Content

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.
 

(F)      
Question from Councillor Tom Wren re: tenancy fraud
and the sub-letting of Council properties
Supplementary question: a long term case of tenancy fraud had
been reported to the Council a number of times without
resolution.  Does the Council think that
if additional funding was put into identifying these fraud cases
more homes could be delivered to those that needed them.
 
In
the absence of the Executive Portfolio Holder for Housing and
Housing Development, the Leader of the Council advised
that  he would ask officers to look into
the specific case.  In terms of the
figures, the SAFS was detecting an increasing number of fraud cases
but this would not necessarily equate to an increase in the number
of houses built.
 

(G)     
Question from Councillor Stephen Booth re: the
progress on recent motions passed at Council meetings during the
past year.
Supplementary question: why has the vaping motion not been
passed to another Committee for consideration and what response did
we get back from the Minister on this issue.
 
The
Leader of the Council advised that no response had yet been
received from the Government Minister. 
The issue of vaping would also be considered by the General
Purposes Committee in November.
 

(H)      
Question from Councillor Graham Snell re:
Swingate/Lytton Way traffic
flow
Supplementary question: are the temporary changes to become
permanent and when will this along with the Station Gateway
Development take place?
 
 
The
Executive Portfolio Holder for Economy and Transport advised that
HCC was the Lead Authority on the traffic management in this
area.  A final decision would not be
forthcoming this side of Christmas but he would still continue to
press the issue with them.  In relation
to the Gateway this was currently out for consultation, the results
of which would be reported to members at the appropriate
time.