Agenda item

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

Meeting of Council, Thursday, 29 March 2012 6.30 pm (Item 77.)

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

(i) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Doughty:

“With reference to the Cabinet meeting of 6 March, Agenda item 7 (Neighbourhood Working – A New Approach), Part 7(d), Page 46 refers to 'Locating staff within wards, making them a 'hub' for local information so they can work more effectively with communities.' How will this work in reality when staffing numbers in the Neighbourhood Management Unit have been significantly reduced?”

(ii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Doughty:

“Part 7(e)of the report at Agenda item 7 of the Cabinet meeting of 6 March, (Neighbourhood Working – A New Approach), refers to 'introducing Facebook and Twitter and regularly getting messages out into the community.' I acknowledge social media might be a useful tool to assist in engaging with what will probably be a small number of younger people in the City but how does the Cabinet Member envisage the majority of the City's residents will be kept informed, particularly as the number of assisted Ward meetings and publications are being cut?”

(iii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Doughty:

“With reference to the £130K portion of the Neighbourhoods budget, can the Cabinet please explain if a fee or percentage will be payable to the 'standalone third sector management

organisation' who will be administering the bids and funding? How much will this be and will it be funded from the £130K portion?”

(iv) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr D’Agorne:

“Which gritting routes and locations are to be removed from the network to achieve the budget savings and what criteria will be applied to determine which ward funded grit bins should be retained or removed?”

(v) To the Cabinet Member for City Strategy, from Cllr D’Agorne:

“What further delays are anticipated in implementing Labour's manifesto commitment to introduce a 20mph limit in all residential areas in the city?”

(vi) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr Galvin:

“Regarding the Beckfield Lane Waste Disposal Site, how many accidents to members of the public have there been in the past ten years and what were the circumstances of said accidents (if any)?”

(vii) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr Galvin:

“Has the likely increase in fly tipping near the Beckfield Lane Waste Disposal Site been considered as a result of its closure and if so what measures will be taken to deal with this eventuality?”

(viii) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr Galvin:

“Have there been any consultations or surveys of users of the BeckfieldLane Waste Disposal facility prior to the decision to close this site?”

(ix) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

“Could the cabinet member tell us if she would agree that development of an attractive archive tourist/research centre in the centre of York incorporating the City Archives and elements of the Borthwick Institute and the Minster Archive collection would create an asset for both residents and visitors to the city?”

(x) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

“In preparing the cost estimates for the Community Stadium, have the pre- during- and post build salaries/expenses of the senior CYC officer responsible for delivery of the stadium and the cost of other officers working on the stadium project (as all or part of their responsibilities)been calculated and if so what is the total sum and over what period of time has this figure been calculated?”

(xi) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

“Assuming the Community Stadium project goes ahead, who will finance the additional training pitch which will be required and where will it be located?”

(xii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

“What is the estimated working-life expectancy of the Waterworld complex and what plans have been made to update its outdated technical requirements in the short term prior to replacement of the current facility?”

(xiii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Healey:

“Regarding the proposed Community Stadium, what financial incentives and/or subsidies if any will be made available by CYC to the successful bidder for the Operations Management contract for the stadium?”

(xiv) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Healey:

“Regarding the Community Stadium, what financial liabilities will rest with CYC should either or both the football or rugby clubs become unable to meet their contractual obligations regarding the stadium and what steps will be put in place to limit the liability of CYC in this regard?”

(xv) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Healey:

“Regarding the Community Stadium, should the NHS or the University of York St John fail to take part as tenants of the stadium, have potential alternative tenants been identified and have preliminary discussions been held?”

(xvi) To the Cabinet Leader, from Cllr Runciman:

“Will the leader please confirm the total reduction in the core government grant anticipated for the financial year 2012/13? And the subsequent reduction anticipated for the year 2013/14?”

(xvii)To the Cabinet Leader, from Cllr Runciman:

“Will the leader confirm that all officer and other supporting reports to be considered by Cabinet members will continue to be made available for public scrutiny on the Councils web site at least 1 week before the decision is scheduled to be taken?”

(xviii) To the Cabinet Member for City Strategy, from Cllr Hyman:

“Given that the planning inspector has confirmed that it is not the case that areas of search will not be touched “for at least 25 years”, will the Cabinet member now undertake a full public consultation on the use of Green Belt land?”

