1. home and garden

5.
REPRESENTATIONS FROM MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
[40 Minutes]
(A)
PETITIONS
NAME
SUBJECT
MP01
Councillor D Morris
Children's Play area in the Imperial Sports Ground
MP02
Councillor S Comer
IKEA Plc and Eastville Club
(B)
STATEMENTS
Name
Subject
MS01
Councillor D Brown
M32 Detrunking
MS02
Councillor D Brown
Statement on Statements
MS03
Councillor C Bolton
South Bristol Pool
MS04
Councillor G Hopkins
Community Resolve
MS05
Councillor G Hopkins
Waste Issues
MS06
Councillor M Kerry
Lockleaze and Horfield Area Housing Committee
MS07
Councillor R Eddy
Cost to BCC of 'Bottled' General Election
(C)
QUESTIONS
From
To
Subject
MQ1
Councillor E Bagley
Councillor D Pickup
Proposed Playing Fields Site for
Fairfield School
MQ2
Councillor A Fox
Councillor J Price
Eastfield Estate
MQ3
Councillor A Fox
Councillor R Walker
Canfield Park
MQ4
Councillor M Popham
Councillor J Price
Neighbourhood Issues
MQ5
Councillor S Emmett
Councillor M Bradshaw
Balanced and Sustainable
Communities
MQ6
Councillor S Emmett
Councillor J Price
Area Housing Committees
MQ7
Councillor Hopkins
Councillor H Holland
Labour Policy on Waste
Petitions, Statements and Questions - 16 October 2007
From
To
Subject
MQ8
Councillor B Lewis
Councillor D Pickup
Statements of Special Educational
Needs
MQ9
Councillor D Brown
Councillor M Bradshaw
Bus Concession Proposals
Petitions, Statements and Questions - 16 October 2007
MS01
STATEMENT TO FULL COUNCIL – 16 OCTOBER 2007
I note with interest the recent announcement by Tom Harris MP,
the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State, Department for
Transport, that:“Following advice from the Highways Agency, informed by
discussions with the relevant authorities, I have now decided that
the following routes should be removed from the announced
detrunking programme and remain part of the strategic road
network, maintained by the Highways Agency.”
His statement included reference to the M32 (Bristol to M4
Junction 19).
I hope that the relevant Executive Member (or the Leader of the
Council, who will surely have been involved in earlier discussions
about possible detrunking of this route) will make a statement
explaining the significance of this decision and, in particular, its
impact on the location of a possible Park & Ride site near the M32,
using the M32 route into Bristol and, especially, Cabot Circus. It
would be appropriate to include an explanation as to what (and
when) discussions were held “with the relevant authorities”, what
advice was given to the DfT from Bristol City Council, and who was
involved in making such a decision.
Councillor D Brown
Henleaze Ward
Reply to
Telephone
Co~~ncillor
Dennis Brown
Fax
-The Council House
Ernail
Our ref
Your ref
Date
Councillor Mark Bradshaw
0117 92 22879
01179222090
Mark,[email protected]
MBlLD
5 November 2007
.,
W
Dear Dennis
M32 DE-TRUNKINC ANNOUNCEMENT
I refer to your statement at the council meeting on 16 October 2007
Since the government's publication in 1998 of proposals to define the M32 motorway (south of
Junction 1, Hambrook) as a "non-core" trunk road and to de-trurik it, discussions have continued
i with the Highways Agency and its managing contractors over the implications for the city council.
The most significant ongoing issue has been the condition of the Eastville Viaduct and the
Highway Agency's proposals for bringing it up to an acceptable standard of repair before the
transfer of responsibility to the council. No specific discussion has taken place over the
government decision not to pursue this de-trunking, but it would appear that there has been a rethink by the government over the significance of this road i r ~relation to the national motorway
network.
The Highways Agency has continued to assist and cooperate with the council to try to
accommodate our local transport aspirations throughout this process. Indeed the Highways
Agency has agreed to accommodate bus lanes south of Eastville Viaduct to help deliver this key
part the Greater Bristol Bus Network for which final government approval is eagerly anticipated.
The decision is not expected to have a significant effect on the council's aspirations - with South
Gloucestershire Council's welcome support - to develop a park and ride scheme to serve this
corridor. Consent from the ~ighGaysAgency would have been required whether or not the
motorway were detrunked because of the impact any possible park and ride scheme could have
on the remaining trunk part of motorway network. Discussions are continuing with the Highways
Agency to identify a scheme that meets both our local transport aspirations and the Highways
Agency's strategic management duties. I am confident that a scheme that satisfies all parties can
be identified.
Yours sincerely
Councillor Mark Bradshaw
Executive Member for Access and Environment
2004-2005
Houvcg Renewal
20052006
2006-2007
Promohcg
Rmal Egval~iy
T r a n s f m f gthe Oelrvery of
Sewrces Thmugh Partnershrps
Brunel House
S t George's Road
Bristol BS3. 5UV
i]avid Bisi;~?
Director of Planning, Transport
PI S~~stainable
Deyelopi-nent
A
8:4
-
~
2 s+;cl?-
+rra\tQ
O
~
MS02
STATEMENT TO FULL COUNCIL – 16 OCTOBER 2007
At the last Full Council meeting I made a statement requesting that
the Cabinet initiate a report to be brought to this Council Meeting
outlining how responses to statements might be published in a way
that was publicly accessible.
Please note that (a) I have received no reply to my earlier
statement that was referred to the Leader of Council, nor (b) has
any such report been published for this Full Council meeting.
I hope the Leader of Council will rectify these failures as soon as
possible and make a public statement as to what progress has
been made towards a response to my earlier request, which
remains a matter of public interest.
Statement from Cllr Brown
..,-.. -..
..
Telephone: 01 17 922 3932
Friday 26 October 2007
Councillor Dennis Brown
Liberal Democrat Group
Bristol City Council
In your statement to Full Council on 16 October 2007, you asked for clarity as to
how responses to statements at Council are to be published so that they are
accessible to the public.
I now have advice from Stephen McNamara, Head of Legal Services, and his
response is quoted below.
" We have not previously had any system in place to ensure that responses to
statements (or indeed petitions or motions) were easily publicly accessible. It
is intended that in future every response to a statement or a petition or a
motion will be published on the council's web site.
The new arrangements took effect on 4 October for Cabinet meetings - the
public forum business received at that meeting, and the response sent, is
published on the website."
I believe that 'the new arrangements to publish responses on the website will ensure
the accessibility of responses to statements, petitions or motions made in Full
Council. I also believe that this system will serve as a check that the responses are
made in a timely and correct fashion, and will add to other arrangements we have
put in place to ensure greater openness and transparency in the workings of the
Council.
