreak, the Secretary of State had made Environmental Health Officers (district councils) and Trading Standards Officers (county councils) responsible for the enforcement of business closure provisions. WRS created a team from within its Community Environmental Health to deliver such enforcement activities and continued to respond to alleged breaches of Covid-19 controls in shops, pubs and similar venues. The team had provided significant levels of advice and support to businesses during the process of the re-opening of the economy, helping them to interpret the provisions and apply them to their local situations. The demand for advice had now fallen significantly but the service continued to respond to allegations of breaches. This work would continue going forward and the service would look to use legal powers if necessary where persuasion did not lead to changes in business behaviour.

This work would continue to help reduce the risk of a second wave. With the rise in case numbers, the WRS Management team was looking at establishing more regular out of hours working to look at potential non-compliances as they occurred.

However, the Leader advised that in terms of the anticipated second wave it should be noted that all teams were completing a review of their business continuity plans. This was because a second wave was a risk that was anticipated and could be and should be planned for, in order to ensure this Council could support its residents and maintain its services through this difficult and uncertain time. The process of reviewing business continuity plans had, amongst other things, triggered compiling information for all managers about where officers lived in relation to actual or anticipated lockdown areas. In terms of the national Test, Track and Test approach officers across the organisation had been identified and would be trained to assist with this national initiative. As an aside, and in line with Test, Track and Trace, there was a strict approach to entering council buildings so that Test, Track and Trace could be instigated by the council as landlord, if required.

Councillor Hunter’s supplementary question was in respect of any opportunity to make a further claim and that all actions necessary be put in place to safeguard the residents.

The Leader confirmed the claim process and that the Council was working with the relevant partner organisation to ensure the safety of everyone.

Question Submitted by Councillor S Hughes

Putting no limit on our climate ambition

“Can you please clarify that it is not BDC’s target to become carbon neutral by 2050 and that in fact we aim to drastically reduce emissions long before then. The motion this council passed last June means that in Bromsgrove action will not be delayed to 2050 but taken as soon as possible, as is required to save the planet?”

The Leader confirmed that, the Council declared a climate emergency at its meeting on 26th July 2019 and had formally created the Climate Change Working Group (of which Councillor Hughes was a Member) which was working with officers to develop a Climate Change Strategy for the Council to better understand its impact and how to reduce this.

This strategy would inform how the Council’s services could work towards being carbon neutral and officers were currently working with the Climate Change Working Group and Heads of Services to consider realistic timelines, costs, alternatives and the resources required to achieve this

This Council was working hard to becoming carbon neutral as soon as was practicably possible and was already working on initiatives to reduce carbon with projects coming forward for example electric vehicle charging and a district heating network, which had been discussed at both Overview and Scrutiny Board and Cabinet meetings.

The Leader confirmed to Councillor Hughes that she did not think it was necessary to be tied to a deadline and that this Council would work hard to be carbon neutral as soon as practicably possible and support its residents wherever possible to do so.

Question Submitted by Councillor P McDonald

After the success regarding extending the suspension of rent evictions, would the Leader write once again calling upon the Government to support: Landlords, letting agents and charities urging the Government to support private tenants with a £270 million fund to help with rent arrears.

At least 322,000 private renters have fallen behind on payments since the pandemic began, according to a coalition of Shelter, the National Residential Landlords Association, ARLA property mark, Crisis, Citizen Advice and Generation Rent. Without the fund it is feared there will be a devastating homelessness crisis.

The Leader responded that whilst writing to the Government would give a view on this Council’s commitment to supporting tenants and residents across all tenures, as Leader, she considered the Council could best support the families and communities in financial difficulty and crisis supported by its actions. By providing them with supportive financial advice and working with a range of agencies and partners to ensure families received the correct benefits, and advice to minimise debt and reduce arrears throughout would ensure the Council could serve them best.

The Leader confirmed that the Government had advised that renters affected by Covid-19 would continue to be supported over Autumn and Winter through comprehensive measures, which was most welcome. The Government had changed the law to increase notice periods to 6 months, meaning renters who were served with notice could stay in their homes over Winter, with time to find alternative support or accommodation. The only exceptions to this were the most egregious cases including where tenants had demonstrated anti-social behaviour or committed fraud, and the landlord rightly would like to re-let their property to another tenant. The Housing Secretary had also confirmed that with Covid-19 still posing a risk, if an area was in a local lockdown that included a restriction on gathering in homes, evictions would not be enforced by bailiffs.

Clearly any additional national fund would help those in the greatest difficulty but the Council’s work in support was also vitally important.

Councillor McDonald raised a supplementary question in respect of letting agents and writing further to the Government.

Question Submitted by Councillor S Hughes

Can the council leader update on the support the council has given to the Artrix Holding Trust to date and confirm its intention to continue to engage with the Holding Trust to exercise its community leadership role and secure a future sustainable model of delivery for the venue.

The Leader responded that the Artrix Holding Trust was an independent organisation and must make decisions on the future of the Artrix venue unfettered by the Council or other bodies. This Council had worked and continues to work, with the Holding Trust to provide support so that it was able to take decisions independently.

