To answer questions received under Council Procedure Rule 6.2.
NB In accordance with the provisions of Council Procedure Rule 6.2.9 there will be a maximum of 30 minutes allowed for questions and answers. Any question not answered within the 30 minute time limit will receive a written reply within 5 working days.
Minutes:
The following questions were asked under Council Procedure Rule 6.2.2:-
(a) Councillor Peter Scott asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services)
"In Newport and other areas within the borough we are seeing more cars needing to find spaces in our car parks particularly shoppers and those who work in our towns. We are not getting any extra car parks or spaces to cope with them so is it not now time for Telford and Wrekin Council to seriously consider parking charges on all council car parks? If not, what are your proposed solutions going forward?"
Councillor Lee Carter responded that work was currently being undertaken with Newport Town Council to manage plans for long and short stay parking within the thriving centres across the borough. He gave a cast iron pledge that free parking would remain and that sustainable options to visit town centres were being explored. The Council had invested in new bus routes for residents to travel to employment, leisure facilities and high streets and cycling and walking routes were available. A parking plan containing potential improvements to stay restrictions and real time information on spaces was being investigated but this did require funding. Once funding had been identified, local stakeholders would be consulted.
Councillor Peter Scott asked a supplementary question:
“Would the Council consider using parking permits for residents in areas ie around schools?”
Councillor Lee Carter responded that he was willing to consider any proposals put forward and would continue to engage with all stakeholders.
(b) Councillor Peter Scott asked the following question of Councillor Richard Overton, Cabinet Member: Homes & Enforcement
"In Newport and across the borough there is an increase in irresponsible dog owners who let their dogs defecate on public roads and parks and do not pick it up. I appreciate that there is an Enforcement Team that can deal with reported cases and that free dog poo bags are available but what else can the council do to crack down on this increase in this anti-social behaviour?"
Councillor Richard Overton responded that the Council were on the side of residents that that there was a Public Spaces Protection Order (PSPO) in place across the borough and penalties were imposed on dog fouling or dogs allowed to enter gated children’s play areas with offenders being held to account. Community Action Teams (CATs) operated in partnership across the borough and would be delivering targeted campaigns with a data and intelligence led approach. Dog fouling would not be tolerated.
Councillor Peter Scott asked a supplementary question:
“In relation to the Public Spaces Protection Order could missing signage be installed as residents may not be aware of the order being in place.
Councillor Richard Overton responded that Councillors could use their Pride Fund as a partnership approach for additional signage and asked Councillor Scott to provide details of locations where he felt signage was required.
(c) Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Nathan England, Cabinet Member: Finance, Customer Services & Governance
"What is the total and full cost of providing, purchasing and installing all equipment and furniture for the new council chamber at Southwater One (SW1) to include officer time and training etc?"
Councillor Nathan England responded that during the reconfiguration of the property estate some 29 buildings had been disposed of including the former Wellington Civic Centre and Addenbrooke House which provided savings of £1m. The cost of the one-off investment was £250,290 which would be repaid from the savings benefit and income generation from renting the facility to organisations for events. Feedback from partners and visitors was favourable and the Theatre was no longer impacted with a £5,000 loss per meeting booking.
(d) Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Paul Watling, Cabinet Member: Adult Social Care & Health Systems
"Whilst welcoming the speedy and commendable apology by the Director of Social Care following a recent investigation by the local Government Ombudsman into failings surrounding the care provision for a member of our community, will the Cabinet Member tell me what steps have been taken to ensure that such an instance will not occur again and advise Full Council of the number of any other similar cases in our community currently in progress?"
Councillor Paul Watling responded with appreciation of the hard work of the START Team and the Director of Adult Social Care who answered the complaint with speed. It was difficult to comment on induvial cases in the public arena but when member enquiries were received, they would be responded to. In relation to Ombudsman Cases, there were currently no new adult social care investigations with one in the final stages of completion. A Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) complaint provided a full and complete response and any concerns raised were investigated. The Council received very few LGSCO complaints compared to other Local Authorities and of those received there were minimal investigations.
Councillor Andrew Eade asked a supplementary question:
“Would Councillor Watling extend his personal apology on behalf of the Council and look at the compensation offered?”
Councillor Paul Watling responded that the LGSCO had made its decision and the Director of Social Care had made an apology and the Council would learn from the investigation and any areas they could.