Yours sincerely,
Cllr Helen Holland
Leader of Council
The Council House
College Green
Bristol BSI 5TR
Councillor Helen Holland
leader ~f Council
Website
www. bristol.gov.uk
MS03
STATEMENT TO FULL COUNCIL – 16 OCTOBER 2007
Bristol South Pool
I am deeply concerned and disappointed at the news that the
ruling Labour group has chosen not to include the refurbishment of
Bristol Pool in its medium term Capital Budget, preferring to fund,
for example, the Arena.
I have sought and received assurances from officers that there is
no threat to the survival of the pool. However, despite requesting
similar assurances from the Executive member for Leisure
Services, I have had no response.
I therefore request that the Executive Member for Culture and
Leisure Services provide assurances (which I hope are mere
confirmation of council position) that the Labour Executive is
committed to keeping Bristol South Pool open, and that it is
committed to making funds available - should Labour still be in
control of the council - at the earliest possible stage to allow the
refurbishment to go ahead.
Charlie Bolton
Green Party Councillor
Southville
Reply to
Telephone
Fax
Email
Our ref
Your ref
Date
Councillor C Bolton
Green Party
Southville
Councillor Rosalie Walker
01 17 92 23812
26 November 2007
Dear Councillor Bolton
STATEMENT TO FULL COUNCIL 1 6 - r ~
OCTOBER 2007
BRISTOL SOUTH POOL
Following your statement to the Council I am keen to provide you with the reassurance
that the Bristol South Pool is not under any threat of closure. Indeed the original proposal
to upgrade Bristol South came from our group in a previous 'administration'. When we
took office in May of this year we were glad to be in a position to continue to progress the
design work and feasibility study to improve the swimming pool, extend the recreational
facilities and link the building more strongly to Dame Emily park.
That said it is important to note that the project had never secured funding approval in the
Council's capital programme. As a responsible Executive we took the view that the
council needed to be open with local people that there is not sufficient funding for the
major refurbishment proposal to go ahead at this point in time.
Whilst I cannot predict what will form the most pressing investment priorities when capital
funding does become available, I can assure you that this scheme remains a strong
aspiration as it meets several of our strategic priorities and it remains our intention to
deliver the scheme. To increase the chances of an early start we have asked officers to
investigate whether other funding sources might be found.
In the meantime, there is a clear expectation that the Bristol South pool will remain open
to the public and that we will make some of the smaller improvements within the service
funding currently available, including improving accessibility for people with disabilities.
Yours sincerely
i-
Councillor Rosalie Walker
Executive Member for Health and Leisure
'The Council House
College Green
Bristol BS15TR
Executive Member
Website
www.bristol-city.gov.uk
MS04
Statement from Cllr Gary Hopkins to Full Council re Community
Resolve
I attach for the attention of the administration a letter received from
Community Resolve together with a table outlining the range of
their work. Community Resolve were fully aware when sending
that I am no longer the responsible Executive Member.
The work they do is of the highest quality and addresses many of
the most difficult problems that our society is challenged with.
Set up with much one off funding they concentrated on doing the
job rather than establishing their own financial security. I was
happy to help when they sought support early in 2007. Clearly
there needed to be longer term sources of income. I am
disappointed that it now seems that the commitment to help and
support has disappeared with the change of administration.
I urge the administration to think again and find the commitment
and energy to preserve and develop this nationally renowned
organisation.
Reply to
Telephone
Fax
Email
Our ref
Your ref
Date
Councillot Gary Hopkins
Councillor Peter Hammond
0117 92 23812
01179222090
27 November 2007
Dear Councillor Hopkins
-
Statement at Full Council Community Resolve
Following your statement to Council at its last meeting concerning Community Resolve I
attach a copy of a letter written to Ms Hen Wilkinson, Director of Community Resolve
which outlines the current position.
Yours sincerely
n
~ouncillorPeter Hammond
Deputy Leader and Executive Member
for Care and Communities
Enc.
The Council House
College Green
Bristol 051 5TR
Executive Metar ber
Website
www.bristol-city.go\f.uk
Hen Wilkinson
Director
Community Resolve
The Old Co-op
Chelsea Road
Easton
Bristol
BS5 6AF
Reply to
Helen Holland
Tetephone(Oll7) 9223932
Minicoiri
Fax
E-mail
[email protected]
Our ref
Your ref
Date
14111107
Dear Hen
Thank you for your letter dated 26thSeptember, regarding your work in Bristol and how the
Council could help to support you.
Community Resolve has received £34,000 funding from the Council Wseyear; £20,000 of
which is from Community Development Investment Grant Fund. Peviously Community
Development did not fund you.
You have submitted an application for 2008109 for £ 110,992 and have identified four
outcomes that you want to deliver. Some of these outcomes have high relevance to our
grant funding. Currently we are reviewing all grant applications and will advise you in early
December if your application has been successful.
Yours sincerely
Helen Holland
Leader of Bristol City Council
MS05
Statement from Cllr Gary Hopkins to Full Council re Waste issues
During the period of our administration we made radical changes
in the waste services. We were aware that these were not
supported by Labour or Tory parties but to be fair a number of
individual members of these parties did come to us and express
support privately. Despite much public whinging no alternatives
were put forward when the opportunity presented during the
budget process. We heard though much public complaining and
various “proposals/promises” appeared in press releases and
election leaflets.
These included “free” green waste, weekly residual collections,
free bulky waste, doorstep plastic collections. There was even a
promise to pay back the green waste charges (this lasted about as
long as the rebate of the over collection of council tax).
When I and others asked questions that the administration and
their allies had no answers to they refused to answer, suppressed
information, complained about being questioned and set up the
citizens’ jury.
Despite all the faults with this operation the ordinary citizens
showed considerable commonsense. Not all the aspects of actual
service delivery were addressed and if you had not insisted on
designing and managing the process in secret some of the faults
could have been spotted earlier. Faced with facts and reasoned
opinions from experts rather than the glib promises in Labour and
Tory leaflets and petitions they came up with answers on the major
questions that they were asked that endorsed the strategy brought
in by us last year and the direction we would progress the service
in.
The jury cannot be blamed for the six months of delay and
confusion. The administration their Tory supporters can and will
be. The delayed debate on progress should have been held at this
council meeting. Due to the failure to deliver the report on time
that has not been possible. I sincerely hope that the jury process
will receive a thorough examination at OSM on Thursday but I
have a feeling there will be efforts made to bury the problems.
The substantive issues will though not disappear. You were
advised by Alderman Roberts who set up the previous citizens’
jury that this one was a waste of time and money and that the
issues had already been decided. She was right you should have
listened to her and us. Ironically the service delivery, which of
course could not be addressed in previous work was not dealt with
in this process. Jurors themselves quite rightly complained of the
disgraceful presentation from SITA and of course, against advice
from this side, there was nobody from Customer Services and the
partial failure to deliver the service was therefore understandably
ignored.
