The deadline for questions to be submitted to the Monitoring Officer is 16 November 2020.
Minutes:
Question from Councillor Mark Howell
A recent Active Travel press release by the Council stated that the Keyhole Bridge measures are to be removed as “ward councillors have received reports from local residents of incidents between pedestrians and cyclists and also of motorcyclists taking advantage of the closure to considerably increase their speed, causing danger to pedestrians.
1. Did the Transportation Portfolio Holder receive a report from officers analysing and advising on the impact of the measures on public safety prior to making his decision or did he only act on anecdotal reports from ward councillors and residents?
2. Why were Poole Town councillors (who are supportive of the closure) not consulted considering the bridge spans the boundary of Poole Town and Parkstone wards?
3. What are the percentages for and against closure of consultation responses filed since implementation of the measures?
Response from Councillor Mike Greene, Portfolio Holder for Transport and Sustainability
I have been involved in various discussions about Keyhole Bridge with officers, councillors and members of the public. Most of these have involved the subject of public safety among other items. I have also examined the reported collisions at and around the bridge. These include the latest incident between a motor vehicle and a pedestrian or cyclist, which occurred in 2013.
I would note that the relevant guidance for the Keyhole Bridge ETRO, Local Transport Note 1/20: Cycle Infrastructure Design, clearly states that effective engagement with the local community, particularly at an early stage, is essential to ensuring the political and public acceptance of any scheme. The Department for Transport advises engagement as good practice even where there is no legal requirement to do so for the measures being proposed. This was clearly not undertaken by the previous Administration in the case of Keyhole Bridge and the other closures introduced under Tranche 1 of the Emergency Active Travel Fund.
The road closure is in Parkstone Ward, very close to its boundary with Poole Town Ward. All homes in close proximity to the closure lie in Parkstone Ward. However, all Poole Town ward councillors were invited to a meeting on Friday 9 October 2020 to discuss the topic of Traffic through Poole Park including the Keyhole Bridge measure. It is unfortunate that Cllr Howell could not attend, although his views were previously recorded and considered. The other two Poole Town Ward councillors did attend.
In the 7-week period of closure up to 8 October, when it was reported that I would not support it continuing, around 48% of the consultation responses received were in support of the closure, with 49% opposing it. After my public announcement that I hoped to reopen the route, further responses were received which were 79% in support of the closure and 18% against. Taking into account all responses, 60% are in support; 37% opposed.
As someone who believes passionately that BCP’s congestion problems can only be solved by a significant modal shift to sustainable transport, the ETRO episode has been thoroughly depressing. If we are going to achieve the necessary behaviour change, we need to take the public with us. The crass way the previous Administration introduced the Tranche 1 measures, including Keyhole Bridge, did precisely the opposite. It set neighbour against neighbour and reignited the conflict between motorists and cyclists which we have spent years trying to defuse. Thankfully, the new Administration’s more balanced approach and promise to do better seems to have persuaded Government not to carry out their threat to disallow further Active Travel Funding to councils which behaved like BCP did in the summer; and we have been awarded over £1m for Tranche 2. We now have to persuade the public that we can invest it better than our predecessors.
Councillor Howell confirmed the boundary of the two wards and the meeting referred to was about Poole Park.
Question from Councillor Mike Cox
The Conservative Reset Paper sets out a significant income for the council from investments and the sale of Community Bonds. Can the Leader explain how such income be relied on to provide a sound source of income for the council at this scale?
Response from Councillor Drew Mellor, Leader of the Council
You and I have both been vocal about further investments being the right approach for BCP Council to take in this economic environment so I look forward to your support as we bring forward an ambitious investment agenda that grows both our capital asset base as well as improves our revenue position yearly. This was described in our Budget Reset paper as a “Generation’s fund” with the principle being that future investment profit was netted off against council tax deductions. The principle being that a sound investment strategy not only benefitted this generation through reduced council tax but also served to benefit the next generation as there was a commitment to leaving behind a significantly increased asset base than we inherited.
