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 W L Tomlinson asked the following question on behalf of Councillor T Janke of Councillor, to the Cabinet Member: Cabinet Member: Highways, Housing & Enforcement
“As stated under The Civil Enforcement of Parking Conventions, a scheme Telford & Wrekin Council adopted in 2022, the council appears to have enforcement powers to address traffic obstructions and pavement parking under sections 62 and 92. Can the cabinet member responsible for enforcement clarify if the council does indeed have such enforcement powers and will neighbourhood enforcement officers take action against offenders, particularly in well-known hotspots such as those found in my ward of Newport South?”
Councillor R Overton responded that the Council had a range of enforcement powers for both residents and businesses. In relation to double yellow lines, Neighbourhood Enforcement Officers worked hard to ensure that restrictions were adhered to and penalties issued. The Council had worked successfully in partnership with the Town and Parish Councils but recently Newport Town Council had discontinued its enforcement package and this could have contributed to the issues.
b) Councillor A Eade asked the following question to the Leader
“Following on from questions I raised at the Full Council Meeting of Thursday 29th of February to the then Cabinet Member for Economy and Neighbourhood Services (now the Leader of the Council) concerning severe flooding at Church Aston, would Councillor Carter give an update on the outcome of promises he made to in response to my questions?”
The Leader responded that since the previous question had been raised, he had worked with the landowner’s representatives to push for a solution at the earliest opportunity. Regular contact had taken place and this had resulted in assurances being given that work would start in April. The Leader set out that despite this, it was clear that the landowners were not acting at the required pace. A letter before action was sent in July with a view to taking enforcement action under powers from the Land Drainage Act if a robust and timely plan was not implemented. The landowner had responded setting out a number of actions and timescales. The Leader had been personally tracking these actions in order to achieve a satisfactory outcome. The landowner had set out an intention to complete the improvement works in November, although there had been a slight delay due to the harvest in October, and the Council would continue to ensure the work was undertaken or would take the most robust legal approach that it could within the powers it had. Officers would keep Councillor Eade updated of progress.
Councillor A Eade thanked the Leader for getting the issues resolved as it was having a devastating effect. He asked a supplementary question that as the trigger point had now passed and new crops had been sewn in the field the landowner had no intention of repairing the drainage within the field, whether legal powers could be used to take enforcement action on the landowner or commission the work to be done and re-charge the costs to the landowner accordingly as a matter of urgency due to the onset of winter.
The Leader stated his disappointment that this work appeared not to be completed and a robust legal approach would be taken as a matter of urgency to pursue every avenue to ensure the owners undertook the work promised.
c) Councillor N Dugmore asked the following question to the Cabinet Member: Finance, Governance & Customer Services
“By how much will the 31st October budget measures increase annual employment costs for Telford and Wrekin Council based on the current number of employees?”
Councillor Z Hannington responded that there would be no additional costs to the Council as the government would be funding this.
Councillor N Dugmore asked a supplementary question as to what support would be extended to the Council's contractors and if they would end up with extra costs and a reduction of services?
Councillor Z Hannington responded that there would not be a reduction in services.
d) Councillor R Tyrrell asked the following question to the Leader
“This Council will recall I raised the issue of the ongoing environmental issues at the Potters Landfill site at Granville at our meeting on 18th July 2024. Residents continue to suffer. Please can the Leader write to the Environment Agency and the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food & Rural Affairs to review the operation and licence of this site?
Over the last few months residents of Priorslee, St Georges, Donnington, Muxton, and beyond have suffered from the effects of the Potters Group Landfill site at Redhill, including the unpleasant odour and potential adverse effects to health arising from the hydrogen sulphide emitting from the site. This has resulted in the relevant agencies, the Environment Agency, the Health Security Agency and this Council’s Environmental Health team, working in partnership to find a solution. I understood that a landfill cell at the site which should have been sealed and capped last year, had not. That work was apparently finally completed in September, but it seems it may not have been completed after all. I have been pushing for the health concerns to be addressed and understand the Council has now acquired test equipment to monitor odour and gases itself. We all await those results. However we continue to receive numerous complaints regarding the odour from the site and the problem has not been resolved. My residents are rightly expecting me to pursue this on their behalf and are seeking a speedy resolution, given their patience for almost 12 months already.”
