Agenda item - Written questions from Councillors.

Note:  Councillors written questions as listed will be taken as read along with the written answer at the meeting.  The Councillor asking the question may ask one relevant supplementary question which shall be put and answered without discussion.  One other supplementary question may be asked by any other Member of the Council which shall also be put and answered without discussion (a separate addendum with the written answers will be circulated at the meeting).

 

66.1       The Mayor reminded the council that councillors’ questions and the replies from the appropriate councillor were now taken as read by reference to the list included in the addendum, which had been circulated as detailed below:

 

66.2       (a) Councillor Kitcat asked:

 

“Can Councillor Theobald detail in what circumstances residents or their landlords are charged by Cityclean for the provision of receptacles for:

 

1.     Waste collection,

2.     Recycling collection?”

 

66.3       Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“They are not charged unless they are private landlords or managing agents operating businesses and they then pay for their refuse and recycling containers.”

 

66.4       Councillor Kitcat asked a supplementary question, “The charges that Councillor Theobald refers to in his written response, which are charged for waste receptacles, are charged to the agents and landlords but these are then passed on to residents, Mr Mayor, through their rent or their management fees.

 

My supplementary question is can Councillor Theobald explain why, while apparently trying to encourage recycling rates, the council is charging for recycling containers to be provided to residents when the 1990 Environmental Protection Act, Section 46, Part 3, clearly permits the council to provide these bins free of charge?”

 

66.5       Councillor Theobald replied, “The council does not get involved in charges that landlords or managing agents levy against their residents for a range of services in their building: electricity charges, if there’s a lift there, heating charges and such like.  That is a matter for landlords and their managing agents and, indeed, leaseholders and tenants.”

 

66.6       (b) Councillor Kitcat asked:

 

“Can Councillor Theobald detail the total amount spent by his department on purchases of communal bins in the financial year 2008/9 and also provide the per unit cost paid by the council for each type of model of bin including those with and without foot pedals?”

 

66.7       Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“The overall figure is £398,096 to date and I can tell you that both types of bin cost the same, both types cost £819 each.”

 

66.8       Councillor Kitcat asked a supplementary question, “I am slightly concerned by the written response Councillor Theobald has provided claiming that both types of bins available on the street cost the same, because I have an email here from the Assistant Director for Cityclean of the 17 February saying that the new model bins are more expensive than the old model with the foot pedal.  I am distressed that given the difficulty residents are experiencing with these new model bins and that they apparently are more expensive, what his explanation is for that? 

 

I would like to invite the Cabinet to come and demonstrate the ease of use of these new bins to the residents of Regency Ward.  Will the Cabinet accept?”

 

66.9       Councillor Theobald replied, “Do you know, there are five questions that I have got tonight from Councillor Kitcat and that must have followed another five or ten or whatever it was at the last meeting.  Now what I said last time, Councillor Kitcat, was we do have an Assistant Director for Cityclean and I invited you at the last meeting to pick up the telephone and go and meet with her and discuss all these questions with her.  She would be delighted to see you. 

 

Now I appreciate that there is a webcam here and I appreciate that my answers are sent round the world on U-Tube so perhaps that might be the reason why: there isn’t a camera in Gillian Marston’s office as far as I am aware.  Could I not suggest that you meet with Gillian on a one to one, take all your questions with you and I am sure like every other Member of this Council, and I have got nods of heads all around this Chamber, when you want an answer, a professional, technical answer, you pick up the telephone and you ask Gillian and she will give it, rather than you coming here asking me. 

 

I suspect, Councillor Kitcat, the reason why the charges are the same, and that is my information, is because the Assistant Director has negotiated a better deal.”

 

66.10    Councillor Elgood asked a further supplementary question, “Can I, through Councillor Theobald, place on record my thanks for the help of Cityclean officers who have been, you know in fairness, extremely helpful on issues such as locations.  We have noticed though in our Ward that since they have been put in we have seen a little bit less activity from the officers and we still have a list of small issues over locations that we are not quite getting the attention we would like to see. 

 

Would the Cabinet Member if I pass the list through to him please help us in alleviating these issues such as that raised within the petition from Upper/Lower Market Street?”

 

66.11    Councillor Theobald replied, “I am extremely fortunate because my Director is not too far away from me.  Your list I will hand to her and I am sure tomorrow she will resolve this.  I do want to thank you for your kind remarks because the job of dealing with all these changes is not an easy one.  I get, as you can imagine, hundreds of emails, many good, some not so good, but it is always appreciated when a Member does thank the officer for responding to something and I thank you very much for that. 

 

I can assure you that if you have got positive suggestions then we will always do our very best to try and meet those positive and helpful suggestions.”

 

66.12    (c) Councillor Steedman asked:

 

“The Valley Gardens, stretching from the Level to the Old Steine, are a much?loved leisure resource for residents and the gateway to the city for many visitors, yet they are in a poor state of repair, isolated and divided by heavy traffic flows, inaccessible to pedestrians and choked by air and noise pollution.

 

Fortunately, the Council’s Local Transport Plan outlines a programme of works to transform the Valley Gardens into a fantastic new public space.  A revitalised Valley Gardens would reconnect the islands of green space to create a new, accessible public park flowing down to the sea, and prioritise coherent pedestrian and cycling routes, as well as bus transport.  It could integrate playgrounds, informal recreation, wildlife gardens and urban food growing.

 

Can the Cabinet Member for the Environment reconfirm that they are committed to delivering this programme, with works beginning in this electoral term?”