The ambition behind the community bond was to generate significant investment power in relation to carbon reduction projects to underline this Council and indeed this administration’s commitment to our Climate and Ecological Emergency. Where we intend to deliver measurable actions and not rhetoric. Our reset paper also netted this income off against expenditure on these projects so in both cases, the Generations Fund and our Environmental CMB income nets off fully against expenditure so is entirely reliable and sound with nil impact on the MTFP at any point.
Councillor Cox asked a supplementary question stating that the Leader of the Council had indicated that costs were offset against profits. He asked that if you were making a net profit it implies you were raising bonds how much was that. Councillor Mellor reported that it was not against profit but against expenditure and nets off entirely.
Question from Councillor Mike Brooke
You have made much of your Reset Paper at both Overview and Scrutiny Board and Full Council as well as publicly. If I have read it correctly you claim significant savings, at least £48 million over a three-year period, can be made through an ambitious Transformation programme and that these savings can then fund your proposed spending commitments.
How realistic is this claim?
Response from Councillor Drew Mellor, Leader of the Council
The KPMG report uses a savings target of £43.9m and this is now adopted as our minimum requirement so I would comfortably suggest that savings in this region are realistic. Our reset paper included a Phase Zero suggested approach ahead of the three year window of achieving the full transformation savings programme. This Phase Zero approach was in part adopted by the previous administration in delivering savings as part of the Covid response. For clarity the MTFP now proposes a savings target of £15m in 2021/22 and a further £9.1m in both 2022/23 and 2023/24.
These savings are transformational, recurring and do enable this authority to move forward with confidence in terms of delivering both the most modern of councils but also towards a position of investment in much needed frontline priorities. This is why our administration’s commitment to delivering this programme is both long standing and hugely important.
Councillor Brooke sought clarification on how the transformation programme would be funded and what will it mean for the transformation budget and the total cost the Council faces. Councillor Mellor referred to the paper which had recently been through the Overview and Scrutiny Board and Cabinet on the MTFP some of which would be funded by borrowing.
Question from Councillor Tony Trent
Local youth offending figures for 2018/19, presented to the Police and Crime Commissioners Panel earlier this year, present clear signs that areas with open access youth provision have a lower level of offending than areas without such provision. This is reflected nationally. Professional youth workers have also been able to spot emerging issues with young people – often before their schools do.
With this in mind, and the clear stated aim of putting community safety and the reduction of crime and disorder in the BCP area at the top of the agenda, will the Portfolio Holder and Cabinet give a clear commitment to restart open access youth provision post Covid-19, and use the skills and experience of youth workers employed by BCP Council, and retain them, to extend a provision to the whole of the BCP area using the most practical means available.
Response from Councillor Mike White, Portfolio Holder for Children and Young People
The current BCP Youth Offer has 3 core elements: positive activities; detached youth work and individual short-term targeted youth work sessions.
Under the current Covid restrictions the Council is unable to offer ‘open access’ positive activities and is instead providing small group work sessions for youth support by invitation only. These sessions are provided by BCP using a mixed delivery model of both in-house youth work provision and commissioned provision. The Council also delivers detached youth work across BCP as well as 1:1 individual sessions on request. Youth workers are also part of our Team working to identify early opportunities for youth work support to schools.
At the current time, the Council is unable to confirm when ‘open access’ positive activities will restart, however we are committed to restarting as soon as guidance allows.
Looking ahead, post Covid I will certainly consider at that time whether a review of the current delivery model for ‘positive activities’ should be undertaken and how this can be as inclusive as possible.
It is clear that the provision of ‘positive activities’ is far greater than simply open access youth centre sessions and can include many activities outside of a centre base. BCP has strong voluntary sector led groups the council can build upon for young people.
