Agenda item - Oral questions from Councillors

100.1.     The Mayor noted that 12 oral questions had been received and that 30 minutes were set aside for the duration of the item. She also noted that since the publication of the agenda she had been informed by Councillor Littman that he wished to withdraw his question.

100.2.     The Mayor then invited Councillor Peltzer Dunn to put his question to the Leader of the Council.

100.3.     Councillor Peltzer Dunn asked; “To the leader of the council; what are his proposals for the Hove wall of honour?”

100.4.     Councillor Morgan replied; “All of the plagues, the historic items in the listed Hove library building will be kept.”

100.5.     Councillor Peltzer Dunn asked the following supplementary question; “Obviously I assumed they would be kept but I think it’s much more important when we think of the magnificent tribute made to the Hovarians who gave their lives in the 1914-18 war - 632 Hovarians died - and I’d like an undertaking form the Leader of the Council that should the Carnegie building be disposed of the plague may be re-sited and rededicated in suitable position in Hove Town Hall.”

100.6.     Councillor Morgan replied; “Yes, of course.”

100.7.     Councillor Druitt (on behalf of Councillor Page) asked; “No one can be unaware of the biggest humanitarian refugee crisis since WW2 in Syria with many hundreds of thousands fleeing to Europe; meanwhile our city has taken 2 small families in 6 months and offered to take three more. What more can the council do to help refugees in crisis and preserve our reputation as a city of sanctuary that values all human regardless of colour or creed?”

100.8.     Councillor Daniel replied; “The question’s wrong, we housed 5 families in the city since the Syrian relocation program started and we are continuing to maintain that open offer as long as we can find that suitable accommodation. Officers are still working on that and we can bring reports and updates to the NC&E committee which we have done to date. I’d suggest emailing myself or officers for regular updates.”

100.9.     Councillor Druitt asked the following supplementary question; “Five is still a pretty poor showing, there are thousands of people fleeing Syria and if we can only take 5 families, that’s quite upsetting. How can we better publicise the request for people in the city to take refugees and how can we ensure that people who have already offered accommodation have that offer taken up?”

100.10.  Councillor Daniel replied; “I think we have done tremendous work, I’d like to thank officers and the people of this city for coming forward with so many offers around accommodation. We’re using some of the money to support case work via voices in exile which obviously has the ongoing benefit of making that organisation which works much more broadly with refugees in the city more sustainable. I think that’s one of the points taken into account. The way in which the programme is being administered by the government is under a process of change at the moment and there may be a regional coordinator where we were coordinating for our own city before and also our officer who has taken a lead on this has been asked by many councils to speak to them about how she has managed to do such an amazing job in the south east; being the first council in the south east to house refugees in our city. I would say we are doing the right thing, we’ll continue to do the right thing and you should continue to make sure we do the right thing.”

100.11.  Councillor Yates asked; “Tenants, tenant’s residents associations and other tenant’s participation groups are regularly raising issues with myself and other councillors around the delivery of the reactive response service of Mears, delivered on behalf of tenants. As well as issue with the quality of completed work, there are consistent issues raise about the speed of repairs, the avoidable costs associated with repairs, the quality and number of checks on work completed and the overall communication with tenants and tenant’s representatives over specific jobs and some of the broader issues to. I’d like to know what action is being taken is ensure that the light touch monitoring that was introduced under the Tories is being toughened up to make sure that tenant’s wishes for an effective, responsive repairs service is delivered with their money?”

100.12.  Councillor Meadows replied; “The Mears Company delivers housing repairs and improvement services under a 10 year contract set up in 2010. This contract is valued at around £20 million per year and around 20% of the contact is on responsive repairs. As my colleague has stated already the council have a light touch approach through that contract that was undertaken all those years ago and it will continue until 2020. I can say that due to problems discovered earlier this year by our staff Mears are beefing up their customer services and they’re looking at employing extra quantity surveyors and building surveyors to ensure the quality of the works that Mears Company undertakes is assured to both residents and tenants. Can I also mention just briefly that the contract has provided 105 apprenticeships and development opportunities and they are still currently 24 apprenticeships in progress. As I understand it the contact is delivering on its promises however we have had to tighten up certain controls around the quality of some of that service.”

