To consider the following questions which have been received from Elected Members and which are asked pursuant to Standing Order No. 11.
1 Councillor Carr – School Meals Service
‘Should a Labour controlled Council be considering removing its school meals service when we have one of the highest levels of high deprivation in the country?
Should we expect the service to make a profit or should we be happy just to cover the costs of providing that service?
I am led to believe that a consultant was recently employed to look at the service. What was the cost of this and what were the recommendations?
Would a decision to terminate the Service be a matter for consideration at full Council and what would be the costs to schools for providing a new service in terms of catering equipment and all that is required to deliver nutritious food?’
2 Councillor Barnard – Modern Foreign Language at GCSE
‘Could the Cabinet Spokesperson inform the Council of the percentage of pupils in Barnsley Schools who studied a modern foreign language to GCSE level in the most recent year for which figures are available?’
3 Councillor Wright – Penny Pie Park Redevelopment
‘Many will know my stance on the current Penny Pie Park redevelopment through various conversations I have had over the past 12 months.
However given that we are now keen to demonstrate to residents we are listening to concerns surrounding the scheme, could I therefore ask that a footbridge over the railway line be considered within the new developments that would link Penny Pie Park with Pogmoor Rec in order to effectively utilise as much of the remaining green space as possible?’
4 Councillor Fielding – Demolition of Council Houses
‘Why has the Council instructed Berneslai Homes to evict the tenants and then demolish a pair of 4 bedroomed semi-detached council houses on South Road at Dodworth? ‘
5 Councillor Felton - Hospitality
Following the submission of a question by Councillor Greenhough on hospitality to the last Council and the response provided by Councillor Gardiner (Cabinet Spokesperson for Core Services) I submitted a request for further information to the finance team. I would firstly like to thank that team for taking time to gather the information I requested. Can I please, therefore, confirm that the hospitality on Armed Forces events is less than £5,100 and not what was quoted on a social media post?’
6 Councillor Wright – Development of new school
‘I have been contacted by numerous residents in regards to the proposed new school and particularly as to where the new school will be built.
Can I therefore ask the cabinet member to explain how such a planning application is processed and what participation we as a Council will have within the proposed development?’
7 Councillor Hunt – Barnsley Market
‘Traders in the new Barnsley Market have signed up to 5-year leases with a break clause after 3 years. What assumptions has the council made as to the likely numbers of market traders that will activate the break clause?’
8 Councillor Felton – Assisted Bin Collection
‘Why do people who qualify for assisted bin collection have to pay the fee for a replacement bin when the damage has obviously been caused by a council employee or equipment?’
9 Councillor David Griffin – Local Plan and Barnsley’s Road Infrastructure
‘Was the impact of the Local Plan on Barnsley’s road infrastructure evaluated for each of its housing sites and, in general, how is it expected to pay for any significant road improvements needed?’
10 Councillor Hunt – Glassworks
‘How many new businesses has the Council signed up to the Glassworks since it opened last November, and how many of the units in the indoor market remain un-let?’
11 Councillor Hunt – Barnsley Market
‘I am hearing from market traders who have reluctantly signed up to a 5-year lease that some other traders are now operating on daily licenses. How many businesses in the indoor market are on 5-year leases and how many are operating on daily licenses?’
12 Councillor Fielding – School Places and Development of new School
‘It is clearly essential and to be welcomed that the Council provides the extra Secondary School places needed for the enlarged September 2021 intake in Barnsley.
With no site for the proposed new free school chosen yet, there must be a significant risk that it will not be ready for the September 2021 intake. If the new school is not ready on time, where and how will the Council educate the increased number of students?’
13 Councillor Hunt – Infrastructure in the Darton East Ward
‘What, if anything, does the Council intend to do to address infrastructure in Darton East, such as improving roads and increasing primary school places, following the recent housing development on the site of the former North Gawber colliery and other potential developments contained within the Local Plan?’
14 Councillor Kitching – Barnsley Pride Events
‘I thoroughly enjoyed the Barnsley Pride event that was held in the Town on July 14th. What plans do we as a Council have to support the growth and success of this relatively new event in future years?’
15 Councillor Kitching – Barnsley as a welcoming town for LGBT+ people
‘What plans do we have to ensure that the town is a welcoming, friendly and space for LGBT+ people all year round, not just on Pride day?’