 

66.13    Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“I entirely agree that the condition and quality of the buildings and public space in this area have been deteriorating over many years and are in great need of improvement.  However, how this can be achieved, in terms of creating an acceptable and workable balance of all the demands for movement and access that there is, has yet to be defined and would also need to be rigorously tested to ensure that it would work.

 

This Administration is aware of the issues and will need to consider the Valley Gardens as part of the development of future programmes of investment for the whole of the city.”

 

66.14    Councillor Steedman asked a supplementary question, “I would like to thank Councillor Theobald for his response, which seems to be a very long-winded way of saying that his Administration is not at all committed to delivering the improvements to Valley Gardens identified in the Local Transport Plan and, in fact, intends to abandon them.  Yet Members of the current Administration have, in the past at least, publicly expressed their support for these proposals, which I thought meant that there was cross-party agreement. 

 

Could Councillor Theobald therefore tell me if this is yet another illustration of internal Tory splits and divisions or, alternatively, whether it is yet another example of a Tory u-turn?”

 

66.15    Councillor Theobald replied, “I think we are in exactly the same situation as the previous Administration.  We have to look at the whole situation here in the Valley Gardens and to see exactly what effect that will have on other areas and that is currently what we are looking at.”

 

66.16    Councillor Simson asked a further supplementary question, “Would the Cabinet Member agree with me that we need to have an up to date traffic model for the city as the traffic flows need to be determined before any major improvements take place?”

 

66.17    Councillor Theobald replied, “The short answer to that one is definitely, ‘yes’.  I think it is a pity that the previous Administration didn’t keep up to date the traffic model.  I looked at what is happening in London, I went up and made a particular point to see the testing and how you can test each road and each route and see if you do (a) what the effect is on (b) and (c) and I think that is to the disadvantage of us at the present time but we are working on trying to update the traffic model and this is certainly something which I regard and I am sure this Administration does as a priority.”

 

66.18    (d) Councillor Davey asked:

 

“Would the Cabinet Member for Environment agree that it is vital that the local authority lead the way and make every effort to encourage its staff to travel by sustainable means such as walking, cycling and by public transport both to work and during the working day wherever possible?”

 

66.19    Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“We are very much committed to supporting and encouraging staff to travel sustainably, both for commuting and during the working day.

 

The Council’s Staff Travel Plan offers many initiatives which are having a positive impact across all sections of the Council.  These include:

 

•         Interest free loans for bus and train season tickets;

•         Discounted bus tickets;

•         A corporate contract with City Car Club offering discounted rates;

•         A tax-free bike scheme and interest-free bike loan scheme;

•         Greatly improved facilities for cyclists (including additional cycle parking and showers) together with beginner, refresher and cycle maintenance training sessions;

•         Real-time travel information display screens are soon to be installed at Hove Town Hall and King’s House.

 

As well as working with Council staff, officers run the Travel Plan Partnership which is working with local employers to support them in implementing their own Travel Plans.  Officers are already working with 32 of the largest employers in Brighton and Hove and hope to expand this initiative further over the coming months.”

 

66.20    Councillor Davey asked a supplementary question, “These are all excellent initiatives and I applaud the officers for their efforts in bringing them forward.  Could the Cabinet Member please tell us when the nine pool bikes, presumably bought for staff to use that have been sitting in the King’s House bike cage unused since last summer, will be available for staff to actually cycle?”

 

66.21    Councillor Theobald replied, “If you had linked that up to your original first question then I could have answered it but unfortunately I can’t but I will be delighted to send you a written response.  Could I just make one other point, when you congratulate and say how good these things are, and they are good, it’s interesting how it is always the officers and when things aren’t quite so good it’s the Councillors but I join myself and this Administration with the officers.”

 

66.22    Councillor Mitchell asked a further supplementary question, “Given that Councillor Theobald in his answer has just expressed his support for sustainable travel, notably bike travel, could he explain why the proposed and funded cycle route and pedestrian route from the Downs Hotel, Woodingdean crossroads to Sussex University has been abandoned, or seemingly abandoned, after preliminary work had been undertaken?”

 

66.23    Councillor Theobald replied, “I really don’t think that has got anything to do with staff travel in the original question.”

 

66.24    (e) Councillor Davis asked:

 

“Can the Cabinet Member for Culture, Recreation and Tourism outline what steps are being taken to address the gaps identified in the recent Brighton and Hove Sports Audit, namely that Swimming, Indoor Sports, i.e. Badminton, Basketball, Volleyball, Indoor Bowls, and public access fitness activities are all lagging behind when compared to other Local Authorities’ provision.”

 

66.25    Councillor Smith replied:

“Thank you for your question on the Sports Facilities Audit.  Completion of the audit should be seen as the first positive step to improving the sports facilities in the city.  The audit did highlight that the distribution of the facilities is good across the city compared with other cities where facilities are concentrated in the city centre.

 

The council has already given a commitment to keeping the King Alfred Leisure Centre open and work has already commenced to secure greater planning contributions for new facilities.  The council will also develop partnerships with sports clubs, schools and other organisations to increase access to existing facilities as well as developing new facilities.”

 

66.26    Councillor Davis asked a supplementary question, “Councillor Smith I hope you would agree with me that it is a co-ordinated approach that is needed with small sports projects and I wondered if you are able to name some of these smaller sports projects that are ready to apply for funds from Sport England?”

