Agenda item

Question 1 -  Councillor Cubitt

In 2014 our Transport Assessment by Parsons Brinckerhoff and commissioned by the Council was extremely clear that in the event that Manydown was built, we needed to build a Western Bypass joining up to Junction 7 M3. At our EPH Committee on 1st November 2018 and clearly recorded in the minutes of that same meeting the Committee requested that, inter alia, the Western Bypass be mentioned in Strategy Theme 5 and Strategy Theme 7. The Western Bypass has not been mentioned. EPH Committee’s requests have been ignored. Why?

Answer  - Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural  Environment

Madam Mayor may I thank the Deputy Mayor for her question.  Can I draw her attention to page 254 of the agenda which says under the section ‘Looking Beyond the Local Plan – supporting longer-term housing and jobs growth’, “based on initial assessment, some of the key longer-term transport infrastructure considerations might include: Investigating strategic multimodal improvements between the A30 (west) and the A339 (e.g. a western relief/distributor road)”.  I can assure Madam Mayor and all Members here, that I have at every meeting with our officers and every meeting with Hampshire County Council, insisted that a western relief road remains on our agenda as part of this transport strategy and I would like to urge all Members to encourage the county council, in particular to have it on their agenda and encourage our County Councillors of all political parties to insist that a wester relief road is on the county council’s agenda.

Supplementary Question – Councillor Cubitt

At that same EPH meeting we were advised by transport experts that if the A33 was dualled from M4 to M3 it would result in Basingstoke becoming a dormitory town which would destroy our local economy. Can the Cabinet confirm they will not support the dualling of A33 in our Borough?

Supplementary Answer - Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural  Environment

I have consistently from before I was a portfolio holder to the present date, said that I am not convinced and do not support the case for dualling the A33.  In my view, bearing in mind there is limited resources, the county council and national government should be focusing their attention on the western bypass and given the choice between the two, it is the western bypass which is most needed.  Dualling the A33 will result in my view of only encouraging more traffic from elsewhere to come through that road rather than actually assisting any of the residents of Basingstoke and Deane and bearing in mind my priority as Cabinet Member is to do what is right for Basingstoke and Deane.  As someone who has regularly used the A33 over the last fifteen years, I know exactly the strains and stresses on it.  It regulates itself in terms of through traffic avoiding it rather than by creating a dual carriageway that will send even more traffic in, create more fumes and bad air for the new schools that are planned to be built at the east of Basingstoke on the new sites in the Local Plan, so I totally have to say that I do not support the dualling of the A33.

Question 2 – Councillor Potter

The CX in an email to Cllr Tilbury on the 26th June stated that the termination payments made recently to the ex -Deputy Chief Executive and separately to the ex- Head of Law and Governance were made in accordance with the Council’s procedures and the Law.

I have been examining Guidance issued under Section 40 of the Localism Act 2011 and I draw members attention to the attached IMG 0004 above and in particular paragraph 13 of the guidance issued by the Secretary of State in 2013.

Very clearly Councils are expected through a meeting of Full Council to be given the opportunity to vote on any severance package of £100,000 and above.

Additionally the guidance issued requires Councils to be given the opportunity to vote before large salary packages in respect of any new appointments are confirmed.  Again the threshold set out is £100,000 and we have adopted this practice.

Indeed we have an agenda item at the Council meeting on the 18 July relating to the appointment of the Executive Director of Development and Deputy Chief Executive with its £119,000 remuneration package so we follow the guidance in this particular case.

Why in the last 6 years since the guidance was issued has BDBC not been advised to adopt the elements that relate to Severance Payments?

Answer – Leader of the Council

The question raises issues of policy going back to 2013 requiring research by officers.  The Chair of the Human Resources (HR) Committee agrees and accepts that the HR Committee should receive a report on settlement agreements and the legislative and government guidance in relation to the same.  She will request a report to be brought to the September meeting of the HR committee.  Hopefully that will tease out any of the questions and issues that will be raised.

Supplementary Question – Councillor Potter

Would the Leader of the Council and the Chair of HR be interested to know, as I hope they would so I am not accused of asking for anything that is unusual, that the following councils that are close to us, Reading Borough, Winchester City, East Hampshire, Portsmouth City, Eastleigh Borough and there are others, are required to refer to council for approval, settlement agreements of £100,000 and above, so it is common practice in a number of local authorities consistent with the advice issued under section 40 of the Localism Act that I have referred to.

Supplementary Answer – Leader of the Council

I just want to confirm that we will explore what is done in other councils and I am sure the Chair of HR Committee will be confident with that and will understand the issues across the piste and I am sure any of that information can be fed in and used as evidence.

Question 3 – Councillor Lovegrove

An eighty two year old Tadley resident reported her bin was damaged whilst it was been emptied she was told she would have to pay for the replacement .

It took several calls involving the Citizens Advice to resolve, thus causing  much stress to this Lady .

Does the portfolio holder consider this fair treatment for our elderly residents?

Answer – Leader of the Council

I am speaking on behalf of the Portfolio Holder.  Anything that causes distress to our residents we should all be concerned about and I appreciate that the older you get and the frustrations of a telephone and trying to get your point across is difficult.

The council introduced a bin charge for replacing black bins as part of policy changes in April 2015 which included residents having to pay for replacement refuse bins if damaged, lost or stolen.

There would not be a charge if the bin went into the back of the vehicle, these would be replaced free of charge.