It would not be appropriate to give an unqualified commitment to the extension of a BCP led open access positive activities offer at this time, given both the uncertainty of the future of open access provision and the need for a full and inclusive review of the current mixed delivery model .
However, BCP remains committed to providing the current offer, within Covid restrictions, and ensuring that the youth offer is able to adapt and adjust to provide a variety of high quality youth work interventions for young people across BCP area.
Councillor Trent sought clarity that where figures provided that young people wanted access to a youth centre, they could, would that support continue to be available and where there was the need for intervention maintaining services would be a material consideration when look at the future. Councillor White reported on the services available and having inherited and overspend of £6m he would need convincing of any additional discretionary expenditure.
Question from Councillor Marion LePoidevin
I’m sure colleagues will join me in congratulating Marcus Rashford on his success in persuading the Government to reverse their initial refusal to provide funding during the Christmas holidays for food for children who are eligible for Free School Meals in term time.
I am pleased that BCP agreed to do what they could at half-term for families in this position following pressure from many residents and councillors and especially thank those businesses and individuals who also responded to the clear needs. Because this was only undertaken at short notice after schools had already closed for half-term it is likely that some in need fell through the cracks and got no help.
The Government announcement means that there is sufficient time to put in place a more structured approach.
I am therefore seeking assurance that not only every family with children eligible for Free School Meals but also all those not normally eligible but now in serious need will receive suitable help, thinking particularly of households who have faced a severe loss of income and are without recourse to public funds.
Response from Councillor Nicola Greene, Portfolio Holder for Covid Resilience, Schools and Skills
The Government have announced £170m to be provided nationally through the Covid Winter Grant Scheme. This aims to support children, families and the most vulnerable over the winter period.
The grant has been allocated to Councils to allow them to directly help the hardest-hit families and individuals, as well as to provide food for children who need it over the holidays. This recognises Councils as being best placed to understand which groups need support and are best placed to ensure appropriate holiday support is provided.
The allocation for BCP Council is £1.068m which covers the period up until the end of March 2021. As such, planning in relation to Free School Meals must take into account not only for the Christmas holidays but also February half term.
BCP is working cross council and in partnership with key third sector partners to ensure a scheme is put in place that not only delivers Free School Meals to those who are eligible, but also enables professionals to refer in families and individuals who need this support. In line with the aims of the grant funding, this will seek to cover not only food costs but also help with bills and access to positive activities.
Further details of the scheme have been shared with schools, community groups and Members at last week’s briefing and I am grateful for those who have made use of their contacts and social media to extend the reach.
Essentially, flexible School Meal Vouchers for eligible children will be issued to cover the school holiday periods between December and end of March 2021 at a rate of £15 per child per week. Registration is being taken through the schools directly who are reaching out assertively to their families who need this support.
In addition to those eligible for free school meals, there is other food support provision which can be found on the Together We Can webpage. Schools and Community Champions have also been provided with this information so that they can assist those who are not digitally enabled.
Chairman, albeit outside the scope of Councillor Le Poidevin’s question I would be grateful if you would allow me the platform to mention the Access to Winter Warmth Support.
Citizen’s Advice BCP will be providing a dedicated phone line between December 2020 and end of March 2021 to support residents with keeping warm through a range of measures including pre-payment vouchers, Fighting Fuel Poverty grants (£200), Surviving Winter Grants (£200) as well as a Discretionary grant funded by BCP Council to help with winter warmth costs until end of March 2021.
Such items include:
· Utility bills (heating, cooking, lighting)
· Water for household purposes (including drinking, washing, cooking, central heating, sewerage and sanitary purposes)
· Other related essentials that help with food and winter warmth, such as: a warm blanket or duvet, warm clothing, heater, boiler service/repairs, essential toiletries, purchase of equipment including fridges, freezers, ovens, etc. - in recognition that a range of costs may arise which directly affect a household’s ability to afford or access food, energy and water.