(xix) To the Cabinet Member for City Strategy, from Cllr Hyman:

“Would the Cabinet member for City Strategy state when he now expects that new low emission buses will be introduced onto stage carriage services in the City?”

(xx) To the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, from Cllr Firth:

“Would the Cabinet member state how much the City of York Council has contributed towards the costs of providing present "free" WiFi access in the City Centre?”

(xxi) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Would the Cabinet member list for each Ward Committee in the City the votes cast for, and estimated costs of, each of the 10 most popular schemes balloted on in the autumn by residents and which of these schemes is likely to get the go ahead given the reduced level of funding now being made available?”

(xxii)To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Orrell:

“What budgetary assumptions has the Cabinet member made on a likely increase in accident claims arising from the reduction in highways maintenance expenditure agreed by the Council at its last meeting?”

(xxiii) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Would the cabinet member state the number and type of lampposts that will remain to be tested and replaced at the end of the 12/13 financial year?”

(xxiv) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Firth:

“What assumptions did the Cabinet member make on the additional costs which would arise at the other two recycling centres in the City to reflect the transfer of activity from Beckfield Lane?”

(xxv) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Could the cabinet member outline the budget implications of the additional cleansing costs to address the increase in fly tipping that has been forecast by one of his colleagues?”

(xxvi) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“Given the obvious effect on residents in the surrounding areas, why has there been no public consultation on the implications of the decision to close Beckfield Lane?”

(xxvii)To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Can the cabinet member confirm the total amount spent on road repairs in 2010/11, 2011/12 and the budget for 2012/13”

(xxviii) To the Cabinet Member Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Ayre:

“Could the Cabinet member state how much rental has now been received from the organisers of last year's Christmas Grotto in Exhibition Square and say whether she plans to repeat this, or a similar event, in 2012?”

(xxix) To the Cabinet Member Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Ayre:

“Can the Cabinet member please outline the total ward committee budget for each of the last four years and for this year?”

(xxx) To the Cabinet Member Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Ayre:

“Will the Cabinet Member confirm that all salt bins currently funded by Ward Committees will now be filled and refilled from the core budget?”

(xxxi) To the Cabinet Member for Education, Children and Young People’s Services, from Cllr Ayre:

“Will the Cabinet member please provide assurances that Hempland Kids Club will not be evicted following the public consultation on Burnholme School?”

(xxxii)To the Cabinet Member for Education, Children and Young People’s Services, from Cllr Aspden:

“Can the cabinet member commit to a successful future for Street Sport following the ward committee cuts?”

(xxxiii) To the Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“Can the cabinet member outline plans to cater for the needs of those people affected by the change in eligibility criteria from moderate to severe during the transitional period?”

(xxxiv) To the Cabinet Member for Crime and Community Safety from Cllr Orrell:

“Can the cabinet member outline what he considers his main achievement in the past year?”

(xxxv) To the Cabinet Member for Crime and Community Safety from Cllr Orrell:

“Does the cabinet member agree that his £14,700 Special Responsibility Allowance would have more direct effect on reducing low level crime and Anti-Social Behaviour if it was used to fund Community Ranger patrols in 3 Ward Committee areas?”

Minutes:

Thirty five questions had been submitted to the Cabinet Leader and Cabinet 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 Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Doughty:

Reply:

“There are clearly assumptions being made here which are not in any way founded in fact, as the staffing review is yet to be undertaken by the Director of Communities and Neighbourhoods in consultation with myself.

As I don’t know what the new structure of the NMU will be yet, meaning you also don’t know, then the second part of your question is not relevant.

The staff team will work effectively with other ward-based staff such as estate managers in Housing and Street Environment Officers sharing their community contacts and streamlining working arrangements. In this way they will share intelligence and information. The ward team meetings will provide additional opportunity for this. The new arrangements represent a much more efficient use of staff time and the Council’s resources.”

(ii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Doughty:

Reply:

“Committee meetings per year. Councillors will be assisted at every meeting of the Ward Committee - up to 3 per year. One will be the Ward Committee AGM and a further 2 meetings will be arranged if requested by the Ward Committees.

This is not a significant change to the number of meetings and publications that presently exist, albeit the formats will be different. And although many people may not use Facebook and Twitter, many more people are online and will access information through the council’s website.”

(iii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Doughty:

“With reference to the £130K portion of the Neighbourhoods budget, can the Cabinet please explain if a fee or percentage will be payable to the 'standalone third sector management

organisation' who will be administering the bids and funding? How much will this be and will it be funded from the £130K portion?”

