Agenda item

Up to 30 minutes is allowed for this item.

 

Written questions

 

To answer any written questions from a County Councillor, (or any person living or working in the county, or is affected by the work of the County Council), about any matter which relates to any item on the agenda for this meeting.

 

The closing date for the receipt of written questions is 4.00 pm on Thursday 14 July 2016. Please send written questions to the Chief Executive marked for the attention of Jo Moore, (email: jo.moore@gloucestershire.gov.uk)

 

Oral questions

 

To answer any oral questions from members of the public. An oral question may be asked by a member of the public about any item on the agenda for this meeting, provided notice of the question is given by the questioner to the Chief Executive’s representative, at least 30 minutes prior to the start of the meeting.

 

Depending on the nature of the questions, it may not be possible to provide a comprehensive answer at the meeting, in which case a written answer will be provided as soon as reasonably possible after the meeting. Questions received and proposed responses do not accompany this agenda but will be circulated prior to the meeting.

Public questions

 

No public questions were submitted for consideration at the meeting.

 

Member questions

 

Please refer to the following link to view the responses to the member questions submitted for consideration at the meeting.

 

http://glostext.gloucestershire.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=117&MId=8219&Ver=4

 

A total of 15 (member) questions were submitted for consideration, for which the following supplementary questions were asked at the meeting.

 

Question 1: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

 

Item 10: Financial Monitoring Report

 

On a recent visit to Norway, I was amazed at the superior quality of roads, in comparison to the roads in the UK. The roads in the UK are in a dreadful condition. How much input will local councillors have to consider the list of schemes for which £3.1 funding has been allocated to the new programme for structural patching? It sounds to me like a ‘done deal’. There is no indication from the Local Highways Manager on how the £3.1 million will be spent.

 

Response by: Cllr Vernon Smith – Cabinet Member for Highways and Flood

 

I believe it is very important for local councillors to have an input to the new programme, via discussions with the appropriate Local Highways Manager. The Highways Team takes the allocation of funding very seriously and is currently working extensively to address this issue. There is also a Shadows Meeting on 21 July 2016, to which you are welcome to attend.

 

Question 2: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

 

Item 10: Financial Monitoring Report

 

Response by: Cllr Ray Theodoulou – Cabinet Member for Finance and Change

 

You state the council’s general reserves are only 4.7 per cent of the council’s revenue budget in the 4 to 6 percentage deemed nationally prudent, and as approved as part of the MTFS. If as low as 4 per cent is acceptable, can the Cabinet Member give me his assurance he will place £3 million to bridge the gaps in the Highways Local Scheme and Adult Mental Health Services, post EU Referendum.

 

Response by: Cllr Ray Theodoulou – Cabinet Member for Finance and Change

 

I cannot give you this assurance. The council’s general reserves are ring-fenced, set aside for a rainy day or if unexpected issues go wrong. If Cabinet was able to utilise the reserves at a later date, or in a different way, it would, but this is not proposed at this time.

 

Question 3: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson

 

Item 10: Financial Monitoring Report

 

Given the current economic climate and the impact of the EU referendum, have you taken into account the allow extra time for the council to sell its surplus assets to achieve an estimated asset sales value of just under £23 million?   

 

Response by: Cllr Ray Theodoulou – Cabinet Member for Finance and Change

 

There is no reason to believe the value of the council’s assets will depreciate. On recent checks, the value of assets appears to be getting better. I agree, the current economic climate is patchy and can be volatile, but there is no hurry to dispose of the council’s assets – we have plenty of time. We will, of course, endeavour to get the best possible price. 

 

Question 4: Cllr Jeremy Hilton

 

Item 5: Draft Minerals Local Plan

 

Land off Myers Road is listed in the Gloucester Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment  2011 as land suitable for housing. Site SUV43 - 165 houses. Does the Minerals Local Plan provide sufficient alternative sites within the county to provide a place for Allstone and other minerals businesses who operate here to relocate?

 

Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor – Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure

 

This is an issue for the site owners and Gloucester City Council, to whom site owners can make representations. The Minerals Local Plan will go through various iterations re the use of land. If there is progress on the use of this site for housing development, representations can be made to the County Council, for which we will be happy to take account of in any revisions to the Minerals Plan.