And lastly, please remind your residents of the Let’s Talk Money scheme run by Citizen’s Advice which provides support and signposting for people who might be struggling with financial pressures over the winter months.
Question from Councillor Felicity Rice
The public consultation on the Climate Action plan was ready to go live on 30 September. Can you please update us on this piece of public consultation?
Response from Mike Greene, Portfolio Holder for Transport and Sustainability
As the Cabinet Member for Transport and Sustainability, BCP's response to the Climate Change Emergency is an extremely important part of my responsibilities.
I believe it is important that the Annual Report on the Council's Climate Action is endorsed and recommended to Council not just by myself but by Cabinet as a whole, and I intend to request this at the next Cabinet meeting on December 16th. This is an ideal opportunity to launch the public engagement on our 2050 BCP Area Climate Action Plan to which Cllr Rice refers and so I intend to ask Cabinet to approve that at the same meeting.
Provided that Cabinet gives its approval, the public engagement will be launched the following day. It will be online for eight weeks and I would encourage our residents and other stakeholders to participate.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank officers, other Members and Cllr Rice in particular for helping us get to this stage on both the Annual Report and the public engagement survey.
Councillor Rice asked for access to the consultation document and other members of the cross-party working party. Councillor Mike Greene reported that the papers had been published.
Question from Councillor Andy Hadley
A recent Environment Agency report on the Water Companies rated our local supplier Wessex Water as “good”, apart from their handling of storm overflow water drainage.
We have been approached by local fishermen concerned about food poisoning outbreaks, which they have tracked as closely relating to and following periods of heavy rainfall, when the Wessex Water system overflows. When in administration we called on the Environment Agency to work with the Wessex Water to increase storm water capacity to prevent dumping of raw sewage into our Harbours.
Can the Portfolio holder please advise how BCP Council are continuing the work with the Environment Agency and Wessex Water to:-
(i) Understand the scale of the problem.
(ii) Determine the impact on the natural environment, tourism and the food chain.
(iii) Act on solutions to end the discharge of raw sewerage into our rivers and harbours.
And to recognise and resolve the pressures of permitting connections for new development making this issue worse.
Response from Councillor Mark Anderson, Portfolio Holder for Environment Cleansing and Waste
I thank Cllr Hadley for raising this issue. I can assure him and all members that addressing this long-term but worsening issue is a priority for me and this administration. We continue to meet with Wessex water and the Environment Agency to understand the issue and current programmes of research and investment.
He will be aware that the Council is not the regulatory authority for water quality and that the legislative framework is determined by Central Government working through the Environment Agency. The Government has made clear that the water companies need to act more quickly to improve water quality in our rivers and waters and the Environment Minister Rebecca Pow has set up a DEFRA task force on storm overflows. We will be making contact with this task force to raise the specific concerns of Poole Harbour as well as continuing to make the case for increased investment in storm drainage infrastructure with Wessex Water.
We continue to raise this issue and work with local stakeholders on the Poole harbour Catchment Initiative, and we also intend to hold a member briefing on this issue when regulatory service pressures ease in the New Year.
Councillor Hadley indicated that it was also an issue for Christchurch. He referred to the private members bill laid before parliament by Philip Dunn. Councillor Hadley asked if the Portfolio Holder would commit to write to the five local MPs to ask them to support the private members bill which receives its second reading on 15 January 2021 and to work with partners to fix this problem. The Portfolio Holder referred to feedback he had received from the Environment Agency on the Christchurch Avon Beach and proposal to manage the issue. He also confirmed the he would write to the Local MPs on the private member bills and he would liaise with Councillor Hadley outside of the meeting on the wording of the communication.
Question from Councillor L-J Evans
Last week Poole Town Councillors were informed of the cancellation of the New Year’s Bath Tub Race just a couple of hours before the press release was sent out. Whilst we understand the reasons behind the decision, there was plenty of time for us to have been consulted.