 

66.27    Councillor Smith replied, “I will give you a written answer.  Seriously, I don’t remember every single organisation in this sporting organisation in this city that has got funds elsewhere.  We did give small funds ourself for people there.  We gave 20 of them £500 each for individuals to help them to train for Olympics or specialised sport.  We have already done that but must I say from this report we are in partnership with private enterprise in this city.  Withdean have got probably the best indoor tennis complex obviously in this region.  We have got lots of other ones, sports centres are good, elsewhere there are the private ones, David Lloyd’s and that, so there is a lot of partnership.

 

I want more in this city and I am sure all of us still want more there but I must say that we are trying our best, you know funds are very tight for everyone now.  We are keeping the King Alfred open which is a hell of a big expense there and you all know that and it is our target for that but obviously sport, as far as I am concerned, is my number one.  I am sure most people in this city want to keep fit and want us to be a sporting city.”

 

66.28    Councillor Fallon-Khan asked a further supplementary question, “When Labour controlled the council from 1986-1997 and Hove 1985-1997 what did they do for the city as regards sporting facilities?”

 

66.29    Councillor Smith replied, “Very little.”

 

66.30    (f) Councillor Marsh asked:

 

“Would the Cabinet Member for Children & Young People agree with me that the identification of Government resources to be used in improving the fabric of our schools and helping the local economy is always welcome?”

 

66.31    Councillor Mrs. Brown replied:

 

“Resources for improving the fabric of our schools are always welcome and that is why we have developed a clear and strategic capital programme to enhance and improve our school provision.  The development of the Academy is on schedule and we have submitted a revised Expression of Interest for Building Schools for the Future.

 

We are taking a planned and strategic position to ensure capital funds are spent sensibly within the timeframe given but allowing flexibility to support our ambitions for Building Schools for the Future and the Primary Capital Programme.”

 

66.32    Councillor Marsh asked a supplementary question, “Thank you for the explanation Councillor Brown.  However, could the Cabinet Member please tell me how I inform my fellow Governors at Bevendean Primary School (who are actually meeting as we speak and I am not able to be with them which is a real shame), that the urgent repairs to the roof and the long awaited refurbishment of the canteen, not to mention the jobs these projects would have created to help local people who need them now, will have to wait for another year for reasons that none of us can understand?”

 

66.33    Councillor Mrs. Brown replied, “I have always said that this Administration will welcome any monies that can be used for improving our schools and this we will always do but I do believe you are talking about the £9m that we will be discussing later with the Notice of Motion, so I think I’ll wait and give a full explanation then.”

 

66.34    Councillor Meadows asked a further supplementary question, “Could the Cabinet Member for Children & Young People tell us why she thinks it is that both of her Conservative counterparts in East and West Sussex were able to make benefit and use of the money that the Government has made available to schools now when the Brighton and Hove Conservatives were unable to do so? 

 

As a School Governor I know of various primary schools, like Coombe Road, who would love to have made great use of this money and I think they would also like to know.”

 

66.35    Councillor Mrs. Brown replied, “I have said this, I have said it in the Argus and will be saying it again later.  We have a planned three year Capital Programme and your Government is always telling us we should keep the money and put it with other funding streams to make best use of it to do major works in this city and that is what we are going to do. 

 

We are a responsible Administration.  We are not into quick fixes: we are going to use it to do the best things we can for the children in this city.”

 

66.36    (g) Councillor Kitcat asked:

 

“Could Councillor Geoffrey Theobald clarify that in his response to my question on communal bin fire safety of 29 January 2009, he does indeed say that the Fire Authority has told the council through Cabinet Member Councillor Kemble that it has no concerns over the communal bins?”

 

66.37    Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“I said in response to your question at the January Council Meeting that Councillor Ted Kemble, as the Vice Chairman of the Authority, discussed the communal bin scheme with the Chief Fire Officer some time ago and they are satisfied that the communal bins do not pose an additional fire risk.

 

The specific locations of communal bins have been determined with Highways and Traffic Engineers who fully consider road safety issues as well as access for emergency services and delivery vehicles.  We have not asked the ambulance service, the fire or police authorities to also view the location of each bin.”

 

66.38    Councillor Kitcat asked a supplementary question, “Given Councillor Theobald’s written answer, can Councillor Theobald explain why a response to a Freedom of Information request regarding fire safety and bins from the council stated, and I quote: ‘We have not been informed by the Fire Authority that they do not have concerns about the bins’?”

 

66.39    Councillor Theobald replied, “I haven’t been informed that they do have.”

 

66.40    Councillor West asked a further supplementary question, “Does Councillor Theobald recognise how frustrated the residents of Central Brighton are about the chaos that he is presiding over with the introduction of these bins and the changes to the recycling and refuse collections?

 

Councillor Kitcat is clearly entitled to ask as many questions as he likes.  It is his constitutional right and as a Member of the Cabinet can I ask Councillor Theobald if he recognises that, as he is responsible for this service, it would be useful if he better briefed himself and remained calmer when answering questions at Council?”

 

66.41    Councillor Theobald replied, “I really think that if you want to challenge me politically on a direction, that’s fine but when you come up and ask technical questions and my frustration: you know Councillor West, yes there is a frustration.  I don’t think it’s just mine, I honestly think it goes right across the Council.  It is because Councillor Kitcat could just pick the telephone up and ring Gillian Marston our Assistant Director and she would give him the answer, rather than just try and catch me out.  That is my frustration and I invite any Member of this Council if they do have technical questions, then please copy me in by all means but contact the officer who will be delighted to speak to you.

 

Councillor West I do not share your view when you talk about chaos, it has settled in very well, it has been a difficult change and I am sure as every month goes by people will recognise the benefits.”