(e) Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services)
"Will the council leader please inform all opposition members as to why, despite following my motion to Full Council four weeks ago and becoming council policy, a full briefing has still not been made available on the progress or otherwise of Child Sexual Exploitation recommendations made by T&W Council, The Police, or NHS?"
Councillor Lee Carter responded on behalf of the Leader that a briefing would take place on 22 March 2024.
Councillor Andrew Eade asked a supplementary question:
“Would Councillor Carter confirm that a private briefing for opposition members and the Liberal Democrats and Independent Members without members of the controlling group take place?”
Councillor Lee Carter responded that a briefing would take place on 22 March 2024 and that it had taken a little while to get all four key agencies together. This was the second briefing as a briefing had taken place prior to Christmas.
(f) Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services)
"Can the Cabinet Member for Highways explain to me why after nearly 12 months since the TRO was obtained and eight months after the scheme was designed, ‘costed,’ and approved, that young children attending Church Aston Infants School and other pedestrians are still having to run the gauntlet of traffic on a narrow unlit carriageway during dark mornings and evenings?"
Councillor Lee Carter responded that the works were programmed for March 2024 and further details would be issued by the relevant team shortly.
Councillor Andrew Eade asked a supplementary question:
“Why has it taken so long to put a safety scheme for young children in place?”
Councillor Lee Carter responded that the scheme was a priority and would be delivered in March. It had taken a while to process, review and develop a workable option and further delay had been added following objections and changes.
(g) Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services)
"Following a serious flooding event emanating from a field behind The Dale at Church Aston three years ago, which has continued to flood properties at The Close and along Wallshead Way on several occasions since, can the Cabinet Member advise me when and what steps are being taken to solve the problem?"
Councillor Lee Carter responded that there had been significant wet weather since September with 10 storms. This had caused a borough wide impact on residential and business properties. The Council was doing everything it could to support people affected by the flooding, but this had been made more difficult with the changes in eligibility. This specific matter was a private land drain issue and the landowner was aware of the responsibility and the Council would continue to liaise to ensure the appropriate steps were taken.
Councillor Andrew Eade asked a supplementary question:
“Would Councillor Carter be willing to meet local residents to look at the video and photo evidence and assure residents what measures were in place to solve the problem and look at the issues first hand.
Councillor Lee Carter responded that the issue had been established but he was willing to look at other evidence put forward. The Team would be writing to residents in relation to the action that would be undertaken to resolve the issues going forward.
(h) Councillor Andrew Eade asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services)
"Due to the serious risk of flooding at Millwood Mere on the border of Church Aston, will the Cabinet Member update me on the current position with Bloor Homes, the Environment Agency, Drainage officers, and Planning Enforcement to resolve this issue and allay the genuine fears of my Ward Members?"
Councillor Lee Carter responded that Bloor Homes had accepted responsibility for the issues and had agreed a number of actions and changes and would look to decide if any revisions were required. He would hold the developer to account and ensure that the appropriate measures were in place to manage the site. He welcomed any evidence to the contrary and would keep the local community updated along with the Ward Member.
Councillor Andrew Eade asked a supplementary question:
“Would Councillor Carter commit to asking his officers to attend a public meeting with residents to explain what the Council was doing and make them aware of any problems and set out the way forward?”
Councillor Lee Carter responded that he would liaise with the Ward Member, but that a far quicker way of raising issues was to use the member enquiry process or to email Cabinet members in order to get the answers as quickly as possible.
(i) Councillor Nigel Dugmore asked the following question of Councillor Lee Carter, Cabinet Member: Place (The Economy & Neighbourhood Services) the following question:
"How many Pride in your High Street grants have been issued to high Street businesses since the scheme started and what percentage are/were still in business 12 months after receiving the grant?
Councillor Lee Carter responded that the scheme had been responsible for the local high streets bucking the trend being 4.4% below the national average of 13.8% bringing new life into the premises, expanding, setting up or diversifying. Out of the 330 grants awarded, specifically 62 were start up grants with 61 still trading. Other grants varied with 249 of the 268 grants awarded still continuing to trade.
Councillor Nigel Dugmore asked a supplementary question:
“What criteria allowed businesses to have more than one grant?”
Councillor Lee Carter responded that there were various criteria which allowed businesses to access a range of grants from start-up, renovation of shop fronts, diversification of business and becoming eco-friendly. This continued to be a successful scheme which had generated 365 jobs and £2.3m in private sector income. Qualification for grants followed a rigorous process and not everyone had been successful with over 100 grant applications rejected.