In his Leadership speech, Cllr Mellor promised us “a council which is collaborative and fair, collaborative in a way in which we value the voices and opinions of those who work with us”. Therefore, please may we have assurance that in future Ward Councillors will be involved in decisions impacting their residents.
Response from Cllr Mohan Iyengar, Portfolio Holder for Tourism, Leisure and Culture
We are committed to being collaborative and fair. For the bath-tub race, it was a joint decision by Poole Harbour Commission and Council Officers. The matter was clear-cut on the grounds of health and safety during Covid-19 restrictions, and the scope to vary the decision or do anything alternative was near zero.
Ward councillors were informed quickly after I was informed, although I accept you might like to have known sooner. From the contacts I have along Poole Quay – and from the media coverage – it doesn’t appear there has been any adverse reaction to the way this has been decided or communicated.
If this event might have had alternatives for its timing or delivery, we’d have considered them and consulted. This is what we’ll look to do generally as our events programme re-starts hopefully in 2021.
He explained that he would collaborate on these events and we plan to expand the number of events.
Question from Councillor Vikki Slade
We are fortunate in Dorset to have an incredible charity that supports children through the loss of bereavement, and I can speak from personal experience with my own child having been supported by their specialist programme at the age of 7 following a close family death.
Along with many other Cllrs I was shocked to receive confirmation from Mosaic that BCP Council is now restricting support to families already known to our Early Help services rather than being funded via a contract with specialist workers assessing the need for support direct with the school or family.
What assurance can the Portfolio Holder provide around the provision of a contracted service for the whole of BCP to ensure that every child in need can access this life changing service as previously was the case when he was Portfolio Holder in Borough of Poole and continues to be the means of funding in the Dorset Council area?
Response from Councillor Mike White, Portfolio Holder for Children and Young People
I thank Cllr Mrs Slade for her question. There seems to be a lot of misinformation circulating on this subject so can i please make it clear that the support is open to any child regardless of whether or not they are known to us.
Can I also make it clear that the Council remains absolutely committed to working with Mosaic in providing support for Children in dealing with the ongoing impact of bereavement.
We had different approaches in the previous three authorities and are now establishing a single consistent contractual arrangement for the whole of BCP. Greater clarity has been brought to the routes by which families can be referred into this service. This allows for all families to be signposted and supported with access, but also recognises that the funding for this may come from a number of sources including the Council, health services, schools or the family themselves.
The aim of this is not to restrict or deny services where they are needed, but to ensure agencies work effectively together to support families to get the support they need.
Officers have recently met with representatives from Mosaic and have committed to work with them to provide reassurance that no families will be disadvantaged by these changes.
In summary this is about harmonisation across the original three councils, streamlining the access point and providing consistency. It is also about getting other agencies to step up to their responsibilities to provide some funding. I am determined that budget will not be a constraint and that any child that needs help will get the help they need.
Councillor Slade reported that the Chief Executive of the charity had advised that since October they had received 67 referrals and schools had been advised directly that BCP Council would no longer fund them. She asked that funding be committed via the covid grant for the last two years. Councillor White reported that any child that needs it would get the help that they need if Cllr Slade has examples of children that have been turned away to let him have them.
Councillor Pete Miles left at 10.25pm
Councillor Cheryl Johnson left at 10.28pm
Question from Councillor Tony Trent
Remembering how much controversy was generated following the award of the first tranche of “Active Travel” funding at the height of the previous lock down, and before the “virtual” system was fully set up in BCP to enable proper meetings to take place, what are the arrangements to involve members in this second tranche? For example…
Will the Transport Advisory Group, on ice since the late winter, be revived? – possibly as a fully constituted advisory group with a “politically balanced” membership (e.g. 5 UA [2, 1, 1, 1], 5 Con, & 1 non-aligned), making recommendations to the Portfolio Holder & Cabinet, and once able to do so, giving the interested members of the public the chance to have their say at the meeting. If this were a group with trained subs (a recommendation from the days when a similar committee operated in Poole) - able to react swiftly, it could not only look at new proposals, it could also be the body that reviews the first tranche of ETRA schemes (with representations from the public at the meetings, if able at the time) as they reach their anniversary reviews, and…
Could the portfolio holder confirm, without the tight deadlines imposed by Government on Tranche 1, that he will ensure meaningful engagement with the public be undertaken, and how that will be done?
