Agenda item

To consider the decisions made by Cabinet on 7 May 2013 in relation to the above item, which has been called in by Cllrs Healey, Gillies and Richardson in accordance with the Council’s Constitution. A cover report is attached setting out the reasons for the call-in and the remit and powers of the Corporate and Scrutiny Management Committee (Calling-In) in relation to the call-in, together with the original report and the decisions of the Cabinet.

Members received a report which asked them to consider the decisions made by Cabinet on 7 May 2013, in relation to the West Yorkshire Plus York Transport Fund (WYTF+). The report to the meeting provided an update on the development of the Fund, proposed details of the package of schemes, sought in principle support as to indicative levels of financial contributions and detailed governance proposals.

Details of the Cabinet decision were attached at Annex A to the report, with the original report to Cabinet attached at Annex B. The decision had been called in by Cllrs Healey, Gillies and Richardson on the following grounds:

1.   No comparison, detailed or otherwise, of the advantages and disadvantages of joining with the Leeds Economic Partnership as compared with the North Yorkshire and East Riding Economic Partnership have been put forward;

2.   The ‘York Package of Schemes’ as put forward has only demonstrable value to North Yorkshire and York whilst demonstrating none for Leeds and West Yorkshire;

3.   There has been a complete lack of debate and consideration of any precept which might need to be levied in order to progress the ‘York Package of Schemes.’”

Members were asked whether to confirm the decision (Option a) or to refer it back to Cabinet for re-consideration (Option b) as set out in the report.

Councillor Healey addressed the meeting on behalf of the Calling-In members making reference to the ten schemes put forward for consideration for the York package with all benefitting York alone rather than other member authorities. The beneficiaries of the three sources of direct contributions into the Fund were also questioned. He requested members to support referral back of this decision to enable further consideration to be given to examining schemes with a mutual benefit to both North and West Yorkshire.

Councillor Gillies also addressed the meeting as a Calling-In member expressing concern that information in connection with this decision was not in the public domain, suggesting that any decision taken was done so without all the necessary information. He questioned the consequences for the City if subsequent large scale funding did not materialise. Reference was also made to recent government announcements which could  affect future funding. He therefore felt that further comparisons should be carried out and that any decision made prior to that would be premature.

The Cabinet Member for Transport, Planning and Sustainability responded to the points raised, pointing out that there was a need to look at transport issues as a whole. With the plan for implementation of local schemes in the first 10 years of the fund, concentrating on larger schemes during the following decade. He referred to the strong case for involvement and to the potential advantages to be gained through economies of scale, staffing expertise with a combined core workforce and to the commonality of urban areas rather than rural.

Members went on to discuss the points raised and other issues in some detail. Questioning details of the proposed transport links to Leeds/Bradford airport, electrification of the rail links between York/Harrogate/Leeds and to the results of consultation which had not been included in the report. Costs of the financial preparatory work for the development of a business case/early design stages for the Outer Ring Road scheme were also questioned. Reference was made to recent Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) announcements and their effect on the proposals.

In response to questions, Officers acknowledged that the City faced significant transport challenges, accepting that there was also a need to work with North and East Yorkshire. Also the need to match the scale of these issues with available funding. It was confirmed that the early years focus would be on improvement schemes in each local authority area. York’s funding contribution and per capita allocation of major scheme funding would be spent on schemes with a mutual benefit to WY and York or on schemes of benefit to York and its surroundings. Although details of the DCLG announcement had not been fully examined it was clear that the current level of York’s scheme appraisals showed good value for money. It was pointed out that this was an in principle decision, requiring further work and clarification of funding.

The Cabinet Member confirmed that he had attended a number of partnership meetings during which there had been strong support and demand from businesses for an improvement in transport infrastructure in the city, particularly to gain access to employment sites. Other Members also expressed support for the compelling arguments put forward for the fund and financial contribution which would support additional employment and City transport schemes, for which funding had previously been unavailable.

Some Members expressed further concerns regarding governance issues and the level of financial contribution required with no metrics to show the advantages/disadvantages to support it.  Following further discussion it was

RESOLVED:                That Option (a) identified in the report be approved and that the decision of the Cabinet be confirmed.

REASON:                     In accordance with the requirements of the Council’s Constitution.