Issue - meetings
QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS TO COMMITTEE CHAIRS / PORTFOLIO HOLDERS
Meeting: 18/10/2023 - Council (Item 11)
11 QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS TO COMMITTEE CHAIRS / PORTFOLIO HOLDERS 
PDF 465 KB
In accordance with Standing Orders, written answers to the following questions will be circulated on a supplementary agenda.
(A) Question from Councillor Robin Parker CC
“A planning application for a large telecommunications mast on the pavement at The Glebe was refused by SBC recently, but SBC failed to ensure that the refusal was received by the applicant within the statutory period, so the large mast can go ahead. This is likely to upset a lot of residents.
Exactly what new procedures will be or have now been introduced to make sure that a debacle like this cannot be made by SBC in future?
In particular, why are such important legal notices sent by Royal Mail even though Royal Mail deliveries are notoriously unreliable these days? Are they sent by Royal Mail first class service?”
(B) Question from Councillor Bret Facey
“Is the Executive Member satisfied that the Council robustly punishes the perpetrators of fly-tipping?”
(C) Question from Councillor Adam Mitchell CC
“Could you please provide an update on the progress and status of the Community Centre and associated shops within the Bragbury End development?"
(D) Question from Councillor Alex Farquharson
(E) Question from Councillor Andy McGuinness
(F) Question from Councillor Tom Wren
(G) Question from Councillor Stephen Booth
“Could the Leader of the Council please update the Council on progress following the passing of recent and future motions, including those on 19 July 2023 regarding consultation and the planning process; 8 March 2023 regarding pay for council and school workers and 8 March 2023 regarding Vaping?”
(H) Question from Councillor Graham Snell
“The arrangements for traffic flows exiting Tesco’s into Swingate and into Lytton Way have been changed again. Has the Council consulted with the Highway Authority about these changes and is the Council working with the Authority to get a workable and permanent solution to traffic entering Lytton Way at this point?”
Decision:
The Council received eight questions from Members to Committee Chairs/Portfolio Holders. The responses to the eight questions had been published in the supplementary agenda for the meeting.
(A) Question from Councillor Robin Parker CC (asked by Councillor Stephen Booth in Councillor Parker’s absence re: planning applications for telecommunications masts
Supplementary question: What new procedures had been introduced to ensure the delays would not happen again and do we have to lobby Central Government as to whether more modern forms of communication other than 1st class post could be used.
The Portfolio Holder for Environment and Performance agreed that the postal system had failed and had lead to a change in what the Planning and Development Committee had agreed. Further discussions would be held with the officers on this issue.
(B) Question from Councillor Bret Facey re: fly-tipping
Supplementary question – recent published DEFRA figures for 2021/22 showed no penalty notices being issued by SBC. Why did SBC fail to hold fly tippers to account.
The Executive Portfolio Holder for Environment & Performance acknowledged the issue of fly-tipping and welcomed a conversation with Cllr Facey and the relevant officers to take the issue forward.
(C) Question from Councillor Adam Mitchell re: the Community Centre and shops at the Bragbury End Development
Supplementary question: can the Portfolio Holder guarantee that a community centre will be built in Bragbury End and that a better way to communicate that with local residents can be found?
The Executive Portfolio Holder for Co-operative Council and Neighbourhood Communities advised that there would be a bookable, community use building with a café but would meet with Councillor Mitchell along with the Assistant Director Housing Development as soon as practicable.
(D) Question from Councillor Alex Farquharson re: safeguarding measures at the 108 Oaks Cross development.
Supplementary question: following multiple disturbances at the development, would SBC commit to double its efforts to ensure the residents did not form a safeguarding concern and would they ensure that residents’ concerns were addressed without local Councillor intervention.
In the absence of the Executive Portfolio Holder for Housing and Housing Development, the leader of the Council advised that one of the rooms had now been converted to a staff room. The development was built to try and meet the needs of some of the Council’s homeless population. Further details would be provided regarding the safeguarding issues to Councillor Farquharson in a written response.
(E) Question from Councillor Andy McGuinness re: the impact of the Prime Minister’s recent announcement to delay the UK’s net zero commitments on the Council’s operations.
Supplementary question: Was the Portfolio Holder aware of the Leader of the Labour Party, Sir Keir Starmer’s views on the announcements.
The Executive Portfolio Holder for Environment & Performance replied that in his opinion, the announcement from the Prime Minister had been made for short term political gain at the expense of our children and grandchildren and that he was of the opinion that an incoming Labour Government would definitely honour its pledges on climate change. ... view the full decision text for item 11
Minutes:
The Council received eight questions from Members to Committee Chairs/Portfolio Holders. The responses to the eight questions had been published in the supplementary agenda for the meeting.
(A) Question from Councillor Robin Parker CC (asked by Councillor Stephen Booth in Councillor Parker’s absence re: planning applications for telecommunications masts
Supplementary question: What new procedures had been introduced to ensure the delays would not happen again and do we have to lobby Central Government as to whether more modern forms of communication other than 1st class post could be used?
The Portfolio Holder for Environment and Performance agreed that the postal system had failed which affected implementation of what the Planning and Development Committee had agreed. Further consideration would be given as to how such a situation might be avoided in the future.
(B) Question from Councillor Bret Facey re: fly-tipping
Supplementary question – recent published DEFRA figures for 2021/22 showed no penalty notices being issued by SBC. Why did SBC fail to hold fly tippers to account?
The Executive Portfolio Holder for Environment & Performance acknowledged the issue of fly-tipping and welcomed a conversation with Councillor Facey and the relevant officers.
(C) Question from Councillor Adam Mitchell re: the Community Centre and shops at the Bragbury End Development
Supplementary question: can the Portfolio Holder guarantee that a community centre will be built in Bragbury End and that a better way to communicate that with local residents can be found?
The Executive Portfolio Holder for Co-operative Council and Neighbourhood Communities advised that there would be a bookable, community use building with a café. She would be happy to meet with Councillor Mitchell along with the Assistant Director (Housing Development) to discuss further.
(D) Question from Councillor Alex Farquharson re: safeguarding measures at the 108 Oaks Cross development.
Supplementary question: following multiple disturbances at the development, would SBC commit to double its efforts to ensure the residents did not form a safeguarding concern and would they ensure that residents’ concerns were addressed without local Councillor intervention?
In the absence of the Executive Portfolio Holder for Housing and Housing Development, the Leader of the Council advised that one of the rooms had now been converted to a staff room. The development was built to try and meet the needs of some of the Council’s homeless population. Further details would be provided regarding any safeguarding issues to Councillor Farquharson in a written response.
(E) Question from Councillor Andy McGuinness re: the impact of the Prime Minister’s recent announcement to delay the UK’s net zero commitments on the Council’s operations.
Supplementary question: Was the Portfolio Holder aware of the Leader of the Labour Party, Sir Keir Starmer’s views on the announcements?
The Executive Portfolio Holder for Environment & Performance replied that, in his opinion, the announcement from the Prime Minister had been made for short term political gain at the expense of our children and grandchildren and that he was of the opinion that an incoming Labour Government would definitely honour its pledges on climate change. ... view the full minutes text for item 11