Response from Councillor Mike Greene, Portfolio Holder for Transport and Sustainability
It was extremely disappointing that when the first tranche of Emergency Active Travel funding was allocated, BCP’s then Administration chose not to fully consult with either ward councillors nor residents before imposing road closures. My displeasure was clearly matched by the Secretary of State for Transport when he wrote to local authorities advising them that those, like BCP, which had failed to pre-consult were likely to miss out on Tranche 2 funding.
It was therefore a relief to hear that the new Administration’s more balanced approach and our plea to DfT not to be punished for our predecessors’ actions found favour and we have been allocated almost £1.1m for Active Travel Fund Tranche 2 projects. As previously approved by Cabinet, the delegation to decide which schemes to take forward, now that we have the award, lies with the Director for Growth and Infrastructure in consultation with the Portfolio Holder and the appropriate ward members.
I will be liaising with the Director and his officers over the next couple of weeks to decide which schemes from the proposed bid we now take forward and then how to proceed. I can assure Councillor Trent that before we do any design work, or make any final decisions, I will be consulting with ward members and publicising our proposed consultation plan. We will be able to use the new engagement platform, recently procured by the Council, to gain the views of the public, which will then inform the design process and detail of the programme to take forward. The timescales for delivery of this tranche of funding means that we will only need to commit to delivery by March next year and the schemes can be fully consulted on between now and then. Design and build will follow in the next financial year.
This early involvement of ward councillors will not be limited to Active Travel Fund spending. Instead it will become the norm for all TROs. I am currently developing a protocol with officers to ensure this functions efficiently, and significantly shortens the excessive turn-around times which have been suffered by residents during the last 18 months.
Councillor Trent asked about the future of the Transport Advisory Group. Councillor Greene indicated that he was prepared to involve ward members on issues, and this was the correct and most sensible approach.
Question from Councillor Mark Howell
The Leader of the Council stated in his nomination speech at the last Full Council meeting that his administration’s “first 100 day plan would actively address” various issues including the economy, jobs, our schoolchildren, and bring back a feeling of pride and safety in our towns. Over 50 days have passed without this plan being published. Will the Leader be publishing the plan before the 100 days expire? If the plan exists, please could the Leader explain what actions the administration has taken in realisation of the plan’s objectives, excluding actions relating to COVID-19 and funded by central government.
Note – Councillor Howell only asked the first part of his question
Response from Councillor Drew Mellor, Leader of the Council
Thank you for the question Mark. Significant work has been undertaken in terms of the aims and ambitions brought about as referenced in my nomination speech and I am pleased to say that this has resulted in material investment over £370k coming forward to Cabinet in the next cycle. This not only demonstrates what we have been saying consistently, that it is not ok to sacrifice the funding that our community needs, it is imperative that we show leadership to our communities out of this pandemic and that if we have strong control of the council finances we can afford to deliver that leadership.
Examples of these commitments include increased budget for mental health cleanliness and safety as we make a commitment to restore pride to our place, particularly commitment to our levelling up agenda in Christchurch where cleanliness services had been consistently underfunded including in the previous administration, investment in communities and culture and the environment and not least support for our economy which this administration is proud to champion. We are delivering both in this financial year and we will deliver further in 2021/22.
Councillor Howell asked was there any reason for the public to have confidence in him or his current administration. Councillor Drew Mellor indicated that he believed that public and this Chamber has significant confidence in this administration and the delivery of his 100-day plan.