Labour members spent months undermining the waste services,
Tory Cllrs came up with silly suggestions of weekly collections and
bigger bins. These were rejected by us and by Bristol residents.
We on this side have been trying to make sure that these issues
are fully and properly debated by the whole of the council. So far
the administration has been running away from the issues. Our
message to you is that you can run but you can’t hide. Either at
our next scheduled meeting there will be proper time set aside or
we will call a special meeting of council to ensure proper
examination. It would be an insult to the citizens of Bristol,
including those that sat on the jury, if anything less happens.
Quite simply you got away with burying Bristol’s rubbish for many
years but not this time.
I urge the Labour party in particular now to think carefully about the
situation. When these issues came back in front of us you can
decide to ditch the previous silly irresponsible behaviour. You can
start backing the officers so that they can concentrate on
improving and enhancing service delivery, rather than wasting time
and energy going back over issues that every responsible
politician in Bristol knew were settled last year.
Up to now nothing has illustrated your failure as civic leaders as
your failure on this issue. Our message – grow up or get out.
Face up to reality, start being honest with the public.
Cllr Gary Hopkins
Liberal Democrat Office
Rm 206
The Council House
College Green
Bristol BS1 5TR
Reply to Judith Price
Telephone 01 17 922 4681
Fax
01179228983
Email
[email protected]
Our ref
Your ref
8thNovember 2007
Date
Dear Cllr Hopkins
I welcome your continuing interest in the Council tackling the waste problems the city
faces, exemplified by your statement to full Council (16110107) to which I reply below.
The Council has only got as far as it has because of the excellent work of the all-party
Select Committee. It is disappointing that you have been unable to recognise the values of
the Citizens' Jury in assisting all parties to review key aspects of where we are and what
further improvements we can make.
I do not recognise your references to suppressing information or managing processes in
secret as OSM had the responsibility for the Citizens Jury. If you have specific examples
of your concerns I will take them up with the Director.
Yours sincerely
L A --94
Councillor Judith Price
Executive Member for Neighbo~~rhoods
The Council House
College Green
Bristol 851 5TR
Executive Member
Website
bristol-city.gov.~
k
WWW,
MS06
Statement to Full Council 16/10/2007
I am both surprised and disappointed by Councillor Emmett's questions on
today's agenda regarding Area Housing Committees and, in particular,
Horfield and Lockleaze Area Housing Committee.
I am surprised because he should already know the answers full well and
therefore does not need to ask them. He should know that the reason for the
closure of this particular AHC is the commandeering of said committee by his
own Party's activists, occupying the Chairman and Vice Chairman positions.
I believe this was done for the express purpose of using its resources to fund
projects that can be used to increase his Party's chances of Electoral success
in Horfield Ward.
The behaviour of these well known supporters or sympathisers generated 16
complaints to the Council's TPU department in the month of June 2006 alone.
Attempts by the Officer servicing the AHC to act to remedy the situation led to
conduct by a former Liberal Democrat Councillor, John Kiely, which many
could construe as bullying. This Officer went on sick leave due to the stress
he suffered and shortly after, left the Council's employment to work
elsewhere. I understand the Secretary of the AHC was forced to record
meetings using a Dictaphone in order to stop them from interfering in her role
and trying to doctor the minutes to suit their purpose. Anyone on the
committee attempting to challenge these two suffered rudeness and
harassment from them.
Finally, earlier this year, there was a mass resignation of members of the
AHC. This, along with my stating to Officers that I would no longer attend or
recognise this AHC until these two were removed from it, finally forced the
Council to take the unprecedented step of shutting it down.
I am disappointed because Councillor Emmett, by posing these questions
seems to be acting in his Party's interests and not of the Tenants who have
lost out through his Party activists' actions and unacceptable behaviour. I feel
Councillor Emmett is showing a complete disregard for Tenants' Participation
in Horfield and Lockleaze and wasting taxpayers' money and Officer time
which could have been more usefully employed on other matters.
1
In any case, he also knows that Area Housing Committees are to be replaced
by alternative means of further Tenants' Participation in the near future.
Cllr Martin Kerry – Horfield Ward
2
Reply to
Telephone
Fax
Email
Our ref
Your ref
Date
Co~lncillorMartin Kerry
C/o -The Council House
0117 9222879
Judith.Price @ Bristol,Gov.UK
12"' November 2007
Dear Councillor Kerry
Statement MS06 to Full Council 16 October 2007
I write in response to your statement to Full Co~lncilon 16 October 2007. As much of your
statement relates to another Member of Council, I will cor~finemy comments to a few facts
about the situation relating to Horfield AHC.
Following a meeting with the remaining members of Horfield AHC, a decision was made
by officers on 20 March 2007 to close this AHC. That decision was appealed and heard
on 15 June 2007 and the original decision was upheld. On I 9 October 2007, 1 and an
officer reviewed the original decision and the appeal decision. We concluded that the
Horfield AHC should be dissolved - you will have been notified of this conclusion by
separate letter. There is no further appealtreview available.
It is important that I reiterate one point - neither the officers nor myself have sought to
apportion blame for the situation that has arisen.
As you know officers are currently consulting on new proposals for tenant participation
and I am keen to hear the outcome of that process. It is hoped that the outcome and any
re-shaped proposals will come to the Housing Management Board on either 19 December
2007 or 17 January 2008 (provisional date at present).
Yours sincerely
Councillor Judith Price
Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
The Council House
College Green
Bristol BSI 5TR
Executive Member
Website
www. bristol-c;ty,gov.uk
MS07
Full Council, Tuesday, 16 October 2007
COST TO BRISTOL CITY COUNCIL OF 'BOTTLED' GENERAL
ELECTION
My Lord Mayor
In common with the vast majority of Members in this Chamber, I
very much regret that Gordon Brown, after actively orchestrating
widespread expectations of a General Election, has now flunked
the test of leadership.
Having denied his own Party the
opportunity to hold a real leadership election, it is now undeniable
that he is running scared of the electorate.
Not content with signalling in last week's Comprehensive Spending
Review that Britons face a double-whammy of higher Council Tax
and huge hikes in the cost of living, it seems that Mr Brown's
manoeuvring over the date of the next General Election has cost
Bristol's taxpayers dearly.
I am reliably informed that the Labour's flagrant U-turn has resulted
in considerable amounts of Bristol officer time (and hence money)
being wasted on project planning, booking polling stations,
reserving polling staff and coordinating security - now to no avail!
Accordingly, I request that the Leader of Council make a full
statement to this Council, outlining the total cost incurred both in
officer and financial time, in preparation for a General Election in
November 2007, and how much will be borne by the local
taxpayer.
