Minutes:
Question 1 fell as Councillor Donaldson was not present.
(2) Councillor Turner referred to November last year when the EDS budget showed a significant overspend and asked was the rejection of your plan and indeed the funding of it for Flash Lane simply an aid to the reduction of this overspend?
Councillor Smith was not in agreement and reported that all of the funding for the proposed traffic calming scheme on Flash Lane was identified from the Local Transport Plan allocation for 2010/11 and not the EDS budget.
(3) Councillor Gilding asked were there any circumstances why a “failing school” should not be registered under “Special Measures”?
Councillor Lakin explained that ‘Special Measures’ was a judgement made about a school by Ofsted in relation to the national inspection framework and had consistent consequences, including termly monitoring visits by HMI and an obligation on the Local Authority to improve the school or resolve the situation through a different strategy, e.g. federation or closure. The Local Authority could not put a school into ‘Special Measures’.
However, the Local Authority did operate its own categorisation system and might judge a school to be underachieving separate from any Ofsted evaluation. In that case, any of a range of support strategies would be put in place to accelerate the school’s improvement. An example might be a primary school which was “Satisfactory” in its most recent Ofsted, but below the national KS2 floor targets and in receipt of Local Authority support to ensure it rose above them as soon as was possible.
(4) Councillor Cutts asked if he could be advised and an explanation of the high costings for the examples below and what happened to the surplus?
RMBC Others
Collection of rubbish £2,000 £1,000
Zebra crossings £50,000 - £70,000 £5,000 - £10,000
Dedicated schools budget:-
Hearing/visual £20,000 £45,000
impediment check (6 visits) (12 visits)
Councillor Smith reported that until he received clarification as to what type of rubbish collection Councillor Cutts was referring to he was unable to provide an answer as he had strategic waste collection in his portfolio and Councillor Akhtar had refuse collection in his.
In terms of the zebra crossing, the costs were determined through the detailed design process and costs were dependant on various site specific factors (drainage, road widths, etc). The cost of scheme was established using the bill of quantities within the Council’s contract, which was awarded following a competitive process and the Council’s in-house provider matched the rates of the external supplier. If Councillor Cutts could identify specific schemes officers would try to undertake a direct cost comparison.
The Council bought its highways construction materials through a contract with its strategic partner RBT.
Councillor Lakin was also not clear what the task in the question specifically referred to nor the amount.
However, what Councillor Lakin could say was that the support for visually impaired and hearing impaired students was provided to schools by specialist teams within the Council. This support was provided on a needs led basis and commissioned by the schools. There was no ‘surplus’ in any such budget.
Question 5 was withdrawn by Councillor Turner.
(6) Councillor Cutts asked was it considered prudent that the Labour Party should enjoy the facilities of the Council and why should not political parties arrange for their own requirement thus being independent of public finance?
The Leader reported that he was not aware of any Council facilities used by the Labour Party. All Councillors received the same secretarial support regardless of their political party from the Eric Manns Building.
(7) Councillor Cutts asked with imposed restrictions and time limit already placed on this Chamber and now newspapers and television advising the public of changes to the ‘budget’ before it had been put before the full Council for approval were Members, therefore, fully disenfranchised and totally within the jurisdiction of the ‘powerful leader’ system?
The Leader explained that today was the day that the Council determined its budget for 2011/12, which was a recommendation from the Cabinet meeting held on 23rd February, 2011. As per the Local Government Act the agenda for the Cabinet had to be published five clear working days before the meeting and as the budget report was not excluded from the press or public, access to the details was publicly available and it was not within the jurisdiction of the powerful leader system.
(8) Councillor Cutts asked could he be advised how many answers have not been given to Councillors’ questions in the Chamber this year due to the guillotine on time under Standing Order 7(12)?
The Leader confirmed that this year twelve questions have been subject to the guillotine.
(9) Councillor Cutts asked with respect to the recent circumstances associated with Flash Lane zebra crossing, could the Cabinet Member please advise him of the number of letters of protest that have been received?
Councillor Smith explained that when he decided to not proceed with the proposed traffic calming scheme on the 13th December, 2010 there had been 23 letters of objection and a petition containing 69 signatures against the scheme.
Following the decision and subsequent decision by the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee upholding the decision the Leader received 213 identical letters of protest that requested a zebra crossing be implemented.
It was also pointed out that that nowhere in the Section 106 was there reference to a zebra or controlled crossing only to a pedestrian crossing. Complaints had been made about the cost of the scheme, but this was immaterial as the request for a zebra crossing on Flash Lane did not meet the required criteria set down by the DfT which required a qualifying 0.85 PV2 value. Other requests for crossings that had been refused because they too did not qualify included:-
Barbers Avenue, Rawmarsh 0.63
Moorgate Road at the hospital entrance 0.62
Woodhouse Green, Thurcroft 0.43
Hollowgate (Narrow Twitchell) 0.39
Station Road, Laughton Common 0.35
Flash Lane, Bramley 0.16
(10) Councillor Cutts asked could the Cabinet Member advise him of the level of fine imposed on a school in the event that a child was permanently excluded?
Councillor Lakin advised that for primary or special schools there was no charge, but for a secondary school it was £4,000.