Agenda item

MEMBERS' QUESTIONS TO CABINET MEMBERS AND CHAIRMEN

 

To put questions, if any, to Cabinet Members and Chairmen (or their representatives) under Council Procedure Rules 11(1) and 11(3).

Minutes:

(1)  Councillor Hague asked what was the financial cost of recruiting a Strategic Director?

 

The Leader confirmed the cost of recruitment would vary depending upon the methods of recruitment that was used. On average the cost for recruiting a Strategic Director was around £20k and the cost of the recruitment would be met through the savings identified by the substantive post being vacant for at least four months.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Hague, given that Regeneration and Environment had now lost its Strategic Director and were faced with the process of recruiting another, asked for assurance that the exciting projects for that Directorate would have no detrimental impact through delays or cost implications for those projects.

 

The Leader was not aware of any additional costs or delays being brought to his attention.  Paul Woodcock, Assistant Director, was acting up in that senior role and was receiving the Council’s support in doing so.

 

(2)  Councillor Carter would receive an answer to his question in writing.

 

(3)  Councillor Hague asked was it common practice for Cabinet Members to make formal complaints against Council Officers?

 

The Leader of the Council replied no it was not common, but it did happen from time to time because one of the key roles of Cabinet Members was to act on behalf of the public to hold officers to account for the delivery of policies and priorities.

 

If there were instances where any Member of this Council felt an officer had not performed their function in the right way, in line with the policies of the Council or misled a Member or in any way believed they had acted detrimentally to the public, then they would have support to follow due process set out in the Member/Officer Protocol.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Hague confirmed he was aware of complaints being made against officers and it had been made clear to him that certain departments were living in fear and anxiety of the consequences of some of the actions they had to take.  He asked how did the Leader intend to deal with these officer concerns.

 

The Leader was not aware of these concerns, but if there were staff members who were concerned or anxious they should escalate these concerns to management in due course and in turn raise those concerns with the Chief Executive.  The Council had a Whistleblowing Policy in place and he was assured that where there were concerns for staff and where there were complaints, proper robust procedures were in place to ensure they were fully investigated and appropriate action taken.

 

Certainly with reference to recent changes in senior management the Leader was assured that appropriate procedures were followed and appropriate action taken in the way it was hoped they would be.

 

(4)  Councillor Carter asked what action had been taken by RMBC since the Council passed an anti-fracking motion to disassociate RMBC from fracking?

 

Councillor Lelliott confirmed that at  the Council Meeting on the 18th October, 2017  the following was agreed as part of the motion on fracking:-

 

·                The Council committed to not allow any fracking activities, including survey work, on Council owned or controlled land and property

·                It further pledged to not sell Council land or property to companies involved in fracking.

 

Since this motion was passed, no applications to access land have been received by the Asset Management Team.

 

No land has been sold to any parties involved in fracking.

 

All staff within the team had been informed of the Council’s agreed motion from the 18th October, 2017 meeting.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Carter asked given the Council’s Pension Authority had 3% of its business in companies involved in fracking, did the Cabinet Member not think the Council should attempt to move the investments.

 

Councillor Lelliott was not aware of this position, but would investigate further with Councillor Carter after the meeting.

 

(5)  Councillor Hague asked how many complaints have been made by Cabinet Members against Officers in the last three years?

 

The Leader of the Council confirmed there had been five complaints made in the last three years.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Hague confirmed there were five formal complaints all made by the Cabinet Member for Waste, Roads and Community Safety, four of which were made against the Strategic Director for Regeneration and Environment.  The Leader was asked to explain why so many of these complaints were made against the Strategic Director and asked had he conducted an exit interview with the Strategic Director.

 

The Leader confirmed these were made against Regeneration and Environment as that was where the problems were that needed to be addressed.  He referred to his comments earlier that where any Member had complaints they should follow the Member/Officer Protocol in place.  Where issues could not be resolved informally, then they would be resolved formally and this was the process that he and all the Cabinet Members would follow.