If she is sincere in her claim to run a more transparent
Administration than that Labour replaced, I am sure she will have
no difficulty in facilitating this request at Full Council today. I would
also expect her to be prepared to take questions on this matter
from Members.
We know Gordon Brown hasn't but has she 'got the bottle'?
COUNCILLOR RICHARD EDDY
LEADER, CONSERVATIVE GROUP
Telephone: 01 17 922
Monday 22 October 2007
Councillor Richard Eddy
Leader of the Conservative Group
Bristol City Council
In your statement to Full Council on 16 October 2007, you asked me to outline the
cost incurred in preparation for a rumoured general election.
The work of Electoral Services is overseen by Stephen McNamara, Head of Legal
Services, and his advice on this matter is quoted below:
" The election team must remain in a state of preparedness at all times
because there is always a possibility of an election being called. As a result
of the rumours of a general election during September, work was undertaken
to ensure that everything would be ready for a 'snap' election. Meetings took
place with relevant staff, there was correspondence with the police and
contact was made with potential polling stations and potential counting
centres. No financial cost was incurred from this exercise. Much was learnt
which will be of value for any election. No record was kept of the precise
number of officer hours spent. I estimate that this was in the region of 30-40
hours. Decisions as to how to deal with this sort of possibility ie a snap
election are not the responsibility of executive members nor indeed of full
council. I make this point in response to the Cllr Eddy query at council as to
who instructed me and my team to undertake this work. For the avoidance of
doubt I had no conversation with you about the possibility of an election and I
received no instruction (and, see above, no instruction would have been
proper) from any member be they executive or nonexecutive in respect of the
work undertaken. "
Yours sincerely,
Cllr Helen Holland
Leader of Council
The Ccuncil House
College Green
Bristol 651 5TR
Counciiior Helen tiolland
Leader of Counci!
Website
www. bristol.gcv.uk
by Cllr Ron Stone for 16 October Full Council
"A Future For Bristol's Street Trees"
Council recognises the current street environment is greatly enhanced by the City's large
street trees, and their invaluable contribution to combating elements of air pollution, and to
soften and enhance both work and residential areas and developments of the City and our
public open spaces.
Many of these trees are 100 years old, provided by the vision of councillors and the City
Counci\ at the turn of the last century. The last major period of planting was more than
2000 large street trees in the 1970s. This provision is under threat, 'from a number of
factors, and requires further and greater support than ever before by the Council to
maintain and protect our green heritage to ensure we leave a similar invaluable legacy for
2100 and beyond.
Council in accepting this responsibility MUST ~~rgently
set up a Street Tree Forum
involving the Highways, Urban Design and Parks Departments, community groups and
other members of the public. This forum needs to review the existing situation and
develop a five-year street tree strategy for Bristol, taking into account the
recommendations of the government report Trees in Towns II which is soon to be
published.
If Bristol wants to be a Green Capital in Europe, we must be committed to a change in
funding via the Civic Budget for 2007/08 so we can sustain our vision and ensure our
Street trees have a secure future and lasting legacy for our citizens to enjoy."
Dear Cllr Stone,
I refer to your statement about the future of Bristol's Street Trees.
The formation of a Street Tree Forum was discussed and
supported by the Joint Quality of Life and Physical Environment
Scrutiny Commission held on the 18th October 2007. In addition,
support was given to an ambitious programme to double the
number of street trees in the city over the next 10 years via a
financial model involving public and private finances. A Street
Tree Forum representing officers responsible for the highway and
officers responsible for tree management will enhance
coordination and effort to allow more new trees to be planted in
Bristol. In addition, the necessary input from community groups,
business and interested individuals will broaden ideas, interest and
support to the Trees for Bristol campaign.
Work is ongoing to understand the resource implications of the
council role in supporting a Street Tree Forum. The model
presented and supported by Scrutiny on the 18th October was to
establish a 'Trees for Bristol' project team including administrative
support, whose role would be to coordinate the Street Tree Forum.
In addition, this team would manage the delivering of the ambitious
tree-planting programme and work to generate significant private
sector funding.
Regards
Richard Ennion
Natural Environment Coordinator
Planning, Transport and Sustainable Development
Agenda Item
5(c)
CITY COUNCIL
16 OCTOBER 2007
QUESTIONS ASKED BY MEMBERS OF COUNCIL
FOR WRITTEN REPLY (CPR10)
MQ1
COUNCILLOR BAGLEY TO ASK COUNCILLOR D
PICKUP, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR CHILDREN
AND YOUNG PEOPLE
PROPOSED
PLAYING
FAIRFIELD SCHOOL
FIELDS
SITE
FOR
Q1.
Does the executive member agree that this site is
still the most appropriate site for playing fields?
A1
Yes
Q2.
Will his Department continue to object to the Town
Green application?
A2
Yes
Q3.
If so, on what basis?
A3
The objection to the application has been resisted on
the basis that we are advised that the land is incapable
of registration as a Town Green.
Q4.
What were original cost estimates of works to
develop the playing fields at South Purdown?
A4
The report to Cabinet on 7 December 2004 estimated
the capital costs at £710,000 for South Purdown and
£140,000 for the bridge over Muller Road. These costs
assumed a delay in establishing the playing fields of
approximately three years.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
1
Q5.
Given nearly 3 years has passed since the original
cabinet decision, what are revised costs of works?
A5
The revised cost estimate is now approximately
£565,000 for South Purdown and £140,000 for the
bridge. The estimate has been revised as a result of
lower tenders than anticipated being received for other
recent playing field construction projects. This estimate
includes an additional £65,000 as a result of the
additional delays to the project due to the Town Green
application.
If it was not possible to use South Purdown for playing
fields there would be significant additional capital and
revenue costs for improvements to an alternative site,
building a pavilion, alterations to the existing school
site for bus pick up and drop off and bus hire. In
addition there would be a significant loss of curriculum
time in order to bus pupils to off site playing fields.
Q6.
Is the executive member confident this approach to
use of open space sits squarely within the ethos of
providing a balanced and sustainable community?
A6
The area of Purdown to be converted to school playing
fields makes up a small percentage of the whole and
currently has limited use by the public. The pitches will
be laid out to maintain public access across South
Purdown. Purdown as a whole extends from Muller
Road up to Stoke Park and the overwhelming majority
of Purdown will be left undisturbed by this proposal,
with public access maintained.
The layout of the playing fields on Purdown has been
designed to retain as many of the trees and hedgerows
as possible. Consultation took place with nature
conservation officers and an environmental impact
assessment of the proposal was carried out.
Creating the playing field for the Fairfield High School
on Purdown will greatly increase public access and use
of the southern area of Purdown, which will be
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
2
beneficial to the local community. The school will
provide access to the new playing fields to allow
community team games through their letting system.