 

66.42    (h) Councillor Kitcat asked:

 

“Can Councillor Geoffrey Theobald provide a list of the type and models of communal bins used by Cityclean in the city and any other local authorities which use those types and models?”

 

66.43    Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“We use model OMB 1800 litre and 3200 litre, and model Spider 1700 litre and 3200 litre.”

 

66.44    Councillor Kitcat asked a supplementary question, “On 29 January Councillor Theobald responded to my question over who he consulted on these new model bins without foot pedals and he stated, and I quote: ‘My answer to your point is that we have trialled these various bins, we have actually consulted residents and residents in the main prefer the ones that we are now putting out.  We constantly consult with residents, we like to get what their views are and how easy they find them to use.  We have trialled them and these are the ones that are preferred.’

 

This is what Councillor Theobald said and yet when I conducted a Freedom of Information request asking for documentation, photographs or, in fact, any consultation responses at all to this alleged consultation, the council was unable to provide anything at all, so does Councillor Theobald believe that he has acted responsibly in the residents’ best interests by imposing these new model bins on them without consultation and will he apologise for the mess he has left them in?”

 

66.45    Councillor Theobald replied, “Yes and no.”

 

66.46    Councillor Duncan asked a further supplementary question, “When you recommend that if we seek technical information about any of these service deliveries over which you as Cabinet Member preside, would you recommend that we use the 292929 number to get that information?”

 

66.47    Councillor Theobald replied, “I don’t know whether you have email, but if you do have email, then I would suggest because I see all the emails going in and I see the quickness of the responses that come from them, so I would suggest email.”

 

66.48    (i) Councillor Kitcat asked:

 

“Could Councillor Geoffrey Theobald detail how many streets or parts of streets have been switched from weekly to fortnightly recycling collections?  Could details of how these and other waste collection and recycling changes were planned be detailed?”

 

66.49    Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“None.  Regarding the details of how changes were planned for our 121,000 homes across 3,000 streets, I would recommend, once again, that you meet with the Assistant Director of Cityclean who will explain the planning process in detail to you.”

 

66.50    Councillor Kitcat asked a supplementary question, “My question is whether Councillor Theobald is in control of his Department when three residents have been told by Cityclean operatives that their recycling collections have changed from weekly to fortnightly.  Will Councillor Theobald apologise unreservedly for his oversight, failing to ensure proper planning and the disrepute brought on the council by the failures in this collection service.”

 

66.51    Councillor Theobald replied, “Well, we don’t agree with that.  I understand that you have received a complaint from one person, a person that I think most of us actually know here, a person called Simon Williams and I do believe I think he was a Councillor on this Council and I do believe I think he was a Green Councillor on this Council.  He complained that his boxes were not collected and that we must have introduced a fortnightly collection where there used to be weekly.  This is not the case, there has been no administrative error.

 

I find it interesting, I think I am right in saying that the population of Brighton and Hove is 260,000 and how many people is this Councillor Kitcat, three.  I rest my case.”

 

66.52    Councillor Oxley asked a further supplementary question, “Would Councillor Theobald agree with me that if the Greens wish to discuss these matters under the political direction of the refuse policy they can easily bring a Notice of Motion to this Council and if they wish to discuss technical matters then they can also do that at a Cabinet Member Meeting and would he invite the Green Councillors to bring forward such a Motion so that we can thrash this out.”

 

66.53    Councillor Theobald replied, “Well, interestingly enough at my CMMs I do have some interesting questions and I am looking across now at Councillor Davey who comes forward quite properly and asks me an interesting question.  There are other Members sitting over there who come along, yes Councillor Hawkes, Councillor Mitchell, various esteemed Councillors, all of whom I have enormous respect for come along and ask really excellent questions and I am always delighted to discuss them at those CMMs and I am sure colleagues would nod.  The one person who seems to not come along to my CMMs and ask me really interesting questions is Councillor Kitcat.

 

Councillor Oxley in response to you I would be delighted to see Councillor Kitcat at my CMMs.”

 

66.54    (j) Councillor McCaffery asked:

 

“I am sure all Councillors appreciate the weekly information on English Gypsy, Irish Travellers and New Age Travellers in the city, but we lack information on progress on the establishment of 14 pitches, the number identified by SEERA and progress in East and West Sussex who already have 6 sites and 32 pitches and 10 sites and 106 pitches respectively.  Both councils are required to add additional sites and pitches.

 

Would Councillor Mears please inform the council what consultation has taken place with Travellers and their support organisations on size and location of the pitches, what consultation has taken or will take place with residents and what information is being given to all Councillors and whether any additional information will be given to the Planning Committee?"

 

66.55    Councillor Mears replied:

 

“Thank you for your question and I am glad to note that the weekly update on current Traveller issues is appreciated.  Part of your question relates to East and West Sussex and whilst Councillor McCaffery will be aware that Brighton & Hove worked with East Sussex as part of the regional exercise to determine Gypsy and Traveller accommodation need across the south east, I am sure she will appreciate that this council cannot answer any question relating to how they take this work forward on their behalf.

 

Regarding our work in Brighton and Hove - it is still early days for this stage of the establishment of a site and we have yet to finally confirm the details and arrangements for the consultations that will be undertaken.  I can confirm, however, that consultations will include Travellers and their representative groups as well as local residents and all will be informed of the process and how any views can be included.”

 

66.56    Councillor McCaffery asked a supplementary question, “Thank you Councillor Mears for answering my question: unfortunately it does, in fact, give us little information.  I would also like to say I was not asking for information on East Sussex I was only asking for information on progress in our city.