Reply:

“A fee will be payable to the third sector management organisation. We are currently seeking tenders for this work to ensure that the fee is as competitive as possible. This will be a more efficient arrangement for the Council taking away the need for officer time spent monitoring service level agreements. The fee will be more than balanced out by the efficiency savings created.”

(iv) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr D’Agorne:

Reply:

“After every winter there is a full review of the winter maintenance programme for the coming year based on the outcomes of the previous year. This is published in the revised Winter Maintenance Manual. The changes to the gritting routes will be considered as part of this review. The Labour administration has put in place a contingency fund for bad weather of £250,000, meaning that York should always be able to cope in periods of very bad weather. This is a reversal of the decision taken last year by the Liberal Democrats to remove any contingency funds.

With regard to ward funded grit bins, they will stay out during the summer. A decision on the criteria for the future allocation of salt bins has yet to be taken.”

(v) To the Cabinet Member for City Strategy, from Cllr D’Agorne:

“What further delays are anticipated in implementing Labour's manifesto commitment to introduce a 20mph limit in all residential areas in the city?

Reply:

“We have in fact being making important progress. As you will be aware a 20mph steering group has been set up.

· A revised and reduced signing approach has been worked out and needed to be agreed with the Police as well as myself. The new approach will significantly reduce the number of signs required across the city.

· Discussions with the Police have taken place regarding the approach to be taken as it is important to have Police ‘buy-in’ and support for the project. The Police initially had a number of concerns but I’m very pleased to say are now supportive of the proposed policy approach, and of the roll-out across the city and will be willing to work with us as part of the delivery.

· I would acknowledge that progress hasn’t been as fast as I’d have liked, but following previous year’s budget cuts by the former administration, resources within the team have been stretched with a number of projects being progressed by the same member of staff.

· I have therefore discussed and agreed with officers the intended appointment of a project manager for the city wide delivery to expedite delivery, now we are clear on the basis of our new approach. We are looking to set up web pages to assist with the consultation and have everything on line to view – timetables, maps, consultation results etc, this will take time to construct/populate but is a more fundamental part of the project once we start to deal with larger areas of the city and raising awareness across the city as a whole.

· I’m also pleased to say the consultation leaflets on the extended Bishopthorpe Road and South Bank scheme is at the printers and will be distributed at the end of next week. Subject to the response, the Traffic Regulation Orders should follow in May and implementation in June.”

(vi) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr Galvin:

“Regarding the Beckfield Lane Waste Disposal Site, how many accidents to members of the public have there been in the past ten years and what were the circumstances of said accidents (if any)?”

Reply:

“There have been a number of vehicle related accidents, bumps due to vehicles manoeuvring on the tight site and others hitting the height barrier.

A good Health and Safety Management System identifies the risk and looks to remove it whenever possible before it happens. Previous incidents are irrelevant to the potential risk.”

(vii) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr Galvin:

Reply:

“Fly tipping has been considered as a risk as part of the decision to make the savings. It will be closely monitored and prosecutions carried out where offenders can be identified.”

(viii) To the Cabinet Member for Communities and Neighbourhoods, from Cllr Galvin:

“Have there been any consultations or surveys of users of the BeckfieldLane Waste Disposal facility prior to the decision to close this site?”

Reply:

“No. We are only required to provide one HWRC and we will still be providing two such facilities. As we are not removing the services to residents, there is no requirement to consult and budget savings are needed to be made immediately.”

(ix) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

Reply:

“I am pleased to able to confirm that the Council is already in the process of developing a new, state of the art archive and research centre as part of the phase 2 development of our popular York Explore.

We have received development funding totalling £107,500 from the Heritage Lottery Fund with the aim of submitting a £1.3m bid to the HLF later on in the summer to take forward the 'Gateway to History' project. This will transform the first floor of York Explore Library Learning Centre into a purpose-designed home for the city's archives and local history collection - with an entire new floor on the east wing to house the archives themselves. We are aiming to receive a final HLF decision in December this year, so that construction work can commence in spring 2013.

This is excellent timing, coinciding as it does with York's plans to mark its 800th anniversary as a self-governing city. This represents a big step towards realising our vision that the archives should be accessible to everyone and a source of pride for the whole city. The new facility will enable us to show off these nationally important collections to our visitors.