If the facility were not available to the school, then
there would be a need to transport pupils off-site by
coach to other facilities. This will increase congestion
on the road, CO2 emissions within the environment,
waste time in terms of the curriculum delivery and
obviously have significant capital and revenue financial
implications.
Q7
Will the Council now consider acquiring the land at
Boiling Wells adjacent to the all weather pitch as
an alternative?
A7
It is not clear which piece of land is referred to. The
whole of the old St Thomas More playing fields on
Boiling Wells have been developed to create the all
weather pitch for Fairfield. This site is surrounded by
Muller Road to the east, Station Lane to the north and
beyond commercial businesses, Boiling Wells Lane
public right of way to the south and a farm and a
company depot and house to the north, with a steep
drop to Boiling Wells pond and stream and beyond that
the railway line and embankment.
MQ2
COUNCILLOR A FOX TO ASK COUNCILLOR J
PRICE,
EXECUTIVE
MEMBER
FOR
NEIGHBOURHOODS
Eastfield Estate
At the Council Meeting on 11th September, I submitted
a 75-signature petition and 3 statements from local
residents regarding the unsatisfactory nature of the
grounds maintenance contract currently in operation on
the Eastfield Estate in Westbury.
Q1.
Will the Executive Member outline what action she
has taken since receiving the petition and
statements?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
3
A1
Officers have met with our contractor to discuss the
pruning requirements for the estate. An estimate of
£12,800 has been provided by our contractor to cut
back, thin and reduce the height of all shrubs within the
estate. I understand from officers of N&HS that they do
not have the budget to proceed on this basis. The
budget for the whole of North Bristol is only £40,000.
However, I am advised that some urgent works will be
commissioned.
It should also be noted, that in the past when residents
have been asked, some have expressed their
preference to leave the shrubs to grow large as this
has provided additional security, privacy, shade and a
habitat for wildlife.
Q2.
Does the Executive Member accept that at some
point in time the Council will have to reduce the
height of the plants it is responsible for
maintaining?
A2
Yes. The shrubs and bushes on the Eastfield Estate
were last pruned in August in accordance with the
requirements of the current Grounds Maintenance
contract specification. Pruning was undertaken to
ensure no shrubs encroach excessively onto
surrounding paths, obstruct windows or access ways.
On previous occasions some shrubs have been
reduced to improve sight lines around carparks and at
road junctions. However, there is not an unlimited
budget for this work and future pruning will have to be
programmed on a priority basis.
It is intended that additional pruning, however, will be
scheduled as part of the Annual Pruning Programme
which is due for approval at the end of October.
Q3.
Does the Executive Member agree with me that it
would be both sensible and cost effective to
reduce the height of those plants at the same time
as the rest of the plant is pruned?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
4
A3
I agree, there are occasions when it could be more
cost effective to reduce the height of individual plants
at the time of pruning.
However in the majority of cases, such as here on the
Eastfield Estate it is much more cost effective and of
benefit to all the residents if this type of work is
undertaken for the whole estate as part of a bigger
area contract.
MQ3
COUNCILLOR A FOX TO ASK COUNCILLOR R
WALKER, EXEUCUTIVE MEMBER FOR HEALTH
AND LEISURE
Canford Park
Q1.
When was the last time the Executive Member
visited Canford Park?
A1
As it happens I visited Canford Park last week.
Q2.
How would the Executive Member describe its
children's play area?
A2
The park as a whole looked well cared for and overall I
was pleased with the condition. The play equipment is
old in design but still functions well. When I spoke to
local residents they told me that it still met their needs.
I checked with officers and learnt that the equipment
was installed in 1993 but is subject to regular weekly
safety inspections. It hasn't suffered the levels of
vandalism of some play areas and has lasted very well.
It does look a little tired and it would be good to replace
it when funds allow but it remains functional, safe and
is well used by children and families.
MQ4
COUNCILLOR POPHAM TO ASK COUNCILLOR J
PRICE,
EXECUTIVE
MEMBER
FOR
NEIGHBOURHOODS
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
5
NEIGHBOURHOOD ISSUES
Q1
Does the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
have any plans to change the democratic
framework of the Housing Management Board,
particularly with regard to the selection or election
of its membership?
A1.
The Housing Management Board was established
under the previous administration with all party support.
It is chaired by myself with an elected Member from
each political party, and has 4 tenants, 1 leaseholder
and 1 independent (a leading housing academic). All
City Council tenants were advised of this opportunity,
22 applied and following cross-party shortlisting, 7
were interviewed and appointment made. An Audit
Commission visit in June 2007 commended the
initiative and has recommended that the Board should
be appointed by thirds (one third elected Members of
Council, one third tenants/leaseholders and one third
independent). This information was presented to the
Board on 10 October 2007 and a full discussion will
take place at its meeting on 13 November 2007.
Q2.
Why is it that editorial control of the Tenants
Tribune magazine rests with Council and not with
tenants?
A2.
The Tenants Tribune is a quarterly publication funded
by the Housing Revenue Account (essentially tenants’
rent). A small board of tenants compile it with the
support of an officer. A senior officer views the
document before publication to ensure that it is
accurate, not defamatory or likely to put the City
Council or the tenants board at risk of legal action.
Q3.
Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
transfer more editorial control of the Tenants
Tribune magazine to tenants?
A3.
I am not proposing to change the arrangements set out
in Q2.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
6
Q4.
Is the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods able
to assure tenants that all monies allocated for
Neighbourhood Investment this year will be spent
within that programme this year?
A4.
All budgets allocated to this programme will be spent
within the programme but not by year-end. The nature
of consultation for some complex schemes and the
likelihood of inclement weather during the winter
months can result in projects straddling financial years.
Additionally it is normal to retain 2.5% - 5% of money
due to the contractors for the 12-month guarantee
period.
Q5.
Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
explain how she ensures an even-handed and
unbiased
approach
to
the
allocation
of
neighbourhood improvement funds across the
city?
A5.
Currently the funds are distributed by a North and a
South Neighbourhood Investment Panel, consisting of
tenants nominated by the Area Housing Committees,
plus one leaseholder representative. These Panels
receive bids for proposed schemes and score these
against a set of criteria such as crime reduction and
number of tenants who will benefit etc. This results in a
prioritised list.
Q6.
Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
explain how she satisfies herself that tenants
consider the allocation of neighbourhood
improvement funds across the city to be evenhanded and unbiased?
A.6
Each Area Housing Committee is represented, as are
leaseholders. Scores for each project are averaged to
minimise the effect of any bias or subjectivity. The
process was reviewed by officers with Panel members
and AHC representatives between December 06 and
January 07. As a result some minor changes to the
process were made but fundamentally the Panels
retained the original scoring method.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
7
Q7.
