Agenda item

The following questions had been submitted :-

 

Question 1- Support for Dairy Farmers – Submitted by Cllr Wilkinson

 

Can the Leader confirm that this Council is doing all it can to support the dairy farmers in Cheshire East as they face the huge decreases in the farm gate prices for their milk?

 

Response

 

The Leader of the Council, Cllr Michael Jones responded that he agreed that the Council must support the industry. He had prepared a full response , but due to the lateness in the day, this would be circulated to all Members of the Council, after the meeting.

 

Supplementary Question

 

Cllr Wilkinson thanked the Leader for his response and asked that if the Leader was minded to write to the Minister for Agriculture, would he point out that farm estates were suffering and that this could have an impact on the greater rural economy.

 

Cllr Jones agreed to work with Cllr Wilkinson on the submission of a letter to the Minister.

 

 

Question 2- Development in Shavington – Submitted by Cllr D Marren

 

A recent letter to the Crewe Chronicle captured the concerns of many residents of Shavington, in suggesting that Cheshire East Council is actively encouraging growth in and around Shavington. If true, the Council can expect a strong reaction from the village and sympathetic Councillors.

 

Can the Portfolio Holder detail which sites identified as deliverable in the 2011 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment around Shavington have had applications for development submitted; which sites officers expect applications for in the short and midterm; the names of the developers and what support and/or encouragement is being given/has been given to these applicants by this Council?

 

Response

 

Cllr Rachel Bailey undertook to provide a written response to the question to all Members of then Council, after the meeting.

 

Question 3 - Press Releases – Submitted Cllr Corcoran

 

This Council has been reported as stating that it shouldn't break the law.

 

1) Could we also have a clear statement that this Council should always tell the truth?

 

2) In particular, please can someone explain to me why this Council issued a press release stating that 'The disparity (of not allowing bus passes on Dial-a-Ride in the south of the borough) arose following the collapse of East Cheshire Community Transport' when in fact the disparity arose before then and indeed the withdrawal of the use of bus passes on Dial-a-Ride was partly responsible for the collapse of East Cheshire Community Transport?

 

3) Could some one also explain to me why this inaccuracy was not corrected promptly when I pointed it out to the Press Office?"

 

 

Response:

 

Cllr M Jones    1)    Cllr Jones responded that the Council could not always tell the truth, for example where there were safeguarding issues and in the interest of the public it was not possible to disclose everything. The Council did not lie, but could not always tell the truth.

 

Cllr Menlove     2) From April 2 this year, there was a disparity between the north of the borough and the south. The replacement flexible transport service in the north of the borough was required by law to accept bus passes, as it was registered public transport. In the south of the borough, the previous service operated under a Section 19 permit and the Council had previously decided that Section 19 services would not be allowed to accept bus passes.

The Council strongly refutes that its actions in anyway resulted in the collapse in East Cheshire Community Transport.  The decision regarding Section 19 permits in no way was responsible for the collapse of East Cheshire Community transport. The administrators’ report into the collapse showed the company had debts approaching £300,000.  Furthermore, It is our understanding that several days prior to East Cheshire Community Transport ceasing trading they became a Limited Company and as a result, Cheshire East Council is now unable to recover monies due to it. 

A grant of £81,000 was awarded to the company on April 1 2012, to be paid in monthly instalments. It transpires that the Council acted with taxpayers’ best interests at heart because had the grant been paid upfront in one lump sum, then almost £75,000 would have been lost.

The Council has supported this organisation throughout. In June last year, Cheshire East Council gave the charity a one-off grant of £125,000 to buy vehicles and software. The Council even maintained the Dial-a-Ride vehicles at taxpayers’ expense. Sadly, this one-off funding was unable to save them.

 

Cllr D Brown  3)     Cllr Brown apologised that inaccurate information was sent out. When the inaccuracy was identified he had decided , in consultation with the Communications team, not to go back to the media to ask them to print a correction, as the situation had been rectified.

 

 

Supplementary Question

 

Cllr Corcoran thanked Cllr Brown for accepting that there had been a mistake, but he considered that an e-mail should have been sent to Members to inform them. However, he did not feel that Cllr Menlove had answered his question and questioned why the press statement had been issued.

 

Cllr Menlove responded that sometimes people made mistakes and quite simply a mistake had been made on this occasion.

 

Question 4 - Definition of a ‘Sustainable Development’ – Submitted by Cllr Corcoran

 

What is this Council’s working definition of a ‘sustainable development’?

 

The National Planning Policy Framework states that there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. Cheshire East Council has intimated that it uses the North West Development Agency (NWDA) sustainability toolkit to assess sustainability. The interim planning policy that has recently been subject to consultation used the distances to local services taken from the NWDA sustainability toolkit question 34. However, I am told by Cheshire East officers that in assessing planning applications a tolerance of 50% is added to all the distances given in the NWDA sustainability toolkit. As an example the NWDA sustainability toolkit lists Primary school (1000m). When Cheshire East assesses a site, is a primary school 1,400m away a pass or a fail (or a marginal fail)?"

 

Response

 

Cllr Rachel Bailey undertook to provide a written response to the question to all Members of the Council, after the meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Question 5 - Responding to Elected Members – Submitted by Cllr Boston

 

You will recall I put a motion to Council on the 16th April that Cheshire East Council adopt a policy of responding to elected member enquiries within 2 working days.

 

When 3 months later this motion had not been responded to I asked why my request for a quick response to Members has not yet been responded to! The response from Member Services  - “There has been a great deal of Cabinet business since the annual meeting of Council and it has not therefore been possible to list every item as early as might have been desired.” serves to underpin my point.

 

Although it has now been listed for 23^rd July can you confirm that this practice of poor or non response to Members will drastically improve in the future and that Members as the elected representatives and voice of the people will not continue to be ignored?

 

 

Response from Cllr David Brown

 

Cllr Brown apologised to Cllr Boston that it had to taken so long to include her motion on the Cabinet agenda.

 

He stated that the Council had always been committed to supporting Members and responding to their enquires in an efficient and timely way.

 

He considered that the exchange of information between officers and Members was crucial. The Council was always looking for opportunities to continue to embed a culture where Members received prompt responses to queries. This approach of “Think Member First” was something which would continue to be a theme of his Group.  Where more could be done to embed this, the Cabinet work with officers to achieve this.

 

He stated that Councillor Boston’s motion would be presented to Cabinet on the following Monday. She was right that there had been a lot of Cabinet business since her motion was first put to Council, but he could assure her that, when her motion is considered, it would receive full consideration.

 

He reported that some work was taking place to revise and streamline responses to Member enquiries and this would be considered by Cabinet at its next meeting. There was a policy, which he felt needed looking at. The public should expect a similar time for responses and Members should not be special. The Council should respond to any query within 5 days, not necessarily with a full answer but at least with an acknowledgment identifying the course of action.

 

The Leader of the Council, Cllr M Jones, added that he intended to propose  that every Notice of Motion referred from Council to Cabinet must be considered by Cabinet within the next two meetings.