 

The Leader did not want the public to view the webcast and think an individual Cabinet Member was making complaints against officers.  There were a number of issues that needed to be addressed over a period of three years; one of which was a serious health and safety issue.  If Cabinet Members were not taking these issues up and not holding officers to account and things went wrong the Leader would have serious concerns.  He was reassured that proper procedures were being followed.

 

In terms of an exit interview for the Strategic Director this was not for Members to be involved with.  An exit interview had been offered to the member of staff, but it was a matter for management if this was taken up or conducted.

 

(6)  Councillor M. Elliott asked if, since he last asked about the derelict, fire ravaged buildings on Corporation Street, had there been any progress in establishing contact with the property owners?

 

Councillor Lelliott explained that progress had been made and the necessary steps were underway to identify property rights and ownership details ahead of a possible Compulsory Purchase Order. 

 

It was expected that  this work would be completed by mid-November following which negotiations would resume with the owners and other interested parties which was the next step in the process.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Elliott had originally asked about Corporation Street nineteen months ago and little had happened since.  Corporation Street was a main access to the town centre and he understood Forge Island was the centre of attention at the moment, but the fire ravaged buildings gave a poor impression of the town centre.  He, therefore, asked the Cabinet Member if she would contact the owners to seek Compulsory Purchase very soon.

 

Councillor Lelliott agreed with Councillor Elliott about the condition of the buildings, but the Council had to follow due legal process to prove there was no viable use of the building.  Attempts had been made to contact the owner of the buildings.  An agent had come forward with a plan for housing, but this was not deemed a viable option.  Compulsory Purchase could not be obtained until all avenues had been explored to deem the building non-viable. 

 

It was acknowledged that the fire ravaged buildings on Corporation Street were an eyesore to the town centre and the owners of those properties should be admonished for them remaining in the condition they were.  Officers had made numerous attempts to rectify the problem and enter into discussions and engage with the owners.

 

(7)  Councillor Hague asked could the Leader confirm if any Cabinet Members had entered into mediation with any Council Officers in the last three years.

 

The Leader did not believe mediation was altogether correct, but confirmed that there had been instances where coaching sessions and other support had been used between Cabinet and the Strategic Leadership Team in order to ensure the best outcome.

 

(8)  Councillor Carter asked how was the Community Infrastructure Levy and its predecessor currently allocated to Parished areas?

 

Councillor Lelliott confirmed the Council’s Community Infrastructure Levy (introduced in July 2017) brought in a new way of collecting funding from development to invest in infrastructure (e.g. road improvements, school places, green spaces).

 

15% of the Community Infrastructure Levy income collected from any development was passed on to the Parish (if the Parish had adopted a Neighbourhood Plan this increased to 25%).

 

The Council would make these payments every six months.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Carter asked how actively was the Council supporting and promoting to Parish Councils in bringing forward local plans so that more money could then be used in the areas most affected by the developments.

 

Councillor Lelliott confirmed Parish Councils were being supported and the Council had a statutory duty to do so.  The Planning Department were also extremely proactive.  A payment for Community Infrastructure Levy was just in the process of being made and work was underway with both  Bramley and Dinnington to get their local plans passed.

 

(9)  Councillor M. Elliott stated that a television programme last week highlighted Rotherham as having one of the highest percentages of residents with obesity in the U.K.  Was there (excuse the pun) an appetite for the Council to consider what can be done to curtail the opening of even more fast food/takeaways in the future?

 

Councillor Roche explained that obesity in Rotherham was a real concern with a number of background causes and factors.  This was something the Council took seriously and had a number of programmes in place around early intervention and prevention for children and families.  The Healthy Programme tackled obesity and work would continue on reducing obesity partly because of the high impact and cost on health and the NHS. 

 

Prior to adopting the Local Plan, the Council had very little control over the opening of new takeaways in fact applications that were refused e.g. the KFC at Canklow were appealed and then granted by Central Government.