 

In relation to progress and information, I would like to ask Councillor Mears when a visit can be arranged for Councillors to a well run, well managed site in West or East Sussex.  I know that she herself has visited one and I think it would help all Councillors if they had the same benefit?”

 

66.57    Councillor Mears replied, “Yes, I am more than happy to arrange a visit: I think it really is appropriate.  As I have discussed with Councillor McCaffery, I have made a visit to a neighbouring Travellers’ site.  I would also like to invite Councillor McCaffery, because I do respect her involvement with Gypsies and Travellers and I know of her commitment, to work with me on this issue.  I think it is something that she would actually bring a lot of detail and benefit to.  The offer is there for Councillor McCaffery and I do hope she takes it up.”

 

66.58    Councillor Wakefield-Jarrett asked a further supplementary question, “Would the Leader of the Council please tell me what measures were taken to ensure the size of the site allocated was suitable and would she not agree that two smaller sites in different geographical locations may have been more appropriate?”

 

66.59    Councillor Mears replied, “The number of sites allocated or to be allocated was derived from an assessment from right across the region.  As I said earlier in my response to Councillor McCaffery, and I do apologise for not pronouncing her name properly, I am prepared to, and I think it should happen, that we should have a site visit to neighbouring travellers’ sites and I would hope that the Councillor would take the opportunity to come as well.

 

If the Councillor would like a more technical response, I am more than happy to give a written reply.”

 

66.60    (k) Councillor Mitchell asked:

 

“Can the Cabinet Member set out the spending in the current financial year and for the financial years 2009/2010 and 2010/11 on the maintenance for sports changing rooms at council run and managed recreation grounds (i.e. Victoria Park, Portslade; Patcham Place, Horsdean, Old Boat Corner, East Brighton Park, Waterhall, Braypool) where both football and cricket are played?”

 

66.61    Councillor Smith replied:

 

“We can break down the costs of cleaning the changing rooms but I will need to ask officers to gather information about building maintenance costs.  We have not planned an increase in expenditure on sports changing rooms for the coming budget year and as yet we have not drafted proposals for the 2010/11 budget year.  We will, of course, keep the matter under review.”

 

66.62    Councillor Mitchell asked a supplementary question, “My question did not actually relate to the cleaning of changing rooms and it is unfortunate that no information has been given in response to my question.  However, I was wondering if Councillor Smith could outline what measures he is actually taking to move away from this reactive maintenance approach to one of programmed improvements in sports changing rooms and facilities as outlined in the Council’s Asset Management Plan and Fund?”

 

66.63    Councillor Theobald replied, “All I can say is we work on our Asset Management Programme, presumably exactly the same as your Administration did before.  There are obviously competing demands.  We were left in a situation with a lot of catch-ups to try and achieve, so I can’t say any more than what it actually says here. 

 

Obviously I would love to do lots and lots of different things but the situation is there is only a certain amount of money.  There are other priorities and we have an Asset Management Programme where all these points are put in and I am sure you worked in exactly the same way.”

 

66.64    (l) Councillor Mitchell asked:

 

“Can the Cabinet Member set out the spending plans for the maintenance and improvement of cricket pitches at council run and managed facilities over the last financial year and the next two years and what plans have the Administration got to improve changing room facilities over the next two years?”

 

66.65    Councillor Smith replied:

 

“Thank you for the question.  I will need to ask officers to do some work for you to get the information you require.  By way of explanation, our in-house grounds maintenance teams work in areas across a range of sites such as cricket pitches, other sport pitches, parks and other green spaces – so it is difficult to break down the cost of maintaining just one type of site or a site and thus provide the figures you request.

 

We have not planned an increase in expenditure on cricket pitches or changing room facilities for the coming budget year and as yet we have not drafted proposals for the 2010/11 budget year.  We will, of course, keep the matter under review.”

 

66.66    Councillor Mitchell asked a supplementary question, “It is disappointing that there is no planned increase in expenditure and it is obviously very important to maximize any additional funding.  Therefore could Councillor Smith please tell me if the council is working with young people’s groups and getting ready to bid for funding in April 2009 to the Government’s Youth Opportunity Fund and the Youth Capital Fund that does provide improved sports facility funding for sports equipment, sports coaches and so on?” 

 

66.67    Councillor Smith replied, “We had money in this council for sports pavilions and all other activities in the city.  If people remember in the late eighties when the Brighton Marina was done, all the muck that was taken out and chalk was put at Waterhall and they gave us half a million pounds for improvements to sports facilities, that’s supposed to have been ring-fenced.  It was taken out of that budget by the Labour-controlled Council at that time and put in the General Rate Fund. 

 

That’s a start, just for information purposes about what’s happened in the past.  We have been in control of this authority for under two years and what we are doing is, yes, we are working with every group in this city to help them get grants and get extra facilities.  We have got a list of things we want doing in this city and we are going to do it.  This Administration will do it.”

 

66.68    (m) Councillor Fryer asked:

 

“What percentage of eligible residents have taken up the Warm Front scheme and what percentage of the population of Brighton & Hove does this represent?”

 

66.69    Councillor Caulfield replied:

 

“Whilst a precise figure for the percentage of Brighton and Hove’s residents who are eligible for Warm Front is not readily available, it is possible to use data from various sources to produce an estimate.  However, before considering the numbers who have taken up Warm Front it is important to bear in mind the fact that changes in circumstances of individual households and changes to properties leads to ongoing changes in the pool of eligible households.