16 Councillor Hunt – Recycled Plastic and road repairs
‘Has the Council considered the use of recycled plastic in the material used to undertake road repairs? This is already used in other parts of the UK, including Cumbria, and would show Barnsley is amongst those leading the way in positive recycling for a better environment’
17 Councillor Kitching – LGA Conference
‘I was delighted to see Councillors Andrews, Howard and Cave at the recent Local Government Association (LGA) Conference in Bournemouth. Could the Cabinet members please detail what they learnt at the event? What ideas and initiatives have they brought back to Barnsley to implement here and benefit the residents of this authority?’
Minutes:
The Chief Executive reported that she had received a number of questions from Councillors in accordance with Standing Order No. 11.
Note: a maximum of 30 minutes was allocated for this item in accordance with Standing Order No 11 (2)(d)
(a) Councillor Carr – School Meals Service
‘Should a Labour controlled Council be considering removing its school meals service when we have one of the highest levels of high deprivation in the country?
Should we expect the service to make a profit or should we be happy just to cover the costs of providing that service?
I am led to believe that a consultant was recently employed to look at the service. What was the cost of this and what were the recommendations?
Would a decision to terminate the Service be a matter for consideration at full Council and what would be the costs to schools for providing a new service in terms of catering equipment and all that is required to deliver nutritious food?’
Councillor Platts, Cabinet Spokesperson for Adults and Communities, responded by stating the Council had considered options for the future of the Barnsley Council School Catering Service (BCSCS) following a review of the school catering marked and the challenges facing the service. It had been decided to fully support BCSCS to explore all avenues so that it had a sustainable future.
The Council was not seeking to make a profit from providing the school meals service and wished to achieve a break-even financial position. The Council would support the service whilst it was operating a deficit in 2019/20 to allow time for a sustainable service to be developed.
A full market analysis report had been commissioned in November 2018 and the information it contained alongside other information informed the Cabinet report and the subsequent Council decision, namely, to continue to explore how the Service may achieve a sustainable position. The work and report cost £21,600 inclusive of VAT and this had been funded through a council development fund ‘Invest to grow fund’. The Council had a resource of £55,000 had been made available through the Improvement and Growth Fund and this had enabled the market analysis to be completed and the balance of the fund would enable progress to be made on the recommendations.
In relation to any decision about the future of the Service, the usual governance arrangements would apply.
There was no additional cost to schools if they chose to purchase a different service to the Council’s. The schools were responsible for their kitchen and already owned the heavy equipment they contained that was required to provide a hot nutritious meal The schools Governing Body would decide who provided their school meals service. The BCSCS currently service 44 primary schools within Barnsley.
Councillor Carr did not ask a supplementary question.
(b) Councillor Barnard – Modern Foreign Language at GCSE
‘Could the Cabinet Spokesperson inform the Council of the percentage of pupils in Barnsley Schools who studied a modern foreign language to GCSE level in the most recent year for which figures are available?’
Councillor Bruff, Cabinet Spokesperson for Children’s Services thanked Councillor Barnard for his question and responded by stating that given the current climate of national political leadership, the persistent squeeze on school budgets and the ongoing Brexit dilemma, the future of young people would rest more and more on their need to have as wide a range of skills and knowledge as possible to enable them to compete in the employment market. Modern Foreign Languages could open doors to more options for work and travel. She believed that the opportunity to study another language would while still in secondary educations was essential
The figures for 2018 were as follows. Of the 2,011 pupils at the end of Key Stage 4, 602 were entered for a Modern Foreign Language GCSE exam. Of those, 367 achieved a grade 4 or above and 251 achieved a grade 5 or above. Unforrtunately she could not report on Modern Foreign Language activity in primary schools as she didn’t have access to this information and it may only be know at an individual school level.
Councillor Barnard thanked the Cabinet Spokesperson for the response and, as a supplementary question, asked if any pupils in Barnsley studied for the International Baccalaureate which included at least one Foreign Language.
Councillor Bruff responded by stating that she was aware that some schools were encouraging pupils to study for the International Baccalaureate but she did not have the figures for that. She would, however, provide Councillor Barnard with those figures.
(c) Councillor Wright – Penny Pie Park Redevelopment
‘Many will know my stance on the current Penny Pie Park redevelopment through various conversations I have had over the past 12 months.
