Agenda item

Questions to the Executive Leader and Executive Members received under Standing Order 10(c)

Meeting of Council, Thursday, 7 October 2010 6.30 pm (Item 43.)

To deal with the following questions to the Executive Leader and / or other Executive Members, in accordance with Standing Order 11.3(a):

(i) To the Executive Leader, from Cllr Alexander:

“Will the Executive Leader agree to sign a joint letter with the Leader of the Opposition addressed to the Defence Secretary lobbying to maintain the presence and number of Ghurkhas at Imphal Barracks?”

(ii) To the Executive Leader, from Cllr Alexander:

“On 6th July 2010 the Executive delegated power to set pay grading of assistant directors to the Head of Paid Services. Does the Leader think that in this current financial climate it is appropriate for the Executive to delegate senior pay levels to other senior officers?”

(iii) To the Executive Leader, from Cllr Merrett:

“Would the Executive Leader explain why the long term assumption for the recycling rate in the proposed Waste PFI contract is so low?”

(iv) To the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services, from Cllr Crisp:

“Will the Executive Member agree that changes to non-recycling waste collections in Holgate and Westfield have been an unmitigated disaster for local residents?”

(v) To the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services, from Cllr Aspden:

“Can the Executive Member give Council an update on the progress with the roll out of the new three box recycling system and also give any indication of the effect of the new system on the amount of recycling collected?”

(vi) To the Executive Member for Children & Young People’s Services, from Cllr Bowgett:

“Does the Executive Member believe that the possible redirection of resources from local authority schools to free schools is an unwelcome piece of Government legislation?”

(vii) To the Executive Member for Children & Young People’s Services, from Cllr Wiseman:

"Would the Executive Member please inform the Council about the plans for Local Democracy Week?"

(viii) To the Executive Member for Leisure, Culture & Social Inclusion, from Cllr Cregan:

“Can the Executive Member inform the Council of the response received from Sarah Teather on requesting York to keep some of the playbuilder funding earmarked for claw back?”

(ix) To the Executive Member for Leisure, Culture & Social Inclusion from Councillor Hogg:

“Can the Executive Member tell Council how visitor numbers for the new York Explore compare with the figures before the refurbishment?”

(x) To the Executive Member for Corporate Services, from Cllr Brian Watson:

“Will the Executive member agree to postpones he publication of Your City until after the next local elections in order to avoid any allegations of it being used for political propaganda?”

(xi) To the Executive Member for City Strategy, from Cllr Alexander:

“Can you please direct me to where and when 'some Labour Councillors’ have made ‘contrary claims’ to elderly people who are unable to walk to the nearest bus stop, being entitled to £50 worth of travel tokens?”

Minutes:

Eleven questions had been submitted to Executive Members under Standing Order 11.3(a). The guillotine having fallen at this point, Members agreed to receive written answers to their questions, as set out below:

(i) To the Executive Leader, from Cllr Alexander:

Reply

Yes

(ii) To the Executive Leader, from Cllr Alexander:

Reply

I am always interested in the Labour Leader’s interest in financial matters, and I note the comments that his group made to the Executive before the meeting on 6^th July:

‘Labour Group Spokespersons Comments for 06/07/10

· Has always supported a leaner council that concentrates its resources on front line services

· Reaffirms that view in the current climate of huge funding cuts for local government

· Expects the Executive to ensure that effective management and strategic leadership exists in each of the council’s directorates.’

The decision of the Executive to delegate the grading of the new assistant directors posts to the Head of Paid Service (Chief Executive) was not called in. I have confidence in the Chief Executive and her focus on achieving the More For York savings. The decision did not delegate the Assistant Director Pay structure, which is set by Members.

No cost of living pay awards have been made to Assistant Directors since April 2008.

(iii) To the Executive Leader, from Cllr Merrett:

“Would the Executive Leader explain why the long term assumption for the recycling rate in the proposed Waste PFI contract is so low?”

York is the forth highest Unitary Authority in England and Wales when it comes to recycling. This puts York well into the top quartile. Our target is to achieve a minimum of 50% recycling going forward. This would put us second, only to Rutland, who's target is high due to their high levels of green waste composted, but lower dry recyclates. The more urban, less prosperous and more deprived an area is the lower its recycling rate is likely to be, a WRAP study has found. (December 2009) the greatest yield per household per year was in ‘Rural-80' classed area, meaning authorities were at least 80% of the population lives in rural settlements or larger market towns had the highest levels of total recycling/composting. WYG wrote in April 2010, 'The top performing authorities achieving recycling/composting levels in excess of 50% tend to collect a significant amount of garden waste.

The collection by York of 6 materials on kerbside, including plastic, is envied by many authorities and contribute significantly to our performance. However, there is a diminishing return in the levels of investment to the marginal increase in recycling collected. In other words, to move beyond our 50% to 52.5% targets will be far more expensive, in marketing, collection and processing than any previous investments, yet will give us lower returns. The PFI, with its mechanical separation front end which removes even more recycling, plus the Anaerobic Digester which produces a 'green' fuel is judged to be more cost effective than trying to push the envelope of recycling which is why this is common practice on the continent.