Wheeled bins have an expected lifespan of 7 – 10 years.  Unfortunately, we are finding that older wheeled bins are starting to show signs of excessive wear and tear, which includes cracks, splits or parts going amiss.

If the bin is over 7 years then it is the responsibility of the resident.  We all upgrade our facilities over a period of time and it would be replaced by the resident.

In this case the bin is at least 20 years old and why the resident was advised that she needed to pay for a replacement.

We are working with Serco, the council’s waste collection contractor, to introduce a bin repair service later this year, which could resolve a number of these issues, however this is not yet operational.

You can pass our, as a council’s apologies to this lady.  We do not want to have our residents distressed by anything that seems out of the ordinary.

Supplementary Question – Councillor Lovegrove

This lady is very angry about having to pay for this lid that was damaged, not by her but by the operatives.  She will not let this rest I fear and will go on further.  To be fair she did get her bin replaced, albeit 4½ months later and they sent it to the wrong address.  So what you are saying is not exactly right because they did replace it so it is not consistent with the policy.  Would you like to review the policy?

Supplementary Answer – Leader of the Council

I will speak to the Portfolio Holder on her return.

Question 4 – Councillor Tilbury

On the 23rd Nov 2018 Cllrs and staff were advised that the previous Deputy Chief Executive was leaving the Council to work on the launch of a new company, in their own words this was a ”unique opportunity”.

However as we are now aware from the Council's Statement of Accounts, this individual had left as the result of a termination agreement costing taxpayers £95,772 for a member of staff with barely a year’s service. Combined with a further £121,615 paid to the previous Head of Legal and Governance along with the substantial cost to recruit new staff to fill these posts has wiped out the entire amount raised by this Council when it increased the Council tax earlier this year.

Unlike redundancy payments, there is little clarity regarding how these payments are justified legally, morally, or even how they are calculated. I had intended to raise this lack of accountability with the head of Human Resources, only to discover they too had left the Council.

Given the clear public disquiet that these payments have created, would she agree that there is an urgent need to address this issue, given the large amounts of public money involved?

Answer – Leader of the Council

I thank Councillor Tilbury for his question.  The Chair of HR Committee shares similar concerns, however due to current legislation and council policy we cannot discuss details relating to individual employees past and present.  Disclosure would contravene both data protection principles and the terms of the ex-employees confidentiality agreements.

Each year the council adopts an annual pay policy detailing how the council will manage remuneration and termination costs, including settlement agreements which are used to bring an employment relationship to an end in a mutually agreed way.

The terms of such agreements are determined, on a case by case basis, in line with council policy and in the light of the particular circumstances, and can include a financial payment to the employee, a reference and agreed exit message.  In offering and negotiating a payment amount, the council, in common with other public or private sector employers, considers the factors detailed in the ACAS guidance.

I am assured that these settlement agreements were dealt with in accordance with council policy and the legislative requirements.

The council is a public sector organisation and I agree that transparency is important, but we are also an employer and have to act fairly and responsibly in that role.

Question 5 – Councillor Cubitt

Basingstoke is already suffering from an infrastructure deficit of approximately £200m; Doctors’ Surgeries & water sources to name but a few. How can we trust this Council to make sure that the quality of life of our current residents is not further destroyed by the continued failure by various parties to honour the explicit commitments to pre identified infrastructure required when building over 1,000 houses per annum?

Answer - Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment

It is a very relevant concern that the Deputy Mayor raises about the amount of infrastructure that needs to be built to run alongside developments.  It is a concern that we have raised throughout the whole of the drafting of the Local Plan and it is a concern that we will continue to raise as we review the current Local Plan.  We have seen some signs of infrastructure improvement with the Black Dam roundabout, several roundabouts on the A33 at Chineham and Binfields and we have seen improvements to the Winchester Road roundabout and know that the Brighton Hill roundabout is due for reworking in due course and we know that the Thorneycroft roundabout is being reworked at present.  The infrastructure is coming, we know that there are section 106 agreements that are in place for the provision of schools and other facilities and we know that the Community Infrastructure Levy is coming on tap soon and will bring revenue in to fund other necessary matters that is necessary to support new communities.  I can give the Deputy Mayor the reassurance that infrastructure is coming as we build, it just takes time.

Supplementary Question – Councillor Cubitt

We already do not have enough water in this Borough and what water we have is from our precious aquifers.  The people of our Borough have not been consulted on, nor agreed to water rationing. I would like from you to agree an amendment to the policy EM6 from when we reschedule the Local Plan which we are about to do and ensure that we increase the focus on water source in our policy EM6 to ensure that we have enough water to meet the needs of existing residents and we don’t impose water rationing on our residents that exist in this borough already let alone provide enough water for future residents that are coming down the track.

Supplementary Answer - Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment

The review of the Local Plan will look at all of the policies and we will look at that in particular.  We are going to have a new water sample study which will put in figures way beyond that which will be built to find an upper limit to what we are capable of having in the borough as well as to deal with the current situation.  There has been talk amongst some of our members as to whether we should have a reservoir in the borough.  Maybe some of those discussions will prove fruitful at EPH committee too.

Question 6 – Councillor Cubitt

Given the Approved Local Plan (2011-2029) is being reopened, please can the Cabinet confirm they will include, de minimus, a requirement in Policy EM10 to Compliance of our Government’s Technical Housing Standards 2015 and adherence to any subsequent legislation in this regard.

Answer - Cabinet Member for Planning, Infrastructure and Natural Environment

The short answer to this is yes.