Agenda item
Questions at Cabinet Meetings
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 25 January 2018
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 will not accompany this agenda but will be circulated prior to the meeting.
Minutes:
Public Questions
No public questions were considered.
Member Questions
A total of 13 member questions were submitted in advance of the meeting.
Please refer to the link below to view the responses to the questions: -
If unable to access the document at the link above, please go to the link below and select the ‘Cabinet Questions and Answers’ PDF document at the top of the web page: -
http://192.168.220.171:9071/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=117&MId=8897&Ver=4
The following supplementary questions were asked at the meeting.
Question 1: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hodgkinson clarified that his question related specifically to rates of pay and asked if the Cabinet Member would commit to paying social workers at the regional rate of pay?
Response by: Cllr Richard Boyles - Cabinet Member for Finance and Change
Cllr Boyles stated that the council was undertaking a review of pay, including the package/offer to social care staff to ensure the council was a good place to work. Cllr Boyles informed members he was awaiting for a report from the Director of Children’s Services and confirmed that the council currently paid the regional rate of pay, whilst other councils chose to offer different incentives.
Question 3: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hodgkinson stated, a ‘”cut was a cut”. What the budget proposed was a 10.6 % cut in the mental health budget, (within public health). Despite a 13% cut in sexual health services, Cllr Harman appeared to suggest there had been no impact on the county. If this was the case, why was the cabinet member proposing to spend an extra 13.6% when he didn’t need to?
Response by: Cllr Tim Harman - Cabinet Member for Public Health and Communities
Cllr Harman reiterated the council’s commitment to protecting the most vulnerable people in the community. What was shown in the budget was the total spend in mental health services, one element of what was the public health budget.
Noting the complexities of public health funding and referring to the response to a question from Cllr Iain Dobie at the Health and Wellbeing Board meeting on 23 January 2018, the cabinet member confirmed that the health sector’s spending on mental health, (in real terms), had increased each year since 2015/16.
Cllr Harman informed members that a councillor briefing would be held in the Council Chamber on 21 February 2018. The briefing would provide an opportunity for members to gain a better understanding of Public Mental Health.
Cllr Harman stated he was confident efficiencies in the council’s sexual health services provided good value for money.
Question 4: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hodgkinson referred to the ‘extra hike’ in council tax and questioned why the cabinet member had not asked the public what they thought about the proposed additional increase. Cllr Hodgkinson asked the cabinet member to justify the extra tax to residents of Gloucestershire, given that it would be the biggest rise for many years and above the 2% wage inflation rate?
Response by: Cllr Ray Theodoulou - Cabinet Member for Finance and Change
Cllr Theodoulou commented on the 13% tax increase that had been introduced under a previous Lib Dem/Labour administration and informed members that it had not been considered necessary nor good value for money to undertake a public consultation on a tax increase of 0.5%.
The intention was to do what was reasonable, not ‘nice to have’. The proposed increase was not the full amount that could have been imposed, a decision he hoped the public would acknowledge as a reasonable decision.
Question 5: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hodgkinson stated that the answer to the question contrasted starkly with a statement issued the previous week by the Conservative Chairman of the County Council Network, Paul Carter, which stated “we are deeply disappointed that the Government has not heeded our calls for additional resource.” The Chairman went on to say “Conservative County Leaders had made their feelings known in a letter to the Prime Minister outlining the unpalatable situation counties were in”.
Cllr Hodgkinson asked if Cllr Hawthorne had been one of the Leaders who had written a letter and how he felt about the Prime Minister ignoring such pleas?
Response by: Cllr Mark Hawthorne – Leader of the Council
Cllr Hawthorne confirmed that the Local Government Association (LGA) continued to be actively involved in lobbying the Treasury on a number of significant issues, some of which had resulted in additional funding for Adult Social Care. One issue the County Council Network was currently lobbying on was the end of the Transitional Grant.
The Leader stated that the LGA continued to lobby government for better funding and that he had been one of the Council Leaders who had signed the letter to the Prime Minister. Cllr Hawthorne clarified that Gloucestershire was in a secure position following the successful bid to participate in the national Business Rates Retention Pilot Scheme 2018/19. The Leader said that the Government was committed to the Fair Funding Review and that the council would continue to lobby to ensure a fair funding structure.