(iv) To the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services, from Cllr Crisp:

“Will the Executive Member agree that changes to non-recycling waste collections in Holgate and Westfield have been an unmitigated disaster for local residents?”

The changes to collections have been far from a disaster. It is true that some residents have taken a time to adapt to the changes but this is not unusual when changes are made to services.

When the changes were made, all residents were advised of the new arrangements and, for the vast majority, this has not proved to be a problem. There are historical issues with waste collections in some areas and the changes have highlighted these and brought them to a head. The storage of waste in back lanes between collections has been a long standing problem in many areas in York. Fortnightly collections have exacerbated the situation in some places, where waste was being left in lanes for 2 weeks. Fortnightly collections from terraced areas work do perfectly well in most other parts of the city – Clifton for example.

It is important that for Health & Safety reasons (including public safety) we move way from back lane collections. Not only is it inefficient, it is fraught with dangers for our staff and the public. I am sure that Cllr Crisp would not want to expose our staff to unacceptable risks. We always work to the Health & Safety Executive’s guidance for this type of operation.

In recent weeks we have consulted all affected residents in the Holgate & Westfield area and further changes made based on their responses. It is interesting to note that despite the various options offered the majority of residents have continued to use the method proposed by the council in April. Over 200 bins have been delivered to residents who had requested wheeled bins to be used in conjunction with central collection points. On the first collection day less than 30 were presented with the remaining homes continuing to present bags at the front of their properties, as per the changes implemented in April 2010, despite them having the option not to.

The change to alternate week collections has been very successful – recycling in the area has been warmly welcomed and the move to alternate week collections has not proved unpopular. What we are in the final stages of implementing is how, and where, residents in the Leeman Rd area present their waste to us but this has to be done in a way that ensures there is no detriment to the aesthetics of any area in between collections.

(v) To the Executive Member for Neighbourhood Services, from Cllr Aspden:

Reply

The 3 box system is going very well and is on schedule to be completed on time, that is by the 15th October 2010. By that date, we will have delivered 170,000 boxes and lids to nearly 70,000 homes across York. 65,000 of these homes have been recycling for a number of years but the remainder will be receiving recycling for the first time.

The impact has been very good indeed. The streets look a good deal tidier, both before and after collections, and in areas where the boxes are being used there have been no complaints of litter as were experienced previously. Residents have welcomed the boxes and so have the collection crews. It is now easier than ever to participate in our service and our crews find them easier and quicker to use. This is important as we will use the capacity freed up within the service to provide recycling to more homes across the city in the future.

Some residents, particularly the elderly and infirm, have contacted us to say that they find the new boxes difficult to store or move. As part of the project, we are reviewing our Equalities Impact Assessment for this service and have held events with staff and the public. We have identified several solutions and alternatives to the boxes for those residents who find using the service difficult and this is in addition to the assisted collection service we already provide. This has been welcomed by those residents attending the event. It is important that we make our services inclusive to everyone and officers are working hard to ensure this happens.

5 of the six rounds that are now collected using this method were monitored for 5 weeks immediately prior to introduction and 5 weeks afterwards. There has been an increase in recycling although it does vary by round. The highest shows an increase of 3.5% and the lowest 1.8%. The average across all 5 rounds is a 2.7% increase in weight collected. Hopefully that will be replicated as we complete the roll out.

(vi) To the Executive Member for Children & Young People’s Services, from Cllr Bowgett:

“Does the Executive Member believe that the possible redirection of resources from local authority schools to free schools is an unwelcome piece of Government legislation?”

My views on the need for free schools in York have been made very clear, both in the Press and on Radio York. In short, it is difficult to see how the opening of a free school in York would add value to the education of either children attending it or to the ability of existing schools to continue to make the excellent progress that is so consistently evident. York has an excellent education service with schools that serve their local communities well and is nationally recognised as doing so.

As I understand it, this is not the case in every authority – and it may be that in those areas the provision of a free school is one possible answer. There are also gaps in provision in some very rural areas of the country which may need to be filled.

However, my preference would always be to ensure that every child can access a good or outstanding local school and that local authorities have the mandate and resources required to ensure that is the case everywhere.

(vii) To the Executive Member for Children & Young People’s

Services, from Cllr Wiseman:

"Would the Executive Member please inform the Council about the plans for Local Democracy Week?"

The cross party Member Development Steering Group, which I chair, has been considering plans for Local Democracy Week alongside other ways of involving more members of the public in the democratic life of the city.

Monday 11th October sees the start of Local Democracy Week across the country. Here in York an interesting programme of events has been planned, which include Meet A Lord Mayor, A Councillor, who me?, Corridors of Power (the history of the Guildhall, then and now) and tours of the Mansion House.

There will also be a Schools Council Meeting in the Council Chamber and newly elected Members of the Youth Council for this session will be welcomed by the Lord Mayor and then meet to decide their campaigning priorities.

Finally I would like to thank all Officers and Members who have contributed to the recent assessment of the Council for Charter Status in Member Development. We do not have a confirmed outcome yet but we are optimistic that it will be positive!