However given that we are now keen to demonstrate to residents we are listening to concerns surrounding the scheme, could I therefore ask that a footbridge over the railway line be considered within the new developments that would link Penny Pie Park with Pogmoor Rec in order to effectively utilise as much of the remaining green space as possible?’
Councillor Cheetham, Cabinet Spokesperson for Place (Regeneration and Culture) stated that, as mentioned earlier in the meeting, the Council fully supported the principle of providing a footbridge over the Sheffield-Penistone railway line kinking Penny Pie Part and Pogmoor Recreation Ground. This was to be provided as part of the mitigation measures in the area. The Council had recently made the decision to allocate funding towards the provision of a footbridge as had been mentioned in the meeting and to this end the Council had already opened dialogue with Network Rail. It must be borne in mind, however, that Network Rail was a legislative body that would approve the principle and facilitate the provision of any footbridge over the railway line. This meant that whilst the Council supported the provision of the bridge, the actual decision to install a footbridge was that of Network Rail.
Councillor Cheetham said that it was worthwhile stating that Councillor Wright was not allowing his personal principles and stance on Penny Pie Park to prevent him from pragmatically working for the best interests of his residents under any eventuality. Also, he understood that later on the agenda there was a question on networking and hospitality. At a recent event where the possible establishment of a Borough wide Rail Partnership was being discussed at which representatives attended from Rail Providers and indeed Network Rail, during a ‘tea break’ he was able to lobby quite strongly for the provision of a footbridge with the representative of Network Rail. Whilst considering hospitality, therefore, it was also important to consider the potential outcomes
Councillor Wright did not ask a supplementary question.
(d) Councillor Fielding – Demolition of Council Houses
‘Why has the Council instructed Berneslai Homes to evict the tenants and then demolish a pair of 4 bedroomed semi-detached council houses on South Road at Dodworth? ‘
Councillor Cheetham, Cabinet Spokesperson for Place (Regeneration and Transportation) stated that the land between South Road and the motorway slip road was allocated for housing in the Local Plan. The Persimmon Homes application submitted last year, which proposed to access part of the hosing allocation from Bark Meadows, had not progressed because of concerns regarding the access. Alternative accesses were, therefore, being considered and one option included taking access from South Road. On that basis, Berneslai Homes had relocated tenants from a pair of semi-detached dwellings. Any demolition would be picked up as part of the planning process if that was felt necessary.
Councillor Fielding stated that the tenants had already been moved out of the properties he understood as long ago as January in one case and one family had to be relocated into a newly bought house in Dodworth as there were no other four bedroom houses available. The total cost to Berneslai Homes was £140,000. Berneslai Homes had stated to him that they would demolish these properties as soon as possible and one neighbour had said this could be as soon as the end of this week as all the services had been disconnected. Given that Persimmon had not reached any agreement with the Council about access arrangements, given that they may not go ahead with this development and given that planning permission may not be granted for this site he asked as a supplementary question why demolition was going to take place so early and what would happen if the site was not progressed? Would the houses be rebuilt?
Councillor Cheetham responded by stating that the cost had arisen as there was not sufficient housing stock in Dodworth and this demonstrated the need for more housing. The demolition of properties to open up sites allocated for housing in the area was obviously indicated. It was very important that the housing required within the area could be built. It did not cost £140,000 just to relocate a family within the area but also included the cost of bringing another property back into social ownership.
(e) Councillor Felton - Hospitality
‘Following the submission of a question by Councillor Greenhough on hospitality to the last Council and the response provided by Councillor Gardiner (Cabinet Spokesperson for Core Services) I submitted a request for further information to the finance team. I would firstly like to thank that team for taking time to gather the information I requested. Can I please, therefore, confirm that the hospitality on Armed Forces events is less than £5,100 and not what was quoted on a social media post?’
Councillor Gardiner, Cabinet Spokesperson for Core Services responded by stating that in accordance with Council policy, refreshments were only provided at meetings/events where external parties were present.
The Council had recently reported expenditure totalling £216,210 in 2018/19 on Catering and Hospitality. Upon further investigation and analysis it ws apparent that only £91,300 had actually been spent on hospitality and catering in accordance with the policy, with the remaining amount being spent on the provision of support staff for the Council’s kitchen/breakout areas (Facilities Management costs) or costs that were subsequently recovered from external organisations using Council facilities.
