Agenda item

Members asked questions of Portfolio Holders in accordance with Procedure Rules 8.1 and 8.2 as follows:

·         Councillor Sutton referred to the last meeting of Full Council, where Councillor Mrs Laws advised that only 4% of planning applications received fulfilled the validation requirements. He added that since that meeting he has analysed the systems and he is concerned about how there still appears a lengthy timeframe. He would like to know how this delay can be rectified going forward and made the point that there is only one note on the Public Access system against an application from the Validation Team which details the status of the application. Councilllor Mrs Laws stated that validation rate is still at 4%, with the Planning Team operating a fair and open approach, where they will assist the agents and developers and at the present time there is a 2.5 week backlog with submissions of applications, with the planning portal dictating that it has been the busiest summer on record and this also being the case with some of the neighbouring authorities. She stated that the Local Validation List was adopted in August 2020, following a period of consultation in February 2020, which has resulted in some applications being registered as invalid, whilst agents are provided assistance to understand the new requirements and this has affected the Council’s performance, as it is dealing with applications two or three times before they can be registered as valid as well as an accumulation of invalid applications, annual leave, and record numbers of applications having an impact. Councillor Mrs Laws expressed the view that the situation could be improved if applications were submitted and valid on receipt, however, any applications which require amendments are dealt with as soon as the requested information is received. She added that the validation figures in April 2020 were 94.43%, May was 21.83%, June was 79.13% and July was 68.54%, with staffing levels currently being investigated, and made the point that the Developer Forum have received a presentation with regard to validation to enlighten the agents on the process, which does not appear to have had an impact, so other measures are now being looked into. Councillor Sutton thanked Mrs Laws for her response and asked whether all of the interventions, consultations and actions taken by the Validation Team should be documented on the Public Access system? Councillor Mrs Laws stated that it is something that could be considered, however, the Council is trying to build relationships with agents and developers.

·         Councillor Sutton asked Councillor Benney whether the motion being determined under agenda item 7 at today’s Council meeting has any relevance to the report that was withdrawn from the Cabinet meeting held earlier today? Councillor Benney confirmed in the affirmative.

·         Councillor Sutton asked Councillor Murphy whether he could provide an update with regard to Waste Vertical Integration (WVI) and also with regard to the abolition of the charge for brown bin collections as was indicated during the election period? Councillor Murphy stated that there is no update with regard to WVI and that he cannot recall any discussion with regard to the removal of the charge. Councillor Sutton stated that he has seen sight of letters distributed during election time which indicated that the brown bin charge may be removed, but he will follow the matter up going forward, agreeing to send copies of the letters to Councillor Murphy.

·         Councillor Sutton asked Councillor Boden whether the details of the recipients of the monies awarded, as part of the different business grants and discretionary grant schemes will be publicised, due to the fact that it is £20,000,000 of public money that has been paid out? Councillor Boden stated that Councillor Sutton is correct, it is public money that has been allocated as part of the scheme, however, there is an implied confidentiality when it comes to disclosure as to who has received that funding. He added that as it is public money and with the amount being so large, there is a public interest to ensure those monies have been spent correctly and prior to the first grant process scheme commencing the Council were advised that there would be an audit process which would be followed up after the grants had been distributed and that process has commenced by Central Government. Councillor Boden stated that an internal audit process has also been initiated to check our records and as a Council we are of the opinion that Central Government will find no matters of concern as part of their external audit process. Councillor Boden added that if there is anybody who wishes to challenge any inappropriate allocation of funds then they should report it to the Section 151 Officer who will carry out a thorough investigation. Councillor Sutton stated that he has been made aware of various party political offices across the country who has claimed monies as part of the scheme, which, is in his opinion, is very wrong and he would hope that this is not the case locally. Councillor Boden stated that under the rules of General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), he cannot make any comment on any applications for funding, but he will discuss with officers and report back to members of the Council when he has ascertained what his position is to be able to respond. Councillor Boden reiterated that if any member has any knowledge of any improper allocation of grant funding, then they should report it directly to the Section 151 Officer for investigation.

·         Councillor Hay referred to the meeting of Council on 6 August where she highlighted the Cambridgeshire Autonomous Metro (CAM) and the routes it will take. She stated that she is passionate about ensuring that Chatteris has better transport links and the Mayor of the Combined Authority has already indicated that there will be a connection to the Fens when the final routes are published and asked Councillor Boden as the Leader of the Council and in his position on the Combined Authority to raise this subject about including Chatteris in the CAM network at every opportunity. Councillor Boden stated that the following the meeting on the 6 August, he spoke to the Mayor and he has stated that he will look at the suggestion made by Councillor Hay, adding that key announcements concerning the CAM  are expected over the next few months, including detailed plans with regard to the route map. Councillor Boden invited Councillor Hay to meet with himself and the Combined Authority Mayor concerning the connections for Chatteris and the CAM.