It is by holding events such as those I have mentioned and by ensuring that elected members have plenty of opportunities for their training and development, that we raise the standards of the democratic process and make sure that the next generation of local politicians are encouraged and supported.

(viii) To the Executive Member for Leisure, Culture & Social Inclusion, from Cllr Cregan:

“Can the Executive Member inform the Council of the response received from Sarah Teather on requesting York to keep some of the playbuilder funding earmarked for claw back?”

We have still not heard from the Government about the outcome of the review of Playbuilder funding. It is clear that the Government are currently making many difficult decisions about spending as part of the Comprehensive Spending Review, the results of which are due to be announced later this month.

I wrote to Children's Minister Sarah Teather to express my support for the Playbuilder scheme and to ask that the enormous benefits of the scheme be taken into account during the review and to stress the importance of many of the planned sites to their local communities. I have been reassured that the Department of Education are aware of the benefits of Playbuilder and that they will be taking these into account when making a decision.

The financial mess that Labour left means that some difficult decisions will have to be taken and unfortunately some good schemes will lose funding. Once the Government have made their announcement a report will come to an Executive Member Decision Session setting out the consequences of any decision.

(ix) To the Executive Member for Leisure, Culture & Social Inclusion from Councillor Hogg:

“Can the Executive Member tell Council how visitor numbers for the new York Explore compare with the figures before the refurbishment?”

Before the refurbishment the library was attracting an average of 8,760 visitors per week. Since the opening of the new York Explore the average number of visitors has risen to 10,500 per week and continues to rise steadily.

During the summer visitor numbers were especially high rising above an average of 11,000 per week. The numbers were boosted by special events over the summer, including the successful Big City Read, which attracted large numbers of visitors to libraries across the city and the children’s reading challenge, Space Hop, in which 530 children took part.

There are also an increasing number of community groups using the Centre - Borders Book Group came over after the closure of the shop. We host a range of reading groups and writers groups and there will be a Craft Club starting this month.

Adult and Community Education classes have now started for the Autumn and we anticipate a further increase to the number of visitors as this develops. We are planning a partnership with the University of York School of Continuing Education to deliver adult learning for family and local history as well as archives, using our collections to support the classes.

(x) To the Executive Member for Corporate Services, from Cllr Brian Watson:

“Will the Executive member agree to postpones he publication of Your City until after the next local elections in order to avoid any allegations of it being used for political propaganda?”

This administration goes to great pains to make sure ‘Your City’ is apolitical, so it expects there would be no upheld allegation of political propaganda and therefore no reason to stop publishing. There has never been an upheld allegation of that sort before.

This publication is more apolitical than the vast majority of councils, as publications do not carry quotations from councillors or any photographs of any councillors, except for the Lord Mayor, in any of its publications. This is stipulated in the Protocol on Publicity and Media (Constitution Part 5D, section 18), which states:

‘The Council communicates through its own publications as well as through the media. All of the content of Council publications will abide with Paragraph 12 of the Code of Conduct (see above).

Members will not be featured in photographs for use in publications except in 3 below. Only the Lord Mayor will be actively featured in Council publications (with an overlap of two months when Lord Mayors change to allow for the lead in times in publications).

Simple ‘head and shoulders’ photographs of Councillors that allow the public to identify them are acceptable, providing they are not linked to any text that in any way promotes the Councillor in question. Factual information, such as contact details, is acceptable.’

Further, paragraph 6.4 of the media protocol states:

'No publicity or press releases issued by the Council will quote the comments of Councillors, although publicity or media releases concerning any decision of the Council will make it clear who was responsible for that decision'.

As a basic principle, the media protocol recognises the need for Council communications in paragraph 2.2, which states:‘The Code notes that, increasingly, local authorities see the task of making the public aware of the services available as an essential part of providing all kinds of services. Good, effective publicity, aimed at improved public awareness of a Council's activities, is to be welcomed.’

Paragraph 12 of the Code of Recommended Practice on Local Authority Publicity (a new version of which is currently being consulted on) states:

‘Any publicity describing the council's policies and aims should be as objective as possible, concentrating on facts or explanation or both’.

I believe that ‘Your City’ achieves the above aims - it is good, effective publicity aimed at improving public awareness of the Council's activities. Should there be any risk of any story being seen as political the Marketing & Communications team would take and abide by the advice of the Head of Legal Services, and they are increasingly cautious in the run up to all elections.

There are two more ‘Your City’ publications this financial year - one to consult on the budget in December, which I hope that he will agree is important and one to provide feedback in February. ‘Your City’ is the only method the Council has for that consultation, and it is already budgeted for.

(xi) To the Executive Member for City Strategy, from Cllr Alexander:

First, may I congratulate Cllr Alexander on his pending award for the ‘most obscure question of the year’.

I suspect that he is referring to an edition of the Liberal Democrat Focus newsletter – which I can understand is a much appreciated source of factual information for the Councillor – and which I understand indicated that some Labour Councillors had claimed in a leaflet circulated a few weeks ago ‘that travel tokens for the elderly had been abolished altogether’.