As the name suggests, the facility will provide a gateway to all of the city’s collections including at the Minster and the Borthwick. This does not mean physically moving those collections as they both have their own excellent facilities already, but it does mean signposting users and working together so that users receive a seamless experience. We are already actively cooperating with the other institutions on matters such as storage, access and collecting policy.”

(x) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

“In preparing the cost estimates for the Community Stadium, have the pre- during- and post build salaries/expenses of the senior CYC officer responsible for delivery of the stadium and the cost of other officers working on the stadium project (as all or part of their responsibilities) been calculated and if so what is the total sum and over what period of time has this figure been calculated?

Reply:

“Yes the costs have been calculated. The project costs for delivery of the project are estimated at £750k. The council’s project management costs are included in this figure. The estimate for CYC’s direct costs within this is £410k over a 3 year period. They include the following posts (which would not necessarily be full time dedicated posts):

· Project Manager (x1)

· Assistant Project Managers (x2)

· Administrative support (x1)”

(xi) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

“Assuming the Community Stadium project goes ahead, who will finance the additional training pitch which will be required and where will it be located?”

Reply:

“An options paper is presented as part of the business case which is included with the Council papers. This sets out three deliverable options that would provide both a training facility and a reserve grade pitch. All can be delivered within the £500k capital budget identified in the business case. The options in the report are as follows:

· YCFC’s training ground at Wigginton Road.

· York Sports Village at Heslington East Campus

· Acorn Rugby Club, Acomb

Officers are currently exploring a further option with York City Knights at York College.”

(xii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Barton:

Reply:

“A full condition survey was commissioned by the Council last year and a copy is available should any Member wish to view it. It noted that the buildings and site are in a good condition commensurate with their age. Only the changing areas were identified as needing immediate attention. The procurement exercise that I have approved will seek investment in the building to address these immediate issues as well as longer term replacement of the electrical and mechanical system and general updating of the building to maintain its appeal to customers.”

(xiii) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Healey:

Reply:

“No financial incentives or subsidies are proposed. It is proposed that the operation of the stadium should deliver a surplus. This is set out in the procurement paper that was approved at the Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion’s Decision Session in January 2012. It is also set out in the Business Case presented to Cabinet on 6th March 2012 and included in the Council agenda papers.”

(xiv) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Healey:

Reply:

“As part of the procurement process, it is proposed to transfer some of this risk to the overall operator of the wider leisure contract. The detail of how this will work will be explored as part of the Competitive Dialogue process.

The business case has been developed using prudent projections. Furthermore, a contingency has been built in. A number of scenarios relating to the clubs being unable to pay their rent are covered in the risk analysis. The likelihood of both clubs going out of business for a sustained period is low.

The ultimate responsibility will rest with the council, although the business model for the stadium is designed so the income streams for the facility are spread and not reliant solely on the sports clubs.”

(xv) To the Cabinet Member for Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Healey:

Reply:

“The Council is committed to delivering the innovative partnerships set out between York St John University, the NHS Hospital Trust, and other stakeholders. Heads of Terms have been agreed with five separate organisations. The Council has also received independent commercial advice (provided by Lawrence Hannah) that confirms the potential attractiveness of the accommodation for future tenants and the scope to re-let it. Market testing undertaken by the Council also identified that there would be considerable commercial interest in the ‘hub’ area of the stadium. If one or more of the tenants do not proceed with the proposals there are a number of alternative options that could be developed.”

(xvi) To the Cabinet Leader, from Cllr Runciman:

“Will the leader please confirm the total reduction in the core government grant anticipated for the financial year 2012/13? And the subsequent reduction anticipated for the year 2013/14?”

Reply:

“In 2012/13, £5m, and for 2013/14, the figure is not yet known, but no doubt it will be significant once again.”

(xvii)To the Cabinet Leader, from Cllr Runciman:

Reply:

“Yes.”

(xviii) To the Cabinet Member for City Strategy, from Cllr Hyman:

Reply:

“The initial correspondence from the Planning Inspector has centred around questions regarding the approach taken to a variety of issues, including in relation to the Spatial Strategy, approach to accommodating growth and the Green Belt. The Inspector has not yet made recommendations to the Council which would pre-empt the Exploratory Meeting and formal Examination process and I suggest we wait for these first before we consider any more precipitate actions.”

(xix) To the Cabinet Member for City Strategy, from Cllr Hyman:

“Would the Cabinet member for City Strategy state when he now expects that new low emission buses will be introduced onto stage carriage services in the City?”