 

To date it is estimated that the number of households in Brighton and Hove who are eligible for one or more of the main Warm Front measures (loft/cavity wall insulation, central heating, boiler replacement and heating repair) is currently in the region of 4,000.

 

In addition to this a recent extension of this scheme to include families with children under 16 is expected to reach around another 3,500 families with the new Family Insulation Grant.  The grant will initially be available to families living in two-bedroom homes, with a view to extending it to more households as the scheme progresses.  The new scheme, operated in partnership with Climate Energy, is part of a local grants programme of more than £1 million a year.”

 

66.70    Councillor Fryer asked a supplementary question, “Warm Front is a good start in tackling the problem of fuel poverty and climate change but I am really concerned that it appears that we are not actually monitoring its take-up, which is what my question was about.  There are many people on low incomes who don’t qualify for Warm Front Schemes and can’t afford to insulate their homes and often there is no offer of incentives to do these new insulation schemes if it is privately rented.

 

In Conservative-led Kirklees Council they have a free insulation scheme where there have been over 30,000 free insulation measures to date, which is more than the entire population of London.  As this involves engaging directly by knocking on people’s doors, this has also led to over 10,000 people getting debt advice checks, over 15,000 people getting fire safety checks and over 67,000 people getting carbon monoxide detectors fitted.  These schemes actually save lives.  This was achieved with a rise in council tax which was higher than that proposed by the recent Green Group budget and was hugely popular with residents.

 

I understand that Councillor Caulfield has recently visited Kirklees, does she agree that we should follow in their low carbon footprint and implement a similar scheme here?”

 

66.71    Councillor Caulfield replied, “The Warm Front Scheme is actually just one of a number of schemes that we run in this council.  We do have the Warm Front Scheme but we also have the Warm Homes Scheme.  We also have our council housing Insulation Scheme as well, where we put in free insulation, new boilers, new front doors and actually we are going to be announcing next week for the first time solar panels on council housing, so we do have a number of initiatives to help with fuel poverty and insulation.

 

As you said I have been to Kirklees, only a couple of weeks ago, to see what they did.  In regards to the fire checks, actually the Fire Service already provide that free service and do visit people’s homes on a regular basis.  I have actually been visited by them myself.  There are a number of schemes to help people deal with fuel poverty and fuel insulation and if you do want to talk about your proposals for your 0.5% increase on everybody’s council tax to insulate the homes of people in this city then that was, I do believe, a twenty year programme.  What we are doing here is dealing with those in fuel poverty right here, right now, not in twenty years time and we do not intend to do that by putting people’s council tax up.

 

In addition, to fund that you also wanted to put a car permit tax on residents who had cars older than 2001, which meant an average of about £318 a year for people who are on a low income and can’t afford to replace their cars, so your scheme does sound good but actually when you get into the detail is targeting those who can’t afford to pay more council tax or to replace their cars.  What we are doing is dealing with fuel poverty right here, right now and letting the Government fund some of our fuel incentive schemes.”

 

66.72    Councillor Steedman asked a further supplementary question, “Well, I wish it were the case that we could actually know how many people are benefiting right here, right now, because Councillor Caulfield can’t actually tell us.  Could Councillor Caulfield tell us what steps are being taken to actually monitor uptake so that in a year’s time she can actually tell us how many people have benefited from the initiatives that she so proudly champions?”

 

66.73    Councillor Caulfield replied, “I can actually tell you, you did just ask for the Warm Front numbers, but I can give you the Warm Homes update.  We can also tell you that we have over 12,000 council houses that will be benefiting from the initiatives I have just discussed, so I can give you that information. 

 

We are monitoring not just what we are doing but also the uptake and also increasing the uptake and we are working with our communication teams so that residents are aware of what’s available and how to actually claim them.”

 

66.74    (n) Councillor Hawked asked:

 

“Would the Cabinet Member for Children & Young People explain why on 4 March, when the Government published the list of Local Authorities that had received Myplace funding, Brighton and Hove was not listed.  This is a grant which was earmarked as a 100% funded grant to improve the 67 Centre in Moulsecoomb.  Did this Conservative led council miss out on much needed government funding for local youth services because the Administration deviated from the government guidelines when applying for the bid?”

 

66.75    Councillor Mrs. Brown replied:

 

“The Government announced funding in May 2008 for the Myplace Strategy which is to provide capital funding to build world class youth facilities.  A detailed bid was developed in Brighton and Hove through a thorough needs analysis and extensive consultation with partners and young people.  The bid fully met the government’s guidelines for applications and was agreed at both the Youth and Connexions Board and the Children and Young People’s Trust Board in September 2008.

 

We understand the bidding process was heavily over-subscribed and unfortunately the Brighton and Hove bid was not successful in this round.  There is to be another tranche of funding available this year and it is the intention of the CYPT to make another application, having taken whatever feedback is available from the Big Lottery (that organised the application and selection process) in order to make any necessary refinements to the bid.”

 

66.76    Councillor Hawkes asked a supplementary question, “Thank you for that answer.  However, saying that our bid was not successful is a great shame.  Would the Cabinet Member for Children & Young People agree that this is a worrying situation?  Whilst the authorities in Hastings and Rye and over in Bognor Regis were successful in getting over £5m of money from the Government, this council has failed to bid successfully for better youth services in Brighton. 

 

Could the Cabinet Member therefore confirm whether she will be seeking advice or help from her Conservative counterparts in Bognor and Hastings who were able to put a successful bid together?”