It should also be noted that these consts were attributable to over 2000 meetings and over 100 events held during the year. The breakdown and further analysis of the expenditure incurred was as follows:
|
|
£ |
£ |
|
TOTAL 2018/19 SPEND REPORTED |
|
216,210 |
|
LESS: |
|
|
|
Cost of Kitchen/Breakout area support staff - Amounts paid to Barnsley Norse for the provision of staff to maintain the breakout/kitchen areas in Gateway Plaza, Westgate and the Town Hall. |
(72,325) |
|
|
Cost of milk provision in staff breakout areas: · Milk is provided for employees and visitors in Town Centre buildings for the purposes of making drinks. Significant additional costs would be incurred in providing adequate space and equipment to store personal milk supplies. The cost to provide milk equates to around £3.40p per employee per year. |
(11,963) |
|
|
Non BMBC costs recovered from external organisations using the Council’s facilities: · These costs are fully recovered from the individual organisations using Council facilities. E.g South Yorkshire Fire Authority / Pension Authority meetings. |
(20,300) |
|
|
Costs funded by external grant · A number of events held (e.g cultural and heritage events) are fully funded via external grants inc. Heritage Lottery Fund, National Lottery and Arts Council grants. |
(20,322) |
|
|
TOTAL HOSPITALITY & CATERING |
|
91,300 |
|
Of Which: |
|
|
|
Incurred at meetings Teas, coffees and catering (where appropriate) provided at meetings and events where external parties are present in accordance with the Council’s catering policy. These include: · Safeguarding Children Board; · Training courses e.g Foster Carers, Mental Health, Health & Safety, Volunteering, training for ex-service personnel; · Barnsley Economic Partnership; · School visits to Town Hall inc. achievement/awards events; · Cabinet/Full Council/Other Council meetings e.g Planning board/schools appeals board; · External visitors to the Mayors parlour & Leaders Office. |
|
56,825 |
|
Incurred on events Costs of catering etc at events. Key Events include: · Mayor Making £9.9k – Each new Mayor can invite upto 40 members of their family and friends to the event. Any elected member pays £30 to attend. · Mayoral Events £5.1k - Mayors social events, Barnsley Armed Forces day, Remembrance Sunday, Refugee Social Group Event, Civic Carol Service, Organ Donation Celebration Event. · Business events £14k – including Landlord Liaison, 0-19 Service Conference, Barnsley in Bloom Awards, Celebration of Learning event. · Cultural events £5.5k - includes launch events at Experience Barnsley , 5th anniversary celebration, Cooper Gallery exhibition launches and Regency Ball at Cannon Hall. |
|
34,475 |
|
TOTAL |
|
91,300 |
As Members were aware, the Council had lost over 1,500 full time staff since 2010. Financial Services had also lost hundreds of staff. To prepare this response had taken 1 ½ weeks which was a resource that the Service couldn’t afford and the capacity was not available without taking staff of their normal full time duties. This question had been put, though he acknowledged that this was not the questioners fault, during an audit period which was the busiest part of the Financial Service’s year. This had put extreme pressure on the staff within Financial Services. He, therefore, suggested that whilst being fully aware of the democratic right to ask questions, all Members should take into consideration the pressure being put on staff. In a recent staff satisfaction survey the biggest staff related issue was stress and all Members should recognise this and be aware of it when asking questions.
With regard to the second part of the question, the £5,100 referred to in social media, he had commented on this within the expenditure reported on Mayoral Events he was not, however, going to comment any further on social media posts.
Councillor Felton stated that she had thanked the Financial Services Team for their response as she understood that things had been very difficult, however, she didn’t feel that her question had been answered. Councillor Gardiner had mentioned on a social media post that Veterans got most of the money and when she had attended veterans events they had asked her to seek clarification of this as they were extremely concerned and upset that they were being ‘blamed’ for the hospitality bill. She asked if Members could avoid using veterans as a political tool and then asked as a supplementary question if she could be provided with details of the amount spent on veterans from the hospitality budget.
Councillor Gardiner responded by stating that he had made no such post as he did not use social media he would, however, provide Councillor Felton with details of the expenditure.
(f) Councillor Wright – Development of new school
‘I have been contacted by numerous residents in regards to the proposed new school and particularly as to where the new school will be built.
Can I therefore ask the cabinet member to explain how such a planning application is processed and what participation we as a Council will have within the proposed development?’