100.13.  Councillor Simson asked; “At the recent budget council meeting when discussing our amendment to reinstate the £145,000 shortfall Cllr Hamilton stated that it wasn’t needed as there was an underspend of £227,000 in this year’s allocation. I was horrified by this admittance as I’m sure very many in the community and voluntary sector were. Knowing how desperate voluntary for even a small amount of funding to deliver vital services to our communities. This money was allocated in the budget to be used by these groups so can Cllr Hamilton please assure us that in future any underspends are flagged up to members well in advance of the end of the financial year, so the money is allocated as it should be rather than go to plug any budget deficit?”

100.14.  Councillor Hamilton replied; “It is not until we have the third lot of bids in that we know how much money we are going to dispose of and how much is going to be left but there is a good point there I couldn’t argue with that, I did say at the meeting that there was that much underspend and I was as surprised as anyone else. I think £100,000 of that was contingency, this is for organisations who suddenly get into a serious problem where they need urgent money and fortunately this year there hasn’t been anybody in that situation. The grants that we have are divided into various categories and people apply in various of those sections and in some of those sections there’s not enough people applying to allocate the money. I think perhaps we can have another look at this as perhaps it might be better to make it a global pot rather than say so much for the environment, so much for communities, so much for arts and so on. I think it might be worth doing that. I am entirely in sympathy with the point that’s being made there, the only consolation I can give you is that my understanding is that we can’t retain that £227,000 but I understand that it is going to be used to keep the Money Works programme going for an extra year which in these difficult times I’m sure will be appreciated by people.”

100.15.  Councillor Simson asked the following supplementary question; “I know that the suggestion has been put forward to use this underspend for the Money Works programme and I know that is a really important programme and to use this instead of the funding that was already allocated to it from this year’s budget. So can I ask Cllr Hamiltonis he would please confirm that if this is done the money that is already allocated to Money Works through this year’s budget will not be used to plug any deficit gaps as that would have the same effect as using the £227,000 underspend?”

100.16.  Councillor Hamilton replied; “I’ve not discussed this in detail with the relevant officers but my understanding is that we had money this year which was going to be used for that purpose and if we use the underspend for that then it will release the same amount of money to go into Money Works next year. Without effect the grants money which we’ve got which of course cannot be carried forward.”

100.17.  Councillor Sykes asked; “In fulfilment of this authority’s Prevent strategy we have a Prevent board and this fulfils certain requirements of the counterterrorism and security act. At this very sensitive time would the lead councillor comment on the Government’s arrangements for the prevent board and in particular whether there is enough opportunity for public oversight of its activities?”

100.18.  Councillor Daniel replied; “I am not going to comment on the government aspect. It’s an emerging area how the governance works in terms of member involvement. Clearly we couldn’t have public involvement in a board that’s looking at counterterrorism issues as well as safeguarding and individual families or who might be affected by this. We have had families within our city affected by grooming by extremists and some of them have sadly lost their children as a result of it; so it’s something that we feel very deeply as a city that we do believe that it’s right to have a programme in place that helps to prevent that. I think the spirit of the question though is what is the right level of scrutiny and what is the right level of member involvement? My proposal is to look at the emerging practise of other authorities -which is varied at the moment- and work out what’s right for Brighton and Hove. I would expect some sort of paper or briefing on it within a month.”

100.19.  Councillor Wealls asked; “At the Children, Young People & Skills Committee two weeks ago there were two reports which would have benefited of someone with an understanding of the autistic community in Brighton and Hove having contributed to them. Last week was school autism awareness week and the week of the 4^th of April is international autism awareness week. I wonder how many members have been made aware of this or whether anything happened in our city’s schools. Does the lead member for Children’s services agree with me that the role of Autism Champion/s in the city would benefit from a review which could look at the value of such role/s, how other cities view the role and how the voice of the board autistic spectrum community and their families could be better heard and will he work with me, council officers, elected members, members of the autistic community and their families and representatives to help make Brighton and Hove the best place to bring up an autistic child or to leave, study, train and work as an adult with autism?”

100.20.  Councillor Bewick replied; “Cllr Wealls will of course be aware that under the last Green administration there was an autism report that went to Children’s Committee that did make recommendations at the time that an autism champion was appointed. That role was assigned to the director of Children’s services. I also further understand that when we came into administration there was a discussion between the chief executive, democratic services and the leader of the council about the role of champions generally and it was decided that it was not something that would be encouraged either at officer or member level as a general point. However, what I do think it is important to emphasise here is that under the children’s act 2004 the Chief Executive, Leader of the Council, myself as lead member and the Director of Children’s Services have a statutory role and duty to promote the interest, the life chances and the wellbeing of all 50,000 children and young people in the city and that includes all children with autism. However, I absolutely agree with him that we do need to make this city the best city to bring up an autistic child and I would suggest to him that we ask officers to bring a paper to the next meeting of my committee to review this issue of an autism champion and ensure that we are meeting the need of this very important group going forward.”