Will the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
inform all tenants that, if they are unsatisfied that
the allocation of neighbourhood improvement
funds across the city is not even-handed and
unbiased, what the process is for their cases to be
heard and the timescale?
A7.
Such an accusation would probably be by one tenant
about another tenant. The council's Tenant
Participation Framework includes a complaints process
to respond to such issues.
Q8.
What
can
the
Executive
Member
for
Neighbourhoods do to change perceptions by
some of the City Council’s tenants that proposals
submitted by them are not being treated as fairly as
they might?
A8.
The council is currently consulting tenants about the
whole tenant participation structure and this contains
proposals for the removal of the Neighbourhood
Investment Panels to reflect the role of the newly
established Housing Management Board.
Q9.
Can the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
explain why tenants have no say or input in the
Estates Management Budget planning, monitoring
and control process?
A9.
The budget for the Estate Management Service is
almost wholly salary and salary-associated costs.
These budgets are part of the Housing Revenue
Account and in its strategic role the Housing
Management Board see all HRA budgets, during the
budget setting process and quarterly monitors.
Q10.
Will the Executive Member for neighbourhoods
include
tenants
formally
in
the
Estates
Management Budget planning, monitoring and
control process?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
8
A10.
Tenants already have input through the Housing
Management Board.
Q11.
Has the Executive Member for Neighbourhoods
determined from the 5 Housing Corporation Tenant
Empowerment Programme pilot studies for the
exploration of extending and/or developing tenant
management, what the potential opportunities and
benefits to Bristol’s tenants are?
A11.
The pilot studies are on-going and are based around
the right-to-manage and will be used to inform future
work in this area. They will be useful in helping social
landlords and tenants with the issues that need to be
handled where tenants wish to pursue this specific
course of action. The current rules to develop Tenant
Management Organisations (under the right to
manage) are being reviewed by the Government with a
view to simplifying the process and providing a range
of options. I welcome these changes and remain open
to talk to our own tenants on the approach in Bristol.
Q12.
From what she has learned from the 5 Housing
Corporation Tenant Empowerment Programme
pilot studies, has the Executive Member for
Neighbourhoods developed the policies and plans
necessary to enable Bristol’s tenants to benefit?
A12.
The pilots are on-going and the Housing Corporation
are due to report the outcomes. I will look at how we
might learn from the studies and benefit Bristol.
Q13.
Will the Executive Member for neighbourhoods
seek funding from the Housing Corporation
through the forthcoming Autumn 2007 biddinground to enable enhanced tenant participation in
the governance, planning, service delivery and
performance assessment of housing management?
A13.
The funding is available to tenants of local authorities
(established as a Tenant Management Organisation)
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
9
not to the local authority itself.
The Housing
Corporation guidance encourages tenants to work with
their local authority. If such a group in Bristol wishes to
consider this option, then officers will work with them in
accordance with the guidance.
MQ5
COUNCILLOR EMMETT TO ASK COUNCILLOR M
BRADSHAW, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR ACCESS
AND ENVIRONMENT
Balanced and Sustainable Communities
Q1.
What steps have you taken to progress the
Council's Balanced & Sustainable Communities
Initiative agreed by Cabinet on 9 November 2006?
A1
Officers have continued to work with a range of
stakeholders to progress the various projects under
BSC. The Programme Board is now chaired by myself
and receives regular updates from the project teams.
We have also brought forward the PRC project
planning brief for Lockleaze.
Q2.
Do Balanced & Sustainable Communities remain
one of the core aims of the Council?
A2
Yes
Q3.
What do you understand by the term "Balanced
and Sustainable Community"?
A3
As stated in the Corporate Plan:
‘… communities where there is a mix of housing tenure
and a balanced range of size, type and affordability.
Such communities should meet the needs of different
population groups at different stages of their life cycles
so that no one is forced, through lack of choice, to
leave their community to buy a house or flat, to house
a family or to downsize as they grow older. Where
people live should be within walking distance (no more
than 15 minutes), of a community hub offering
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
10
shopping, local services and community facilities in
addition to places of work. Jobs, shops, schools,
hospitals, leisure and recreational opportunities should
be accessible through good and reliable public
transport where these are not available locally.’
Q4.
At the last Council meeting you referred to a
"Balanced and Mixed Community". What is a
Balanced & Mixed Community?
A4
This was referring to housing mix.
Q5.
How is that different
Sustainable Community?
A5
See A4.
Q6.
Do you have any plans to re-brand the Council's
Balanced & Sustainable Communities initiative?
A6
In the context of re-branding, I had expected him to
refer to the now defunct C21 branded initiative for
South Bristol, which was characterised by a lack of
transparency and absence of public and stakeholder
engagement.
Q7.
If so to what name, why, and what changes of
substance do you propose to make?
A7
See A6.
Q8.
Given that consultation has already commenced in
Lockleaze under the name of Balanced &
Sustainable Communities do you agree that any
change now will be confusing to local residents
and a waste of money?
A8
I am pleased that consultation is underway and that he
recognises the value of this work being conducted.
Q9.
What funding is available to the Balanced &
Sustainable Communities Team in Lockleaze to
enable it to produce a needs survey and
from
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
a
Balanced
&
11
masterplan for the area, in consultation with local
residents and other stakeholders?
A9
Q10.
Financial arrangements are to be considered by the
Balanced & Sustainable Communities Programme
Board. I will write to him when details are confirmed.
What timescale do you envisage for this work to be
completed?
A10
About 18 months.
Q11.
Can you confirm that there will be no disposal of
the Lockleaze School and Romney Avenue Junior
School sites until the Balanced & Sustainable
Communities Team has completed its needs
survey and masterplan for the area, and that any
future disposal will address those needs?
A11
These are issues under consideration by the Balanced
& Sustainable Communities team and other
colleagues.
MQ6
COUNCILLOR S EMMETT TO ASK COUNCILLOR J
PRICE,
EXECUTIVE
MEMBER
FOR
NEIGHBOURHOODS
AREA HOUSING COMMITTEES
Q.1
What role do Area Housing Committees (AHCs)
have in the Tenants Compact signed between the
Council, its Tenants and Councillors some years
ago?
A1.
Area Housing Committees (AHCs) have involved a
number of tenants in a consultative role. In addition,
AHCs have made decisions on expenditure for
environmental improvements in their locality and
monitored service performance.
Q2.
Do you agree that AHCs have a useful role to play
in representing tenants in the neighbourhoods they
cover?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
12
A2.
Yes, they have provided a useful role, but their key
function of holding a local housing manager to account,
no longer works.
The landlord service is now
organised on the basis of specialist functions rather
than geography.
Q3.
Do you agree that tenants living in an area not
covered by a functioning and vibrant AHC are
being denied effective representation?
A3.
Not necessarily - tenants are involved in the landlord
service in a variety of ways and not merely through
AHCs. Areas have not had AHCs in the past. I do not
accept the premise in the question.