Question 6: Cllr Paul Hodgkinson
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hodgkinson said he was pleased the council’s efforts to change the culture in Children’s Services had been noted by OFSTED. Suggesting that the informal feedback from OFSTED had only formed ‘a small part of the feedback’, Cllr Hodgkinson asked when the full feedback would be reported?
Response by: Cllr Mark Hawthorne – Leader of the Council
Cllr Hawthorne confirmed that the feedback shared with the Children’s Improvement Board would be published on the Ofsted website, the date of which, was, as yet, unknown. The timetable for placing the information in the public domain was entirely down to Ofsted.
Question 7: Cllr Jeremy Hilton
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hilton clarified that his question referred to the £30K allocation per county division for Highways Local, (approved by Full Council in February 2017, following lobbying from the Lib Dems).
Referencing examples of how the allocation of funding had been used within his own division, Cllr Hilton questioned why the Highways Local Scheme had reduced by two thirds to £10K, (for works not normally able to be carried out), and asked why the cabinet member had cut the budget by £1m without first consulting councillors?
Response by: Cllr Vernon Smith – Cabinet Member for Highways and Flood
Cllr Smith informed Cllr Hilton that the highways local funding allocation for 2018/19 was exactly the same as that proposed the previous year and that it was for full council to make the final decision on the amount to be allocated.
Cllr Smith said he was pleased with the budget proposals, (the largest financial investment in the county’s road network ever, with over £150m funding allocated over the next 5 years). Referring to the £120m backlog inherited from a previous administration, Cllr Smith informed members that the backlog had since reduced to £80m under the current conservative administration.
Cllr Smith questioned the use of Highways Local and suggested that some members of the Lib Dem Group had not used the allocations to their full potential, in some cases, not at all.
Urging members to work with their local highways managers, Cllr Smith believed this would help move Gloucestershire into the 21st Century.
Question 8: Cllr Jeremy Hilton
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Hilton expressed concern that the localisation of business rates might create problems for the county should the council go into deep recession or if affected by negative business rates income.
Cllr Hilton asked if Cllr Theodoulou planned to review the recommended 4% to 6% range of balances in the light of the risk of the 100% business rates retention scheme?
Response by: Cllr Ray Theodoulou - Cabinet Member for Finance and Change
Cllr Theodoulou referred to the council’s £1m reserve, and agreed there could be fluctuations. Cllr Theodoulou informed members that it was difficult to foresee how the situation might play out but that, at this stage, it would be inappropriate to spend the additional funding without actually having received it.
Question 11: Cllr Jeremy Hilton
Agenda item 7: Financial Monitoring Report
Cllr Hilton said he welcomed the road improvement schemes for Gloucester, but expressed concern about the bottleneck on the south west by-pass by Llanthony Priory, which was in desperate need of improvement.
Offering his support to encourage the GFirst LEP to allocate £2m funding for the necessary land acquisition on which to build a new road for this area of Gloucester, Cllr Hilton asked what was the back up plan, if the money was not forthcoming?
Response by: Cllr Nigel Moor - Cabinet Member for Fire, Planning, and Infrastructure
Cllr Moor assured Cllr Hilton he could be confident the matter was regarded as a priority issue by the LEP Board.
Question 12: Cllr Rachel Smith
Agenda item 5: Recommendation to Council – Council Strategy and Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) 2018-19 to 2020-2021
Cllr Smith questioned the breakdown of information relating to the one off investments reported in the budget summary table at page 4 of the MTFS document. Cllr Smith sought clarification on any comparisons that could be made in one-off investments between this and the previous year.
Response by: Cllr Ray Theodoulou - Cabinet Member for Finance and Change
Cllr Theodoulou confirmed that a special adjustment had been made in one off investments the previous year. For this year, the adjustment had been lower. Cllr Theodoulou said he anticipated some changes in one off investments.
Question 12: Cllr Lesley Williams
Agenda item 6: Recommendation to Council – Minerals Local Plan
Cllr Williams thanked the cabinet member for the response to her question and said she would be exploring the areas at risk of flooding, listed on the Environment Agency Website.
Supporting documents:
PDF 108 KB