100.21.  Councillor C. Theobald asked; “The recent vegetation clearance works by highways England to improve lines of sight on the incredibly busy Patcham roundabout were both necessary and welcome however does Councillor Mitchell agree with me that the state in which they have left the roundabout is unacceptable for what is the main gateway into our city for motorists? What discussions has she or the council officers had with Highways England about doing something to improve the situation and to transform this roundabout into a beautiful and inspiring entrance to Brighton and Hove?”

100.22.  Councillor Mitchell replied; “I fully appreciate your concern on this matter. As you say at the end of January Highways England undertook some work to the roundabout stating that the vegetation in place on the roundabout was a safety issue and was restricting sight lines.  Underneath the roundabout there is a complex drainage system holding tanks for runoff water which are maintained by Highways England as it serves the strategic trunk road network and the vegetation is also damaging that infrastructure. Officers in the highways team have contacted Highways England and asked that they respond swiftly with information on any plans that they have for the roundabout but as yet I’m afraid to say they have not had a full response.”

100.23.  Councillor Mears asked; “The Council presented its consultation position paper ‘Brighton and Hove Rough Sleepers strategy 2016’ to the Housing committee on the 2^nd March this year. As many of us know it’s not just what the strategy contains but the reality of what is happening in the city as with the deputation on homelessness we have heard earlier. Is the chairperson now able to answer the questions I tabled at the last Housing committee in regards to the reduction in rough sleeper beds in the city from 97 reduced to 83 a loss of 14 beds? The accommodation now used at Dyke Road and St. Aubyns will only take mental health referrals for the Rough Sleepers Strategy to be successful the Council needs to ensure that we don’t go backwards with fewer beds then we had before.”

100.24.  Councillor Meadows replied; “I may have to provide a written response as you have asked for specific details because I’m aware that we have 300 hostel beds in the city that have not reduced in fact we are increasing numbers and we still unfortunately have 200 on the waiting list for them. I’m aware that’s not quite what you asked for. In developing this new Rough Sleepers Strategy it is the first time we’ve put everyone together to be able to have a consistent message and a consistent approach to rough sleeping in the city but I will make sure you get a written response to that question.”

100.25.  Councillor Mears asked the following supplementary question; “Can the Chair of Housing also answer the concerns I raised regarding a new way of working with placements for rough sleepers? In the past rough sleeper teams worker closely with hostels and would know when a bed became available and it would be filled quickly. With a panel made of different agencies this can often be biweekly. Can the Chair of Housing confirm that with this new way of working steps will be taken to ensure that beds are not left empty for possibly a week which also has a knock on effect with a potential loss of housing benefit of £195 per room per week?”

100.26.  Councillor Meadows replied; “I can confirm that as beds become vacant they are very quickly filled, they are never left empty at all Councillor Mears.”

100.27.  Councillor Miller asked; “With six of the secondary schools in the city advertising for maths teachers and struggling to recruit them would the chair of the committee please outline what steps the local authorities are taking to assist the recruitment of these maths teachers to ensure pupils in our city don’t miss out on essential maths education?”

100.28.  Councillor Bewick replied; “I’ll resist straying too far into the territory of the wasted policy of Tory forced academisation which will of course make the teacher recruitment crisis even worse both in this city and in indeed nationally. The Council is working extremely hard with head teachers as part of the school partnership to look at the ways in which we’re attracting maths teachers to the city. It is worth highlighting to Members of course that in the last five A*-C GCSE results round in the summer for the first time we were 1% above the national average for our maths scores although we’ve still got some further work to do at key stage 2 and key stage 3. This is the best city to live in of course in the whole of the United Kingdom and if that’s not attractive enough for our maths teachers but I do accept that we need to do more and now I know more detail about Councillor Miller’s question I will write to him with a more detailed response about how we are going to recruit those important maths teachers.”

100.29.  Councillor Miller asked the following supplementary question; “I’d just like to point out that some really proactive local authorities are assisting their secondary schools to fill these roles by offering more strategic financial inducement, international recruitment or encouraging teach first to come to their local area. I’d invite the Member to look at what more could be done and whether these potential approaches could be used in our city.”