 

The Local Plan, which was adopted in June this year, included policies that helped to control the number of new takeaways in town and local centres. The Policy stated that takeaways would not be supported on primary shopping streets and in future, through the implementation of the Policy, applications for new takeaways would not be granted if this would result in takeaways making up more that 10% of the units within a town centre.

 

The Council also tried to take forward a policy that restricted new takeaways from opening close to schools but this was removed by the Local Plan Inspector who stated that “he did not consider that there was local evidence of a clear link between hot food takeaways close to schools and levels of childhood obesity”.  This was supported by the Council, but was removed by the Planning Inspector.  He did not consider there was local evidence or that there was a clear link to hot food takeaways near to schools and childhood obesity.

 

Officers needed to work together across the Council to address the problem and Councillor Roche was happy to take any ideas that Councillor Elliott or others may wish to put forward in relation to tackling this important issue.  It was not just a planning issue about takeaways, but a need to work together across the whole system to try and tackle the obesity problem.

 

(10)  Councillor McNeely asked, with the cold weather fast approaching, could the Cabinet Member tell her if the Snow Warden Scheme is still running and if so how can residents sign up for it ?

 

Councillor Hoddinott confirmed that the Snow Warden Scheme was still running and had been around for a while.  There were only a few volunteers so this had been revamped to accommodate this, learning from the Love Where You Live Campaign where there were hundreds of litter pickers.  Apply some of the principles to snow wardens.

 

The application process had been significantly improved this year to make it easier than ever to join the scheme.  Residents could complete a simple online form via the Council website under the ‘Gritting, Help to clear Snow and Ice’ section.  Residents would then receive guidance on how to safely clear ice and snow, as well as equipment including high-viz vests, gloves and shovels, along with a supply of salt. 

 

Additionally, this year’s Highways Winter Seminar for Members was on the 27th November, 2018 and any comments on how the Snow Warden Scheme could be promoted in Wards were welcomed.

 

(11)  Councillor Carter stated £500,000 was allocated in the 2017/18 budget for a new library in Brinsworth and asked how had that money been spent?

 

Councillor Allen confirmed that the original notional figure of up to £500k was included in the Capital Programme in April, 2007 for a project for a new library in Brinsworth. 

 

It was the Parish Council themselves that was bringing forward the project for the new library which was an extension of their facilities at the new community hub.  The Cabinet Member urged anyone to go anyone to look at these facilities.

 

The Council were contributing £210,000 towards the project.  A planning application had been submitted on 26th September, 2018 with consultation closed on 31st October, 2018. 

 

This wider project had had the support of funding by the Big Lottery Fund and on that basis it was possible to deliver the library project, which would greatly improve on the current facilities, at a reduced cost. 

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Carter asked when could residents in Brinsworth hope to see library open.

 

Councillor Allen reconfirmed the planning application was submitted on the 26th September, 2018 and the Council were due to meet with the Parish Council to look at the development and progress on the plans.  The Cabinet Member would share any information in due course.

 

(12)  Councillor Vjestica asked had the Council been affected by the national crisis with clinical waste?

 

Councillor Hoddinott explained Rotherham Council did have a contract with Healthcare Environmental to take clinical waste to their site in Normanton, near Wakefield.

 

Rotherham was not adversely affected by this position.  The Waste Service, through their hard work, within a week of being informed of the issue and no longer able to use Healthcare Environmental, successfully awarded a new contract with a Rotherham-based disposal contractor in Wales, Rotherham.

 

The site was fully compliant, located within our operational area and disposal costs were comparable to the previous contract.

 

It was worth noting that the Council operated clinical waste collections on behalf of the NHS, on a commissioned basis. The Council was, therefore, not legally responsible for clinical waste collections from households.

 

However, the Council was aware of the vulnerable nature of customers of this
Service and no Rotherham clinical waste collections were affected by the recent crisis in clinical waste disposal.

 

(13)  Councillor Carter asked since the last meeting what progress had been made in resolving the burial issues affecting those religious communities who required urgent burial?

 

Councillor Hoddinott pointed out that since Councillor Carter previously raised this a really good discussion session with Dignity had taken place at the Improving Places Select Commission in July.  Councillor Carter was invited to attend.