Councillor Cheetham, Cabinet Spokesperson for Place (Regeneration and Culture) stated that this was one of the most frequently asked question both in his current and previous portfolio position. In this particular case and indeed with any application, an organisation which wished to develop and run a school had to apply to the DfE to express an interest in doing so. They were required to identify an area and the authority always attempted to work with applicants to take matters forward but such approaches did not have to be taken up.
The location of the proposed new school was yet to be determined and the Council had worked on a limited capacity on this, however, the site would be announced as soon as it was formally confirmed with the DfE. A planning application was then required to be submitted and would be publicised widely and well beyond the prescribed statutory requirements. The application would then be assessed by officers taking into account all relevant Local Plan policies and need for school places in a particular area in order to ensure that any potentially adverse impact was mitigated against and to ensure a high quality design which would provide an outstanding learning environment for Barnsley children. The application would then be determined by the Planning Regulatory Board.
Councillor Wright did not ask a supplementary question
(g) Councillor Hunt – Barnsley Market
‘Traders in the new Barnsley Market have signed up to 5-year leases with a break clause after 3 years. What assumptions has the council made as to the likely numbers of market traders that will activate the break clause?’
Councillor Cheetham, Cabinet Spokesperson for Place (Regeneration and Transportation) stated that no assumptions had been made. The break clause took effect on 30th September, 2021, however, the right to break could be served anything up to 31st March, 2012 and as yet no tenants had served notice to break.
Councillor Hunt thanked Councillor Cheetham for the response and asked, as a supplementary question whether the Council was aware of dissatisfaction amongst the market traders, many of whom were sole traders, in relation to the requirement for six day working and the effect on their work life balance and if so what the Councils plans were to address this.
Councillor Cheetham responded by stating that on this particular issue the Council was with market traders on issues they had. The Council had a very good relationship with them currently and if there were any issues that needed resolving the Council would endeavour to do so as had been the case this week in respect of a stolen vehicle. The Council had an open dialogue with the market traders.
(h) Councillor Felton – Assisted Bin Collection
‘Why do people who qualify for assisted bin collection have to pay the fee for a replacement bin when the damage has obviously been caused by a council employee or equipment?’
Councillor Lamb, Cabinet Spokesperson for Place (Environment and Transportation) responded by stating that he had received similar questions from Ms S Peacock MP and Mr D Jarvis MP to whom he would respond personally in writing.
The process for damaged bins was the same for all residents. A five year warranty was offered on all bins and if they broke during this period a preplacement would be delivered without charge. Residents were asked to contact the Council if they suspected that their bin was damaged during the process of emptying. Each case was investigated on an individual basis using the bin wagons camera systems and if it was found that the bin had dropped into the back of the wagon or was damaged by the collections crew, a replacement would be delivered without charge.
Indeed, his wife had recently been required to use the online system for ordering a new bin and this had proved to be very effective and efficient and staff involved in this process were thanked.
If this question was directed towards removing the cost of the delivery of the bins then consideration would have to be given to the impact this would have to the standard of service generally.
In relation to those standards, it was important to celebrate the success of the service as 99.7% of bins were collected on time, 97.1% of all waste was diverted from landfill, there was a 47% recycling rate and in the last year 6,221 bulky items had been collected. These were stunning statistics and he wouldn’t want to see the diminution of service in order to recover the cost of the delivery of replacement bins.
He was aware that Councillor Felton had been handling an issue on behalf of a resident and she had contacted him some time ago. This matter had been referred to the appropriate officers and he had thought that this matter had been resolved but if this was not the case he would gladly take this matter up on Councillor Felton’s behalf.
Councillor Felton referred to the Assisted Bin Collection Service and to the fact that residents never touched the bins. Sometimes the residents concerned were not even aware that the bin had been broken until notified by a relative/carer and this could be some time after the bins had been damaged. In many cases it was not possible, therefore, to give actual dates to the service so that an investigation of the CCTV could be undertaken. Councillor Felton asked, therefore, if a guarantee could be given in such instances that a replacement bin could be delivered free of charge.
Councillor Lamb stated that whilst he understood and sympathised with Councillor Felton’s comments, there were significant financial implications to such a decision and he could not give an absolute assurance that such costs could be waived today. He would, however, welcome the opportunity to discuss this matter further with Councillor Felton outside the Council Chamber to see if an appropriate solution could be found.
Note As the time limit of 30 minutes had now been reached written answers would be provided for all Members in relation to the outstanding questions.