100.30.  Councillor Bewick replied; “I think it’s worth emphasising that under our current families of schools approach in the city where our schools work together of course governors and head teachers already have a very large degree of discretion and autonomy about how they market recruitment posts within their particular schools. I’m informed by the Director of children’s services that this is an area that we are looking at and again I’d like to suggest that we bring that plan around what is by the way a nation problem around teacher shortages in maths and indeed other science subject that we bring that plan to my committee for full discussion at a later date.”

100.31.  Councillor Taylor asked; “Bowel cancer nationally is the fourth most common cancer and only the second in the number of lives it takes each year. It is also the most treatable if detected early enough. According to Cancer Research UK less than the national average of people in Brighton and Hove over 60 take the screening test that is offered to them. Can I ask the chair of the Health and Wellbeing Board what can be done to improve participation rates in the city?”

100.32.  Councillor Yates replied; “In terms of our screening programme there’s two issues and we’ve had a report to Health and Wellbeing Board in 2014, we had a report back in 2015 in July about our cancer screen targets overall because cancer screening is an issue in Brighton and Hove. In terms of our numbers we’re at 55.4% against the national target of 52% to try to get people participating from the ages of 60-74 in the national bowel cancer screening programme. In terms of where that weights us nationally we have an average across the nation of 57.8% so we are behind that number and we have an average within the Sussex bowel cancer screening service as a whole of 58.8%. All of that is based on data up to the end of financial year 2015 so that’s only up to March 2015 and hopefully in July this year we should get last year’s figures. What’s more worrying to me is with slightly lower rates of screening we’re seeing higher rates of positive findings. So we’re seeing rates of positive findings around 2.2% against an average in this area of about 1.7%. So actually not only are we struggling to get as many people taking part in the screening programme as we would expect we’re also finding more bowel cancer and that’s the more serious things but that’s also the good thing because every bowel cancer that we identify through screening we can start taking proactive action on to identify is it just a polyp is it something more serious and what action need to be taken on it? Obviously we’ve been working with our partners; the Clinical Commissioning Group and also Albion in the community over January and February we’re running as part of the ‘what’s the bottom line?’ campaign we’re specifically out there promoting using a lady called Sue Brown (Heath Coordinator). Specifically promoting getting active participants, especially in groups that are harder to reach in groups of people in their 60s and 70s who may not usually want to take part in a screening programme especially one that feels so difficult to take part in as the bowel screening programme. What we need to do is to get people taking it seriously. I know that the CCG are making sure that the bowel screening programme are getting information out to people and are making sure people are aware of the programme both of the first attempt but also subsequently every two years because that’s the intention now that between 60 and 74 people should have hopefully 8 screening opportunities to make sure we are identifying bowel cancer early and treating it early.”

100.33.  Councillor Taylor asked the following supplementary question; “By the end of the year the Conservative Government will have fully implemented scope screening or flexible-sigmoidoscopy which will be offered to everyone nationwide to those over 55, a test which can sharply reduce incidence of the disease. Is the Health and Wellbeing board working with the CCG representatives to ensure all those eligible in the City of Brighton and Hove will take up this new scheme?”

100.34.  Councillors Yates replied; “The simple answer is yes. We recognise that sigmoidoscopy is a more effective tool it’s both more discriminatory and it enables us to identify and get rid of false positives at a much earlier stage which gives people more assurance about what the findings of the screen may be and it also gives them more confidence and the opportunity for us to take action at a much earlier level. So yes the intention will be eventually to move to having a fully rolled out system across the whole country and we’re having to work with Public Health England and also with our colleagues at the CCG to make sure there’s an effective strategy to deliver that.”

100.35.  Councillor Barnett asked; “At the last full council meeting I asked Councillor Barradell if she could give me an explanation as to why Parks department have to pay out of their own budget which is for the residents of Brighton and Hove to repair all the damage that the Travellers make; when the gates are broken, the locks are broken and the mess they leave behind. It comes out of the Parks Department’s budget. I did ask Councillor Barradell to answer this question, she said she’d write if she can’t find out, won’t find out or doesn’t know the answer maybe you’d get Councillor Mitchell to answer for you?”

100.36.  Councillor Mitchell replied; “I will try to get you that information Councillor Barnett. Your question refers to ongoing maintenance and repairs to our parks and open spaces across the city from the City Parks Budget. I do not know whether the City Parks offices make a special arrangement for delineating any repairs that they think are necessary due to damage or alleged damage by Travellers. I’m not quite sure how they would go about proving that and I’m not quite sure if they do that. However if they do keep a separate column for that figure I will make sure that you get it.”