 

66.77    Councillor Mrs. Brown replied, “As I stated in my reply this application did meet the Government guidelines and it was agreed at the CYPT Board which both Councillor Hawkes and Councillor Marsh sit on.  The bidding process was heavily over-subscribed: so there were a lot of authorities as well as ours that didn’t receive the money, although our actual record for successful bids is very good and we have done very well with our bids this year. 

 

At the end of the day, Councillor Hawkes, it’s this Labour Government that turned us down, so perhaps the Labour Members would like to explain to their Government.”

 

66.78    Councillor Meadows asked a further supplementary question, “Can the Cabinet Member please confirm that the refurbishment of the 67 Centre in Moulsecoomb now hangs in the balance, because instead of bidding for a share of £110m the council will now be resubmitting a bid for a share of a much smaller pot of £30m? 

 

What would the Cabinet Member for Children & Young People say to young people in Moulsecoomb who will now be concerned that the redevelopment of the 67 Centre has been put at risk by this council?”

 

66.79    Councillor Mrs. Brown replied, “It has not been put at risk by this council, there was this one bid that we did not actually manage to get.  Shall I tell you some of the bids we have recently got.  The first one is V-Talent and the CYPT was awarded £285,000 from December 2008 to March 2011 to enable us to offer 30 full-time volunteering opportunities to young people aged between 16 and 25.

 

Secondly, we bid for the Youth Crime Action Fund and have successfully got £700,000 over two years for positive activities for our young children and more detached work, partly in the Moulsecoomb area.

 

Thirdly, we are the only authority in this country to receive £500 worth of money for a research project funded by the DCSF and delivered by King’s College and the National Academy of Parenting.  This is an intervention project called the Functional Family Therapy Programme and this works with young offenders and those at risk of offending.

 

This shows over the last year we have been highly successful at bidding for grant money but yes, of course, we will put in a bid again for the 67 Centre.”

 

66.80    (o) Councillor Wakefield-Jarrett asked:

 

“Could the Cabinet Member for Central Services tell me what proportion of suspected benefit fraud cases are pursued in ways other than through the courts and how this compares to national trends for action by local authorities where benefit fraud is suspected?”

 

66.81    Councillor Fallon-Khan replied:

 

“Potential fraud in the housing and Council Tax Benefit system.

There are two aspects to dealing with fraud; Prevention and detection.

 

Prevention

As a service recently rated at the maximum 4 out of 4 by the Audit Commission in the recent CPA assessment the Council can take assurance that all the correct measures are in place to deter and prevent fraud before it even occurs.  This maybe reflected in national statistics.   The Department of Work and Pensions operates sophisticated data matching exercises to identify potential fraud discrepancies within welfare benefits, tax and banking records.  The ‘hits’ from these exercises are sent to the Council to investigate.  While not all ‘hits’ result in the identification of fraud the ratio is a reasonable indicator of potential fraud activity and the effectiveness of fraud preventative work.  In Brighton & Hove 2007/2008 the number of ‘hits’ was 36 per 1000 benefit cases, nationally the average was 50.  From these figures it may be that Housing Benefit / Council Tax Benefit fraud activity is less than the national average. However, the service does not rest on this statistic and all efforts are made and will continue to be made to prevent fraud.

 

Detection

The Audit Commission rating also gives assurance that the Benefit Service is conducting its fraud investigation to a high standard.  The Service applies strict guidelines to make sure that sanction is only sought where it is fair and proportionate.  Where high level fraud abuse is clear we do not hesitate to pursue court decisions that we can then publicise as a deterrent to others.

 

In comparison with the national average, the last figures we have are for 2007/2008:

(Although two of the three statistics show the authority as being below the national average, this is to be expected given that Housing Benefit/Council Tax Benefit fraud activity is assumed to be 28% less than the national average).

 

We cautioned 61 customers, 2.07 customers per 1000 benefit cases (national average 2.53)

 

We issued 47 administrative penalties, 1.6 customers per 1000 benefit cases (national average 1.75)

 

We went to court for 47 cases, 1.6 customers per 1000 benefit cases (national average 1.55)”

 

66.82    Councillor Wakefield-Jarrett asked a supplementary question,

 

“I would like to thank the Cabinet Member for Central Services for the detailed response to my question. 

 

Could he tell me what steps are taken to consider the impact on an individual’s life before releasing their details to the press when a benefit fraud is suspected or has occurred?”

 

66.83    Councillor Fallon-Khan replied, “They have committed a crime, so therefore it is in the public interest, is it not?”

 

66.84    Councillor Randall asked a further supplementary question, “We share Councillor Fallon-Khan’s desire to cut down on benefit fraud, none of us like people who free-load on the system.  However, we believe the council should be sensitive and proportional in its response to these issues.

 

I wonder if he thinks pursuing a single mother for more than three months, a woman with two children who has gone through a long period of personal homelessness and trauma and was the subject of a three month investigation, which included three interviews under caution and it emerged that the over?payment was £24 over two years.  Now this caused this woman and her family an enormous amount of stress and I have to say that the people in the department doing the investigation knew about her circumstances because I told them and I wasn’t happy with their response.

 

Can he tell me if he thinks this is value for money, if it’s proportional or an act that he and the Administration are proud of?”

 

66.85    Councillor Fallon-Khan replied, “We do have a strict code of proportionality and also in terms of value for money I think we should remember that the Benefits Team in this Council have just been awarded four stars out of four by the Audit Commission.  If you are going to be picking up on individual cases, do you know I am quite happy to come and meet Councillor Randall and perhaps come and meet this lady, I am quite happy to do that.