Q4.
What role do you see for AHCs across the city in
the future?
A4.
There is a need to ensure that the tenants voice is
heard throughout the landlord service. Proposals for
change are currently being consulted upon which, if
adopted, will replace the AHCs with 9 Service User
Groups and 4 Area Housing Forums. Consultation on
the proposals will be extensive and should conclude by
the end of November 2007.
Q5.
When was the Horfield AHC suspended?
A5.
Horfield AHC was dissolved on 20 March 2007
following a meeting of the committee with officers. I
understand it was dissolved because of an
irrecoverable breakdown in relations that led officers to
believe that the committee had not acted in accordance
with the spirit of the Tenants Compact. This was
subject to an appeal and a further forthcoming review.
Q.6
By whom and for what reason(s)?
A6.
The decision was made by the Head of Housing
Management and for the reasons given above and
subsequently supported by an independent appeal
panel.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
13
Q.7
What appeals have been made against that
decision and what was the outcome?
A7.
An appeal was heard on 15 June 2007 and the
decision was upheld.
Q8.
What further appeals are in progress or in
prospect?
A8.
Myself and another Senior Manager, not previously
involved, will hear a review of that appeal decision on
19 October 2007.
Q9.
How may those people who were involved in the
running of the Horfield AHC, and other tenants in
the Lockleaze and Horfield Area who have no
previous involvement with the AHC, apply to have
it reinstated?
A9.
Some tenants of the former Horfield AHC have
effectively asked for re-instatement by virtue of their
appeal and the forthcoming review.
Q10.
Who would make that decision and when?
A.10
The matter is subject to a review of the Appeal Panel’s
decision.
Q11.
In the absence of the AHC how may Council
Tenants in the Lockleaze and Horfield Area have an
influence on the spending of the balance of the
AHCs own funds, the Environmental Improvement
Budget for the Area and the Council’s
Neighbourhood Investment Budget?
A11.
The AHC had funds to pay its members expenses and
they have been advised to submit any outstanding
claims. Any balance on that budget remains part of the
Housing Revenue Account.
Any Environmental
Improvement Budget projects that were agreed by the
former Horfield AHC are being implemented. Any
remaining balance of that budget will be spent in the
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
14
area by decision of the local Estates Manager, who will
consult with any relevant tenant group before
committing expenditure.
The Neighbourhood
Investment Budget (which is also HRA) is being spent
in accordance with the decisions of the North
Neighbourhood Investment Board. Any under spend or
variations will be considered by that tenant board.
Q12.
By what date to you envisage the Horfield AHC to
be fully up and running again?
A12.
I refer you to my answer to Q10.
MQ7
COUNCILLOR G HOPKINS TO ASK COUNCILLOR
H HOLLAND, LEADER OF THE COUNCIL
Labour Waste Policy
Q1
Does she find it acceptable that copies of the
Citizens’ Jury report were available through the
Bristol Blogger website when they were not
available to Councillors anxious to scrutinise the
process and to progress the waste services in
Bristol?
A1
No
Q2
Whilst we will, as a result of the late delivery of the
report and associated documents, not be able to
have a substantial debate on the issues today will
she at least clear up a few issues. Does she accept
that the average Bristol citizen has shown
themselves capable of understanding more of the
issues after three days than many Labour and Tory
Councillors have after three years?
A2
We were very encouraged and pleased with the level
of engagement and understanding shown by the Jury
Members and , unlike the Liberal Democrats, we do not
underestimate the potential of the “average Bristol
citizen” to influence decisions about their services.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
15
Q3
Will your party now drop plans/promises/demands
for a return to weekly residual collections that
undermined officer’s delivery of the service?
A3
In response to perceived public opinion on weekly
collections, the Citizens’ Jury was given the opportunity
to debate such an issue and decided that there should
not be a return to weekly residual collections.
Q4
Given officer analysis showing the massive
increase in green waste arisings and the millions of
pounds it would cost will you now give an
undertaking to drop your party's plans/ promises of
'free' green waste collections?
A4
The recent published National Waste Strategy supports
the charging for garden waste to encourage home
composting. We are now formal partners of WRAP in
providing subsidised Home Composting bins to our
residents, to help encourage such participation.
Q5
Given the huge cost involved and the negligible
effect it would have, will you now drop your
personal pledge to abolish charges for bulky waste
collections?
A5
There are many ways of revisiting, if appropriate, the
current charging arrangements, which are being
considered at present.
Q6
Will you now work with Liberal Democrats to bring
on our policy of rebates for lower waste producers
which you have been, up to now, resisting?
A6
Citizens’ Jury supported the ‘producers pays’ scheme
which we are currently investigating in greater detail.
Q7
Do you now accept that under present
circumstances doorstop collection of plastic would
be an “inappropriate use of resources” and that
whilst not completely ruling this service out in the
long term that the campaigns from various
members of her party for their immediate
introduction were misguided and unhelpful?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
16
A7
The Citizens’ Jury supported local expansion of the
current plastic bring banks scheme, and felt that
resources could be more effectively deployed in other
areas.
Q8
When answering questions on the cost of the
Citizens Jury previously we were given a figure of
£45,000 as the total cost. However further
questioning of officers has revealed that this
completely missed out officer’s time and internal
costs. Was that a legitimate omission given it was
said officers average cost was £40 an hour when
Councillor Eddy and Councillor Bees were trying to
stem the flow of legitimate questions that you had
no answers for?
A8
The figure of £45k was for external costs only. The
HOE’s fully supported the deployment of his staff to
this project as it was quite rightly viewed as a priority.
Q9
How many hours of officer time have been spent
on this matter from waste, consultation, member
services etc., and therefore what is the real total
cost?
A9
The deployment of officer time to support members
through a process such as the Citizens’ Jury, was
justified. Cllr Hopkins continually gives the impression
that this was a waste of money – he presumably puts
no value on the findings of the Citizens’ Jury. We are
not content to dismiss their findings with such
contempt. Requesting that officers spend valuable time
detailing actual hours spent on the Citizens Jury
process, would not be a valuable use of resource.
Q10
Can she explain why when only a few months ago
she and her colleagues were telling the electorate
that the Council was so awash with funds that they
should all be getting a rebate, they had to pay for
the Citizens’ Jury out of the contingency fund?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
17
A10
Any robust method of consultation, such as a Citizens'
Jury, attracts a cost. From the shortlisted consultants,
officers appointed the company with the lowest cost
and who in their opinion was best suited to deliver the
contract.
The cost has been met from the contingency fund
which, having due regard to the contingencies arising
this year, includes sufficient funds to cover this one-off
cost.