This support had included Council officer time, securing independent industry expertise through the Theatres Trust and providing independent legal advice to the Holding Trust. The Council would continue to engage with and support the Holding Trust so that it could independently secure a sustainable future for the venue.

Councillor Hughes’ asked a supplementary question in respect of what the Council’s response would be should the Holding Trust come to it and ask for support for the Artrix. The Leader responded that this would be a matter for full Council to consider when and if the time came.

Question Submitted by Councillor K Van der Plank

“Can the leader please update the council on the progress that has been made since the Council agreed the actions in the Fly Tipping motion that I submitted in September 2019.”

Councillor Kent responded to this question and provided an update on progress made since the motion, which had been seconded by the Leader and endorsed by all Members in November last year.

The motion had covered a range of issues including developments regarding enforcement, funding and CCTV, publication of prosecutions, education, working with partners and communications.

In respect of how enforcement was carried out across the district, the Council continued to review its arrangements to make best use of existing resources and develop closer partnership working with its neighbouring districts, including working more closely with the Police.

It was looking to develop its CCTV usage and would be starting Covert surveillance in the near future at designated areas. There was some funds in this year’s budget to support higher standards of CCTV camera to support such use. This would be used initially as a trial and to support future bids for funding if it proved effective at areas considered as hot spots.

In respect of publicising formal action and prosecutions, there was currently a case waiting to go to court, but for obvious reasons, there were significant delays in the court system due to Covid-19 at the moment. The Council always publicised convictions as widely as possible so that its communities were aware of the action it was taking and always at the time of any conviction.

The Council was continuing with its awareness and education programme and although the planned project to support recycling across the district had been slightly delayed, it was planned to tie-in the required duty of care elements with the future programme, which was planned to commence in 2021. The Council was also continuing with regular messages via its social media and recycling week in late September was a national campaign which the Council would be supporting and publicising locally. The Council was also looking at how it could get involved with rural schemes to support residents, alongside the local Police and SNT teams.

In addition to the communications already stated, further publicity was planned specifically on fly tipping over the coming months, with simpler access through its website to check waste carriers licences, which would be referenced using the web page, all future publicity on social media and in the media.

Bulky Waste collections were still limited as to what the Council could take, but it was hoping to be able to start a trial in 2021 to consider additional items at a commercial rate to cover the disposal costs. Councillor Kent concluded by confirming that he would continue to keep Members updated as to progress in all of these areas.

Councillor Van der Plank thanked Councillor Kent for his comprehensive response as this was an area where there had been a huge increase over recent months and which needed addressing as a matter of urgency.

Councillor Kent agreed to provide the exact dates in respect of the areas he had covered, outside of the meeting.

Question Submitted by Councillor J King

“We are pleased to hear that subsidy for local bus services is set to increase in Worcestershire this year. Could the Leader please confirm how much additional funding has been allocated for services replacing the 202?”

Councillor S. Webb, as Portfolio Holder for Housing and Communities responded that Worcestershire County Council had allocated an additional £200,000 bus subsidy to the budget for this year. The additional cost of extending the 145 to replace areas affected by the withdrawal of the 202 bus was £29k per annum.

Question Submitted by Councillor S Douglas

“Can the leader confirm that this council will be urging the Artrix Holding Trust when considering future management options, to take note of the demise of the previous operator, that the new lease has sufficient longevity, and ensure that any future operator has a robust and sustainable business plan including the ability to invest in Arts development for the future?”

The Leader reiterated her view that the Artrix Theatre was a valuable and cherished community asset, as was evidenced by the responses when the previous operator went into administration. This Council very much wanted to see a vibrant Artrix Theatre in the future, and not be in the same position as it found itself now in a year or 18 months time. The Council would therefore be supporting the Holding Trust to ensure that any future operator had a robust and sustainable business plan and the ability to invest in Arts in the district in the future.

Question Submitted by Councillor P McDonald

“I understand that it might be possible for the Rubery Festival to apply for some support with the running costs of the event. Can the Leader confirm the best route for the organisers to take to achieve this?”

The Leader confirm that it would be possible for the Rubery Festival to apply for funding. The Arts Development Service would be ideally suited to support the development of Rubery Festival in the summer of 2021.

The Leader understood that the Arts Development Service already had a long standing relationship with Rubery Festival and its Chairman. The work of the festival, outside of the main Rubery Festival event, had also been integrated into other Council events including the Rubery and Bromsgrove Christmas Lights Switch On events. The Rubery Festival’s initial success was achieved through the work of the Arts Development Service working with the Chairman and his team. The Leader would therefore ask a member of the Arts Development team to make contact with the Rubery Festival Chairman in order to discuss this matter further.

Question Submitted by Councillor P McDonald

“Would the Leader please request the Holding Trust to keep the Council updated of events.”

The Leader advised that, as per her previous replies regarding the Artrix Holding Trust, the Council was supporting the Holding Trust to review its options for the future of the Artrix Venue, and the Council would ask and expect to be kept updated on progress.

Supporting documents:

20200916 Member Questions for Council, item 22\2020 PDF 203 KB