 

If you are talking about value for money, the reason that we have taken some of the actions that we have and the reason that we want to have this as one of the priorities that we do is because there is a lot of money that gets wasted from council tax payers and from the council from people who commit benefit fraud or whatever.  Now the results that we have got are excellent and I am going to defend this Administration for the last two years for the work that has been done by the officers and by this Administration.

 

If Councillor Randall wants to talk about a particular individual case I am quite happy to meet him afterwards and we will pursue it from there.”

 

66.86    (p) Councillor Morgan asked:

 

“Can the Cabinet Member for Environment confirm that staff employed in council-owned car parks are to be sacked and that in future the car parks will have no staff on duty to deal with equipment breakdowns, problems with passes and the safety of car park users?”

 

66.87    Councillor Theobald replied:

 

“I would like to assure you that there was full consultation with staff and unions regarding the current improvements to The Lanes and London Road car parks.  Staff have been supportive of these changes, which will create more local jobs and new opportunities through the introduction of an in-house dedicated Maintenance Team, in addition to the new Control Centre operation.  There has been no decision to sack staff.

 

The new Traffic Control Centre will provide 24/7 customer service to all linked car parks.  The Maintenance Team will be well equipped to respond and attend as required.  The new access control, CCTV, improved lighting and general upgrading of The Lanes are specifically designed to make the car parks both safe and secure for all customers.”

 

66.88    Councillor Morgan asked a supplementary question, “I am grateful to Councillor Theobald for confirming that the Administration is removing on-site staff from the council’s car parks as what it describes as part of its improvements. 

 

Does Councillor Theobald agree with Councillor Mears when she said that car parks at night can be scary, especially for lone women and is he aware of the Home Office studies which show that unstaffed car parks have much higher rates of crime?”

 

66.89    Councillor Theobald replied, “I think it is a shame, having read your letter in which you refer to Councillor Mears, that you didn’t wait for me to answer this question before you actually stated in the local paper: ‘Why is Councillor Mears sacking the car park attendants?’.  That is not true. 

 

Now, of course, in the old days when I first joined a local authority, if you had written a letter like that to the local paper the Editor would have telephoned me or Councillor Mears, Councillor Mears really because her name is in this, and said would you like to respond to this and it would have gone in at the same time but, of course, those days have long gone.  That I think is unfortunate, I would like to see that situation again.

 

These car parks have been left to rot for the last twenty years, they were an absolute mess, dangerous and very few ladies, I suggest, would go into these car parks at night time.  They were certainly unpleasant places but what is interesting is that only Monday night a senior female member of our staff, following the Culture Conference, went to the London Road car park at 11.30 at night and said how safe she felt following these improvements.  Now, to me that is very much of a plus.  

 

Within the car parks there are further opportunities for staff, building on an in?house dedicated Maintenance Team, the car parks will be a lot safer.  I support everything that Councillor Mears has said.  The car parks will be very, very much better, a hundred times better than what they are now with cameras, lighting and, you know, every other thing that you could possibly think of to bring these car parks up to the full standard of what one can see elsewhere.”

 

66.90    (q) Councillor Morgan asked:

 

“Can the Cabinet Member for Housing confirm that, despite her promise at Council on 4 December last year that two vacant council properties would be returned to use “early in the new financial year”, these family homes in the Manor Farm area of my ward remain empty and are still awaiting repair?”

 

66.91    Councillor Caulfield replied:

 

“Since my response to Councillor Morgan’s previous question on this matter, further detailed assessments of the works required on both of these properties have taken place.  This includes structural surveys, and an independent survey to establish the possible levels of recharging that could be applied due to damage by previous tenants.  Following these a full specification and an estimation of the cost of the works has been drawn up.

 

68 Manor Way is estimated to require £32,000 of works, of which £5,577 is estimated to be due to damage by tenants, and as such will be considered for recharge.

 

74 Manor Way is estimated to require £35,000 of works, of which £4,850 is estimated to be due to damage by tenants, and as such will be considered for recharge.

 

The specification of works on these properties has now been completed and it is planned to engage with contractors to progress these works in as timely a fashion as possible, whilst having regard for the lead-in time required for ordering materials and other preliminary works.

 

It is still expected that these properties will be brought back into use early in the new financial year.”

 

66.92    Councillor Morgan asked a supplementary question, “Can Councillor Caulfield confirm that these family homes, which the Conservative Council have left empty now for almost 18 months, are really going to have £35,000 of work done on them in time for the new financial year beginning in three weeks?”

 

66.93    Councillor Caulfield replied, “I think, Councillor Morgan, you must have misread my answer at the last Council meeting.  I said they would be ready in the new financial year, not by the new financial year and, yes, I can confirm that work is planned on those two properties as detailed in my answer.  I cannot stand here and listen that we have left those properties empty for 18 months when they were empty for nearly three years under the previous Labour Council.

 

Let me just say in addition to that: we have empty voids in sheltered housing schemes because they have shared facilities.  For those of you that don’t know what shared facilities are, that is where you have to share a bathroom with your neighbours and many of our sheltered housing residents are having to share bathrooms with up to seven or eight neighbours. 

 

We are announcing next week in our Capital Programme that we are going to spend £300,000 to remove shared facilities from Jasmine Court, Hazelholt and Laburnum Grove, thus speeding up our void turn-around times and preventing voids from being in sheltered schemes in the first place.  That is not all: we have found on my personal tour of the sheltered housing schemes seven empty scheme manager flats that have been empty for nearly four to five years.  Many of these are two-bedroom flats which could be used in our under-occupancy scheme and will be relet in this financial year, this within 18 months of the Conservative Council.”