 

Question 5: Cllr Jeremy Hilton

 

Item 5: Draft Minerals Local Plan

 

Gloucester City Council has to find locations for an extra 3,000 houses, as suggested by the JCS Inspector. Land of Myers Road would make an ideal site to contribute to extra homes. Do you support the allocation of this site for additional housing within the emerging city plan?

 

Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor – Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure

 

If Gloucester City Council wished to pursue this as a site for housing development, I am sure we would want to embark on discussions to this effect. This is clearly a view for the City Council to consider.

 

Question 6: Cllr Jeremy Hilton

 

Item 5: Draft Minerals Local Plan

 

Policies within the Minerals Local Plan suggest Land off Myers Road would not be allocated for recycling, sand and gravel supply, skip hire, concrete batching and stone crushing, if considered as a new proposal. Do you agree, this is because of the impact of the policies on the local highway network and the effect of noise and dust on neighbouring residential properties? (Swallow Park & Armscroft Estate).

 

Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor – Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure

 

This is a historic situation. The Gloucester City Local Plan gives the opportunity to assess its continued relevance. I will be very happy to discuss the matter in more detail when the proposals are known.

 

Question 7: Cllr Richard Leppington

 

Item 11: Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy 2017-18

 

I understand we must live within our means. I also feel you must appreciate the negative impact any significant cuts will have on the most vulnerable people in my community. Could I therefore have a commitment that officers from this authority will work with elected representatives from the Forest of Dean District to look at alternative options which will not affect evening or Sunday bus services?

 

Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor – Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure

 

I can give you my assurance officers from this authority will work with Forest of Dean Councillors. However, as you are aware, some services in the Forest of Dean depend on subsidies equating to £38.00 per passenger. This is a very difficult decision, particularly when trying to remain within the £8.00 subsidy cap. As with other situations, we will continue to try to provide good community transport in the Forest of Dean, and are therefore willing to work with yourself and other district councillors to look at alternative options.

 

Question 8: Cllr Iain Dobie

 

Item 9: Decision to launch public consultation on the principles of the Sexual Health Services Review

 

I welcome your interest in focussing the consultation on ‘at risk’ communities. If it is evident from the returns to the consultation key vulnerable groups are weak, can you build in the flexibility to redouble your efforts to secure this

important output? Can you give this assurance?

 

Response by: Cllr Andrew Gravells – Cabinet Member for Public Health and Communities

 

I believe this matter has been covered in the cabinet report. We are keen to get the consultation right, including consulting with hard to reach groups - it is important to listen to everyone’s views. Even if the outcome is not what it is expected it to be, the consultation has to be credible.

 

Question 9: Cllr Iain Dobie

 

Item 9: Decision to launch public consultation on the principles of the Sexual Health Services Review

 

Given there are inequalities in sexual health and public health is significantly underspent in Gloucestershire, why did GCC Public Health Services, (according to the papers published with the agenda for the Overview and Scrutiny Management Committee meeting), underspend against its public health grant on sexual health and mental health last year? Could this failure be a reason for some sexual inequalities?

 

Response by: Cllr Andrew Gravells – Cabinet Member for Public Health and Communities

 

This is not the case. The current underspend is a result of a demand-driven budget. I will provide a more detailed written answer to this question after the meeting.

 

Question 11: Cllr Bernie Fisher

 

Item 5: Draft Minerals Local Plan

 

I am happy to support the Draft Minerals Local Plan, but only if the proposal made at last week’s Environment and Communities Scrutiny Committee meeting, regarding Policy MW06, is endorsed by Cabinet.

 

Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor – Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure

 

I have not received cabinet member support for this proposal. Planning policy starts with national guidance. Although the proposed policy is discretionary, if the council went against national guidance, we would have nothing to counter an applicant’s right of appeal with the Independent Examiner. I am therefore unable to support an approach that could lead to potential abortive expenditure at appeal. By supporting proposed policy MW06, members will have an opportunity to go to the Planning Inspector, and in persuading the Secretary of State.

 

Question 12: Cllr Bernie Fisher

 

Item 5: Draft Minerals Local Plan

 

There does not appear to be a commitment to go back to the District Councils to seek their views on the Draft Minerals Local Plan. Will there be an extended period of consultation to consult with the districts?

 

Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor – Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning and Infrastructure

 

There has already been an extensive programme of consultation. Noting your concerns, cabinet members and officers support the idea of an all member seminar.