 

Discussions were taking place and confirmed progress had been made through working with Dignity Funeral Services Ltd. and Rotherham was testing the feasibility of trialling an extension of the time of the latest burial to 18:30 between 1st April and 30th September at Herringthorpe Cemetery.  

 

Councillor Carter was urged to become involved as there was now another opportunity for Members to visit the new crematorium and talk to Dignity direct on Monday, 19th November, 2018.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Carter asked had the Cabinet Member brought local religious leaders to these meetings to help resolve some of the issues.

 

Councillor Hoddinott confirmed yes.  There had been a number of meetings involving at times herself, Councillor Mallinder, Councillor Alam and the Assistant Chief Executive, Shokat Lal.  There was a pledge to keep these meetings going and create a forum going forward.

 

(14) Councillor Napper asked how many parking enforcement notices have been issued in the last month for violations in Wellgate between Mansfield Road and Albany Street.

 

Councillor Lelliott confirmed that, in the period between 26th September and 26th October 26th 2018, the Council issued 44 Penalty Charge Notices on Wellgate, with 15 of these being issued on the stretch of Wellgate heading out of town beyond its junction with Mansfield Road.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Napper referred to the number of cars parked underneath the traffic lights at the bottom of Hollowgate pointing up Wellgate half way on the pavement and also at the bottom of Mansfield Road 3 cars parked the opposite way to the flow of traffic on double yellow lines.  He asked if parking enforcement could concentrate their efforts on this area of Wellgate a little more than around the Town Hall.

 

Councillor Lelliott gave her assurance that Wellgate was heavily patrolled due to persistent parking problems.  The shared service with Doncaster was starting shortly and this would help with the issues. 

 

The Cabinet Member noted the concerns and confirmed that work did take place jointly with the Police within very limited resources.

 

(15)  Councillor Carter asked how Rotherham compared to Sheffield, Bradford and Leicester in facilitating urgent burials, in particular what were their latest burial times for each of these Council areas.

 

Councillor Hoddinott advised she had received burial times which were:-

 

Bradford             Daylight Hours

Sheffield            Dusk

Leicester            Monday to Thursday until 2.30 p.m. and on Fridays until 2.00 p.m.

 

Rotherham currently offered burials until 3.00 p.m. between April and September and until 2.30 p.m. between October and March.

 

There had been some benchmarking work undertaken and the Cabinet Member, Councillor Alam and the Strategic Director had visited other areas to look at burial times and also practices in catering for different faiths.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Carter, not being from a religion required an urgent burial being facilitated, asked had the Cabinet Member heard any evidence from members of those communities where residents were having to make a decision about burying a loved one where the family lived locally or getting an urgent burial in a place more open and able to facilitate the urgent burial service during a distressing time in people’s lives.

 

Councillor Hoddinott confirmed she had heard from families who had felt they had had to go to other places when they had not got what they wanted in Rotherham.  If Councillor Carter or any other Member had examples she welcomed these being forwarded on in order for them to form conversations with Dignity if it was felt the service had fallen short during which was a very sensitive time for families.

 

(16)  Councillor Napper would receive a written response to his question.

 

(17)  Councillor Carter asked did the Cabinet Member still think the service provision by Dignity was not discriminatory.

 

Councillor Hoddinott confirmed that whilst the policies in place were not being discriminatory the implementation of those policies would be subject to review and trialling of new arrangements in order to try to address the concerns that had been raised.

 

In a supplementary question Councillor Carter asked if the legal advice provided could be shared with members of the public and be released.

 

Councillor Hoddinott was happy to ask the question and seek legal advice.  The Service had to be legal and provide assurances of compliance.  What had been asked was about the Service for residents and all religious communities, which was why negotiations had taken place with Dignity to make changes in Rotherham and bring about changes people would like to see.  This was about giving residents a very good service.

 

(18)  Councillor Carter would receive an answer in writing to his question.

 

(19)  Councillor Carter would receive an answer in writing to his question.