Reply:

“I can’t give a date tonight. Whilst there is no strict definition of ‘low emission buses’, I’m assuming Coun. Hyman means buses that have significantly lower emissions of nitrogen dioxide, particulates and carbon dioxide than conventional diesel buses currently operating in the York fleet.

Therefore low emission buses would include those fuelled by hybrid diesel and electric, compressed and liquefied natural gas (CNG and LPG) and biogas.

The issue of moving to low emission buses is clearly an important one, but is potentially going to require substantial investment, as vehicles and maintenance support charges are not cheap. It is therefore not a five minute job. We will need to demonstrate a clear case to the companies to justify these levels of investment.

We have commissioned, and work is underway on a low emission zone feasibility (LEZ) study for buses to determine the reduction in emissions possible by upgrading the emission standards of York’s bus fleet. This will assist the Council in meeting health-based air quality targets across the city. The results of this study should be available later this year, including a cost-benefit analysis. This should help us, working with the main bus operators, to introduce low emissions buses into York at the earliest opportunity.”

(xx) To the Cabinet Member for Corporate Services, from Cllr Firth:

“Would the Cabinet member state how much the City of York Council has contributed towards the costs of providing present "free" WiFi access in the City Centre?”

Reply:

“The reference to it being free is to users of the service, rather than that there being no cost associated with setting it up for the council, as I’m sure Cllr. Firth is aware.

The cost to the council was £30k with no ongoing costs.”

(xxi) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

Reply:

“These matters are not within my portfolio.”

(xxii)To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Orrell:

Reply:

“The council is fully insured against accident claims so there will not be a short term direct impact on the revenue budget as a result in any changes in the claims profile.”

(xxiii) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Would the cabinet member state the number and type of lampposts that will remain to be tested and replaced at the end of the 12/13 financial year?”

Reply:

“4,500 concrete lampposts are still to be tested, in the three years from April 2013. It is unclear how many of these will need replacing until the testing is complete.

Steel lampposts will not need testing for a further three years as all those condemned or in need of testing within two years will be replaced during the current replacement programme funded by this administration.”

(xxiv) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Firth:

“What assumptions did the Cabinet member make on the additional costs which would arise at the other two recycling centres in the City to reflect the transfer of activity from Beckfield Lane?”

Reply:

“It has been assumed that the 2,800 tonnes of waste going through Beckfield Lane at the moment will arise elsewhere in the waste stream, therefore costed within the savings. When Hazel Court was built, the total tonnages going through the three sites were over 25,000 tonnes, today it is less than 22,000 tonnes, so there is capacity in the system to accommodate the Beckfield Lane closure.”

(xxv) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Could the cabinet member outline the budget implications of the additional cleansing costs to address the increase in fly tipping that has been forecast by one of his colleagues?”

Reply:

“Fly tipping has been considered as a risk as part of the decision to make the savings. It will be closely monitored and prosecutions carried out where offenders can be identified.”

(xxvi) To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“Given the obvious effect on residents in the surrounding areas, why has there been no public consultation on the implications of the decision to close Beckfield Lane?”

Reply:

“We are only required to provide one Household Waste Recycling Centre and we will still be providing two such facilities. As we are not removing the services to residents, there is no requirement to consult and budget savings are needed to be made immediately.”

(xxvii)To the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Communities, from Cllr Reid:

“Can the cabinet member confirm the total amount spent on road repairs in 2010/11, 2011/12 and the budget for 2012/13”

Reply:

“There has been so many changes to government funding, winter maintenance grants, one off grants and local political decisions that make it difficult to confirm the exact amount spent in previous years.

It is unclear from your question whether you mean revenue repairs, capital schemes, LTP improvements, or one off schemes from specific grants like cycleways, footways and bridle ways.

If you could be more specific, I will be happy to provide you with the information you require.”

(xxviii) To the Cabinet Member Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Ayre:

Reply:

“No, and I cannot report on something I never had any involvement with.

Cllr Ayre clearly does not yet understand my portfolio despite him being the Executive Member for a small portion of it for 2 years.

The Christmas Grotto was in no way connected to the Leisure and Culture portfolio. Information concerning the Grotto was passed on to Cllr Reid following a request many months ago when she was digging for someone to blame.

It is a great shame you did not ask Cllr Reid before wasting council’s time with this rather silly question. It’s the second time this council a question has been asked by a Liberal Democrat Member when a colleague already has the answer or has asked a similar or identical question.