Q11
Many of Labour members and Councillors spent a
lot of time last year and in the lead up to the May
elections trying to undermine the new waste
services. You yourself described this as botched. It
is clear that results would have been even better
had it not been for your campaigns, You have
completely
failed
since
assuming
the
administration to give positive leadership on this
issue. Can we now expect that you will listen to us
and the majority of Bristol residents and actually
back the necessary progression of the service, and
encourage your members to take a more positive
and objective message to their constituents to try
and undo some of the damage caused?
A11
The Labour administration has demonstrated through
the formation of the Citizens’ Jury how it represents
and responds to resident engagement on such an
important issue such as waste and we continue to
engage and listen to what our residents say and act
accordingly. Cllr Hopkins continually gives the
impression that recycling has ground to a halt since he
left office, but it hasn’t.
MQ8
COUNCILLOR B LEWIS TO ASK COUNCILLOR D
PICKUP, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR CHILDREN
AND YOUNG PEOPLE
STATEMENTS OF SPECIAL EDUCATIONAL NEEDS
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
18
Q1
Is the Executive Member familiar with the
Publication “Special Educational Needs (SEN) a
Guide for Parents & Carers”?
A1
Yes
Q2
In Bristol, what is the average length of time taken
from receipt of an application for assessment to
the granting of a Statement?
A2
Measurements used are the national Best Value
Performance Indicators, which measure whether
statements issued in 18 weeks or not. For statements
issued with no exceptions i.e. no Health or other
agency contribution 92.9% were issued within 18
weeks. For statements where there was a contribution
from Health or other agencies 69.2% were issued
within 18 weeks.
Q3
Is there a local or Departmental target for the time
taken to process these applications?
A3
Yes
Q4
If so, what is it?
A4
The targets are 95% for without exception statements
and 77% for with exception statements.
Q5
Can the Executive Member advise how many SEN
Statements have been granted for the academic
years:- 2004/5;2005/6; 2006/7 and 2007/to date?
A5
This information is measured on calendar years as
follows:
2004 – 155
2005 – 152
2006 – 212
2007 - 190 (to end September)
Q6
How many Statements were refused in each of the
years cited above?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
19
A6
Data is only available for this for 2006 and 2007
2006 – 115
2007 – 158 (to end September)
Q7
How many Statements went to appeal in each these
years respectively?
A7
This information is for appeals lodged with SEN
Tribunals
2003 – 04 44 appeals
2004 – 05 53 appeals
2005 – 06 52 appeals
2006 – 07 49 appeals
Q8
Can the Executive Member advise how many
appeals were successful in each year over this
time period?
A8
Two thirds of appeals are resolved between the Local
Authority and parents before being heard by the
Tribunal. Of the remaining third most appeals end up
with some aspects being found in favour of the Local
Authority and some in favour of parents. A very small
proportion result in a total finding in favour of the Local
Authority or parents.
Q9
Before an assessment is made, evidence has to be
gathered:
(a)
Is the Executive Member satisfied with the
assessment procedure currently used by the
Authority?
Yes – the assessment procedures and criteria
are in line with the SEN Code of Practice.
(b)
Can the Executive Member confirm what
assistance the Authority gives to parents and
carers in compiling evidence or participating
in this process? For example, does an officer
ever visit the family and child to provide them
with help in understanding what is or is not
relevant for assessment purposes?
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
20
A range of assistance is provided to parents
• Information is provided in the form of a
guide on the process
• Educational Psychologists consult parents
on their child’s needs
• SEN Inclusion Officers meet with Parents
• Parents are informed of the independent
parent partnership service
(c)
How long does this evidence gathering
normally take?
The Code of Practice suggests evidence should
be gathered in 6 weeks which is the standard for
Bristol. As indicated timescales can extend when
there are contributions from the agencies.
Q10
Can the Executive Member confirm what measures
or mechanisms are in place within the Department
to cover for case officer absenteeism i.e. through
sickness or leave, so that applications are not
delayed as a result?
A10
The SEN Team is structured to operate flexibility to
cover case officer absenteeism through sickness or
leave and temporary staffs are used in exceptional
situations to provide cover.
MQ9
COUNCILLOR D BROWN TO ASK COUNCILLOR M
BRADSHAW, EXECUTIVE MEMBER FOR ACCESS
AND ENVIRONMENT
BUS CONCESSION PROPOSALS
In connection with the new national bus concession
proposals, the Department for Transport has requested
responses from Travel Concession Authorities about
the method of allocating funding.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
21
Q1
Will a response be made on behalf of Bristol City?
A1
Yes
Q2
The DfT consultation requests that: “If responding
on behalf of a large organisation please make it
clear who the organisation represents, and, where
appropriate, how the views of members were
assembled”. What process will you use to ensure
that any submission represents the views of
councillors?
A2
Officers will follow past practice of preparing a
response in consultation with the relevant Executive
Members.
Q3
Currently there is a joint arrangement between the
local authority members of the West of England
Partnership on the working of the concessionary
bus fare scheme. Do you intend to make a joint
submission or only a separate Bristol City Council
submission?
A3
A separate submission.
Q4
If you intend to make a separate submission on
behalf of this Council, which of the four proposed
options do you favour and why?
A4
I have not fully decided, and I would welcome
Councillor Brown’s views. Option 3 is simple and uses
the indicators that one would intuitively expect to drive
costs, but option 1 gives greater weight to social
factors and is likely to be favoured by the Core Cities.
Q5
If you intend to make a joint submission, which of
the four proposed options will you promote to the
other 3 Local Authorities and why?
A5
See answer to Q3.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
22
Q6
Do you agree that the option most favourable to
the other authorities would leave Bristol £584,000
worse off and the one that is most favourable to
Bristol would leave the other Local Authorities
worse off by between £26,000 and £179,000?
A6
These are indeed the figures in the DfT consultation
document. Also see answer to Q4.
Q7
As made plain in the DfT document, bus operators
must be left “no better and no worse off”. In your
submission, will you emphasise that the same
principle should apply to all Local Authorities
implementing this scheme?
A7
Yes.
Q8
The bus operators must provide precise evidence
in order to obtain repayment from the Local
Authority. Will you recommend to Central
Government that they should also accept exactly
the same information in order to recompense fully
each Local Authority, rather than using the current
formula-based proposals that may result in Local
Authorities having to use Council Tax income to
support any deficit?
A8
Yes, I intend to continue to argue on the basis that the
costs to authorities are not discretionary and should be
fully reimbursed.
Q9
As you have not yet provided copies to councillors
of your earlier submissions to the DfT in
connection with the concessionary bus fare
scheme, despite repeated requests, can you now
indicate what comments you made earlier about
any proposed methods of full reimbursement to
Local Authorities?
A9
I have sent Councillor Brown a copy of the Leader’s
letter to DCLG.
Questions from Representatives of Full Council
16TH October 2007
23