Councillor R Overton responded as the lead Cabinet Member for Environmental Protection and was sorry to hear that issues were continuing on this site. He was in contact with the Environment Agency who were the lead agency for landfill operations. The Environment Agency had inspected the site at the end of October and they would continue to actively monitor the site as part of its permit and residents were asked to report odours directly to the Environment Agency. Back in March a letter was sent to the Secretary of State Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, but the Council would write to the Labour government and ask for their support in relation to the landfill challenges here in the borough.
Councillor R Tyrrell asked a supplementary question if it was an opportune time to review the Planning Application which was granted in relation to the operation of the site until 2030 and the decision notice issued in November 2021 and does the site continue to comply with the conditions of the decision notice.
Councillor R Overton replied that if the site did not comply with the decision notice that the planning department would be dealing with that and that he would follow this up with them.
e) Councillor R Tyrrell will ask the following question of Cllr O Vickers, Cabinet Member for The Economy:-
“The Procurement Act 2023 came into force on 1 October 2024, and aims to reset EU based law and simplify public sector tendering procedures.
The introduction of the Act followed a lengthy period of public consultation which commenced with the publication of a Green Paper - Transforming Public Procurement - in December 2020 seeking input from stakeholders on a range of proposals to reform and simplify the EU-based rules.
The Former Government received 619 responses to the Green Paper from public bodies, suppliers to Government, and from other interested parties such as academics, legal professionals and members of the public. The Former Government's response to the consultation was published on 6 December 2021. Overall, respondents were positive about the proposed changes but the Government nevertheless shifted its position in a number of areas in the light of comments received during the consultation.
The British Chamers of Commerce new Procurement Tracker, based on data from Tussell, reveals that just 20% of direct procurement was awarded to SMEs in the last year. The Act places a shift from pure economic value to Social Values. This means considering the wider benefits for the community, such as creating local employment opportunities, carbon emissions reduction or using a local supply chain.
Given that the Chancellor in her Budget sought to place the highest increased tax burden on employers and business; what can this Council do to support our local businesses to ensure our local economy thrives? In particular also creating opportunities for less traditional business entities.”
Councillor O Vickers responded that the new Procurement Act removed bureaucratic barriers for small businesses meaning they could potentially compete for more procurement opportunities. These procurement opportunities would allow better visibility for local businesses to search for potential future business more easily. The procurement team were currently undertaking a programme of change in order that the new Act was complied with. This included revising documentation and signposting training opportunities for all council staff ensuring compliance giving greater transparency of opportunity for local businesses. The Council was currently refreshing its social value offer ensuring the Council was realising its maximum social value, which included climate change measures, employment and upskilling local people.
Councillor R Tyrrell was pleased to hear that this had prompted a review of the Council’s procedures and opportunities for business and asked a supplementary question as to what percentage of Telford and Wrekin business contracts or how many were awarded directly to local SMEs within the borough and how did the Council envisage that changing in the future.
Councillor O Vickers responded that he would write to Councillor Tyrrell on with the answer to her question. The Council had awarded 367 grants through Pride in Your High Street and helped 65 new start up businesses and were bucking the national trend on empty shop units.
f) Councillor G Luter will ask the following question of Councillor O Vickers, Cabinet Member for The Economy:-
“After working with the Council to help reinstate council run bus services from my ward to Wellington Town Centre and the Princess Royal Hospital, I welcome the Council's decision to cap Council-run bus service fares at just £2 for adults, and £1 for children. Can you confirm how many residents across Telford and Wrekin will benefit from the continued £2 fare cap?”
Councillor O Vickers thanked Councillor Luter for his hard work on the campaign. It had taken over two years to tender for the bus services and the were key for rural and urban residential areas as well as key links for education, businesses, local centres and the Princess Royal Hospital. There were seven council operated bus routes with fares capped at £2 for adults and £1 for children and the tariff had been in place prior to the previous government introducing capped fares. Since December 2022, the Council’s bus service had completed 350,000 passenger trips and patronage had been increasing month on month. The number 100 bus (work express) connected residential homes to main employment sites and operated from 5am to 11pm. The Council was proud of the work being undertaken improving connectivity for all. The Council welcomed the £1bn funding boost for buses from Government in areas such as Telford and Wrekin together with the commitment to local authorities to take buses back under their control in the future.