(xxix) To the Cabinet Member Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Ayre:

“Can the Cabinet member please outline the total ward committee budget for each of the last four years and for this year?”

Reply:

“The ward committee budget for the last 4 years has been £646k each year. This year is no different.”

(xxx) To the Cabinet Member Leisure, Culture and Social Inclusion, from Cllr Ayre:

“Will the Cabinet Member confirm that all salt bins currently funded by Ward Committees will now be filled and refilled from the core budget?”

Reply:

“Certainly, all the salt bins required across all wards will be refilled from the core budget.”

(xxxi) To the Cabinet Member for Education, Children and Young People’s Services, from Cllr Ayre:

“Will the Cabinet member please provide assurances that Hempland Kids Club will not be evicted following the public consultation on Burnholme School?”

Reply:

“Cllr. Ayre seems to be jumping to a conclusion rather rapidly. The public consultation is still ongoing and no decision has been taken as regards the future of Burnholme School.”

(xxxii)To the Cabinet Member for Education, Children and Young People’s Services, from Cllr Aspden:

“Can the cabinet member commit to a successful future for Street Sport following the ward committee cuts?”

Reply:

“Street Sport is being retained beyond this financial year – while recognising the changes to ward funding. As from 1^st April the equipment and resources of Street Sport will transfer out of the Play team to Energise. The Assets to be transferred include the Mobile Skate Park, Multi Sports Equipment the Mobile Climbing Wall and the Trailer and Ford Ranger.”

Some funding for citywide sessions has been secured for the next year, but has obviously been impacted by the Council’s reduction in funding. But Play workers and Energise are actively exploring other sources of funding and looking to identify how to continue and grow the service. I am confident that, based within Energise, Street Sport – which will retain its separate identity – will continue to be a resource that is much valued by the children and young people of the city.”

(xxxiii) To the Cabinet Member for Health, Housing and Adult Social Services from Cllr Cuthbertson:

“Can the cabinet member outline plans to cater for the needs of those people affected by the change in eligibility criteria from moderate to severe during the transitional period?”

Reply:

“The consultation on the proposal to move the FACS criteria from Moderate to Substantial level, not ‘Severe’ as stated by Cllr Cuthbertson, will begin by the middle of next month and it is aimed to be completed by the middle of June. Consultation is legally required and must be adequate. Letters and short questionnaires will be sent to customers and key stakeholders.

If the change is agreed the Council will undertake a Care Management review for those who are currently supported with Moderate Level needs. This review will consider whether people’s needs have changed since their last review, and if they do remain at the Moderate Level, the Council will support people to look at alternative ways that their needs can be met.

The level of savings proposed at Budget Council enables reinvestment of significant funding into the Voluntary and Community Sector to meet such needs and commissioning, after consultation, could include services to help with :

o Shopping, domestic cleaning or laundry

o Supported leisure activities, social opportunities and clubs

o Help to get a hot meal

o Breaks for carers

These suggestions are based on the support that many of those with Moderate Level needs receive presently. The Consultation will also ask if people think these are the right sort of services to support with the additional investment.”

(xxxiv) To the Cabinet Member for Crime and Community Safety from Cllr Orrell:

“Can the cabinet member outline what he considers his main achievement in the past year?”

Reply:

“Firstly, I am grateful to Cllr Orrell for the opportunity to highlight the achievements of the new Council’s Labour administration, following my appointment to the new post of Cabinet Member for Crime & Community Safety.

Amongst the many of these, I would particularly wish to draw attention to:

· On day one of this Labour administration, the creation of the high level post of a Cabinet Member, dedicated to tackling crime and community safety. A manifesto commitment fulfilled !

· The increased use of Community Payback by the Council, which sees offenders, sentenced to community service, making reparations to our community by undertaking unpaid work of use to the community, charities and faith organisations. Another manifesto commitment fulfilled !

· A date has now been set for the first of the annual Crime Summits to be held on the 25^th of April 2012. This will fulfil yet another manifesto commitment !

· Discussions with North Yorkshire Police, which are ongoing, to strengthen the Council’s Noise Patrol, with a view to implementing one further manifesto commitment.

No doubt Cllr Orrell will wish to welcome these initiatives, which demonstrate this Labour administration’s determination to fulfil its election promises, in contrast to his own Government’s record of welching on theirs.”

(xxxv) To the Cabinet Member for Crime and Community Safety from Cllr Orrell:

Reply:

“No.”