·         Councillor Booth referred to a recent article which had been published, concerning the reports of the abolition of District Councils to be replaced with County Councils, which is something that he has alluded to for some time to be considered across Cambridgeshire to save tax payers money and he asked Councillor Boden for clarity as to what his thoughts are and whether it had been discussed at the Combined Authority. Councillor Boden stated that it is not primarily a matter for the Combined Authority (CA), although they had initiated a review several months ago and this was almost finalised until events within Central Government took over. He gave a comprehensive response with regard to this subject at a previous meeting at Council, but recently the County Council Network had produced a report and the District Council Network have also produced a report, which came to a different conclusion from that of the County Council’s. Councillor Boden added that the Government had announced that there would be a white paper produced with regard to Local Government Reform, and some of the contents have been leaked, however, the information has not been consistent and, therefore, it would not be prudent for him to speculate on the content of the white paper, this white paper has now been delayed and will be published in October. Councillor Boden stated that the opportunity that is within Cambridgeshire and Peterborough already with the elected Mayor already in place, as well as the Combined Authority, but also the coterminous Clinical Commissioning Group from the National Health Service, mean that there is the opportunity of merging health and adult social care together, which will save money and potentially bring an improvement to public services. He made the point that he has said many times, that there are too many layers of Local Government and another layer is currently being considered with regard to Strategic Planning for Transport, where a regional organisation is attempting to obtain statutory powers to share with existing organisations. He would like there to be a more stream lined approach in Local Government to ensure it is as responsive as possible to local needs and developed as locally as possible.

·         Councillor Booth referred to a motion that was submitted in May 2019, with regard to the review of play areas across the district and stated that he is aware that Covid may have delayed such work, but asked Councillor Murphy if he could be provided with an update. Councillor Murphy stated that Covid has had an impact, but this is now being looked into further, agreeing to provide Councillor Booth with an update in due course.

·         Councillor Booth referred to page 32 of the agenda pack where the matrix shown provides details of the cumulative totals of household waste collected and highlighted to Councillor Murphy that the performance figure is shown as 27% and the target is 28%, however, the figure shown is highlighted in green and it should be shown as amber.

·         Councillor Booth referred to the matrix shown on page 42, where it details the occupancy of berths at the harbour at Wisbech where the target is 85% and the cumulative performance is 81% and highlighted to Councillor Benney that it is shown as green and it should be shown as amber. Councillor Benney stated that he will check the figures and provide an update to all members.

·         Councillor Topgood asked Councillor Tierney, in relation to his role as the other Portfolio Holder for the Environment, whether he has any comment to make regarding the charging for brown bins, which Councillor Sutton had referred to earlier. Councillor Tierney stated that there are two portfolio holders; Councillor Murphy is responsible for operational matters and he is responsible for the strategic side. He expressed the opinion that he would like to remove brown bin charges, but the Government are undertaking various work on what will happen with the collection of bins going forward.

·         Councillor Mrs Bligh expressed the view that the new Council website is excellent, is very easy to navigate and find things and asked Councillor Tierney if those officers and teams responsible for the website be congratulated and if there has been any other feedback received concerning it. Councillor Tierney thanked Councillor Mrs Bligh for her feedback and added that there have been very positive comments received and he is very pleased with the outcome.

·         Councillor Hoy stated that a number of members of the Council stood under a manifesto of energize change, with the manifesto having a number of commitments, one was to set up a business development centre and the second was to set up community forums. She added that community forums are easy to set up and asked Councillor Boden whether many have been set up to date? Councillor Boden stated that he does not have that information and added that he cannot answer her question. He stated it is the accepted practice that if elected you should carry out the wishes of local electors and to fulfil the promises that were made. Councillor Boden welcomes candidates suggesting particular ideas that they believe are appropriate for their wards even if they may not be the policy of the party that they are representing and added that with regard to waste vertical integration (WVI), there were four candidates who stood under that platform and they were all defeated, and it would appear that the local electorate were supportive of encouraging WVI and their views need to be respected. Councillor Boden stated that with regard to Business Development Centres and Community Forums that is the responsibility of individual councillors to determine how and when they fulfil the promises that they have made to their electorate or if they actually choose to do so.

·         Councillor Booth stated that with regard to candidates standing under a particular party political flag, it is normal practice for a manifesto to be in place which states the aims and objectives that a candidate wishes to achieve, however, if all candidates of a particular political party have their own individual views then they should stand as independents. He added that candidates will have their own aspirations, but if major pledges are being made, then it is the expectation that they are being made under a manifesto. Councillor Boden responded that political parties do have to have some cohesion, but there does need to be room for individual candidates within those parties to give their own interpretations and their own causes that they wish to follow.

·         Councillor Sutton stated that at Annual Council in May 2019, Councillor Boden was asked whether he would consider a member of the opposition to fulfil the role of the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel and asked whether consideration had been given to that approach? Councillor Boden stated that he did consider it and he will continue to consider it in future, but he came to the conclusion that the most important thing was to find the best person to fulfil the role, regardless of political party, and he has every faith in the ability and integrity of Councillor Mason to hold the position of the Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel.