The Leader, or their nominee, to answer questions from Councillors on matters affecting the Borough, in accordance with Standing Order 15.
The following questions have been received from Cllr. Quentin Edgington:
1. “Why are there large areas of grass in our parks which are not being cut? Not only does it make the park look unsightly and untidy but it also makes it very difficult for dog owners to clear up dog excrement.”
2. “Can the Leader please provide details of Mayoral Civic events which are suitable for all Spelthorne Councillors to attend? As well as current events, can details be provided of all events which are in the Mayoral Diary so far up to and including the end of the Mayoral year?”
3. “What committees have been allocated for Independent Councillor Penny Forbes-Forsyth to serve on?”
4. “Following the result of the Referendum how is the best way for the Borough of Spelthorne to successfully and meaningfully engage with the 22,474 people who wished to remain in the EU and the 16,065 who did not vote?”
The following question has been received from Cllr. Bernie Spoor:
1. “The Council has private landlords on its books that agree to take in those that are homeless for whatever reason. The homeless include the vulnerable often with learning difficulties, the disadvantaged often single parents with children and the unfortunates in society. The property is often on the baseline of letting potential and making it available to the council provides an income stream without tenant pressure.
If the Council has contracted the landlord to provide a home that surely is safe, secure and habitable for the residing tenants and these basic amenities are not met where does the responsibility lie to correct them? Ultimately, they fund the payments to the landlord so when things go wrong where does the Duty of Care fall?”
Minutes:
The Mayor reported that four general questions had been received from Councillor Q.R. Edgington and one general question had been received from Councillor. B.B. Spoor, in accordance with Standing Order 15.
Question from Councillor Q.R. Edgington
“Why are there large areas of grass in our parks which are not being cut? Not only does it make the park look unsightly and untidy but it also makes it very difficult for dog owners to clear up dog excrement.”
Response from Councillor A.J. Mitchell, Portfolio holder for Environment and Compliance
Thank you for your question, Councillor Edgington.
The current grounds maintenance was re-tendered in 2008 and re-let in 2009. As part of the tendering process the Council took the opportunity to explore ways to reduce the overall spend in this service area. As a result of changes made to the specification the Council saved in excess of £200k per year for the life of the contract, which over the 10 year life of the contract will result in savings well in excess of £2m.
Officers also explored opportunities for management of the vast areas of unused parkland and concluded that for reasons of both biodiversity and financial savings, the Council would cease cutting some areas. An exercise was carried out to establish where this was achievable and also ensured the proposal was borough wide. This initiative saved an additional £40k per year over the life of the contract so an additional £400k over 10 years. Initially there were concerns in some areas and we addressed these concerns and amended plans where possible. As well as concerns we also received many favourable comments, as uncut grass can and does bring life to areas of unused manicured lawn, making them more interesting for users of the park facilities.
All dog owners are required to keep their dogs under control at all times when using our parks and open spaces and if this is managed by the dog owner, waste can be effectively removed by the person in charge of the dog.
In accordance with Council Standing Order 15.2, Councillor Q.R. Edgington asked the following supplementary question:
“Thank you Mr Mayor.
I wonder Councillor Mitchell if you have visited any parks recently because some of our parks are unfortunate. Some of the parks in Surrey have very attractive meadow land.
I strongly suggest that he would agree with me that the contract needs to be looked at because the parks which are not cut are in an appalling state. Many members of the public have commented to me on this. I welcome him to take this forward and perhaps he can tell me what the timescales will be for that to take place?”
Councillor A.J. Mitchell, Portfolio holder for Environment and Compliance, gave the following response to the supplementary question:
“Councillor Edgington I’m grateful for your question. Yes I have visited parks. Councillor Edgington and Councillor Forbes-Forsyth will remember that I was given the task of exploring various avenues with regards to Laleham Park and I went to Laleham Park on a very regular basis.
Councillor Edgington may also be aware that we have a financial responsibility to members of the public and certainly within this contract we consider our financial responsibility with importance. The contract is continually being monitored for the service we give to the public and we will look again within the next 12 months at what we are achieving.”
Question from Councillor Q.R. Edgington
“Can the Leader please provide details of Mayoral Civic events which are suitable for all Spelthorne Councillors to attend? As well as current events, can details be provided of all events which are in the Mayoral Diary so far up to and including the end of the Mayoral year?”
Response from the Leader of the Council, Councillor I.T.E Harvey
“Thank you for your question, Councillor Edgington.
The Mayor’s Secretary e-mails on a fortnightly basis to ALL councillors details of the Mayor’s engagements for the upcoming two weeks. You will also be aware that where Mayoral events are known about in advance, they appear in the minutes of the Mayor-making Council meeting and subsequent Council meeting minutes.”
In accordance with Council Standing Order 15.2, Councillor Q.R. Edgington asked the following supplementary question:
“Thank you for the update. What I am asking is for councillors to be made more aware of Council events and notified in the future.”
Councillor I.T.E Harvey, Leader of the Council, gave the following response to the supplementary question:
This is currently being addressed. Over the next month there will be a comprehensive list of events which will be sent to all councillors.
Question from Councillor Q.R. Edgington
“What committees have been allocated for Independent Councillor Penny Forbes-Forsyth to serve on?”
Response from the Leader of the Council, Councillor I.T.E. Harvey
“Thank you for your question, Councillor Edgington.
Indeed, you have raised a very interesting point.
Nevertheless, the answer is very simple. In the case of Cllr Forbes Forsyth I have maintained the committee allocations given to her by my predecessor, assuming there was a good reason for this. Should she, or indeed you have any issues with this I commend you to take this up with my predecessor. You of course are my predecessor and Councillors may indeed be interested to learn why you did not allocate any Committee roles to your fiancée, Cllr Forbes-Forsyth.”
In accordance with Council Standing Order 15.2, Councillor Q.R. Edgington asked the following supplementary question:
Does the Leader think that making no space or allocation for Councillor Forbes-Forsyth is good for the democratic process? Does he not think she should be involved in the democratic process in this Chamber?
Councillor I.T.E Harvey, Leader of the Council, gave the following response to the supplementary question:
For clarification, when Councillor Edgington was Leader of the Council Councillor Forbes-Forsyth was not on any committees or on the Cabinet. The committee allocations which were put before the Annual Council Meeting on 19 May 2016 were run past Committee Services and also checked by the Monitoring Officer. What was agreed at the Annual Council meeting was completely lawful.
Question from Councillor Q.R. Edgington
“Following the result of the Referendum how is the best way for the Borough of Spelthorne to successfully and meaningfully engage with the 22,474 people who wished to remain in the EU and the 16,065 who did not vote?”
Response from the Leader of the Council, Councillor I.T.E. Harvey
“Thank you for your question, Councillor Edgington.
As you know, the Council does its best to serve all its residents, irrespective of how they voted in the recent EU referendum. It is not for us to speculate on the intentions of those who didn’t vote at all, and as a Council we accept the democratic outcome of the vote.”
In accordance with Council Standing Order 15.2, Councillor Q.R. Edgington asked the following supplementary question:
“We need to look at the democratic process in this borough far more carefully. A lot of people made a decision in the recent referendum which was contrary to the outcome, therefore we need to be aware of that. When will we start using democracy properly?”
Councillor I.T.E Harvey, Leader of the Council, gave the following response to the supplementary question:
“61 percent of the Borough voted for Brexit which indicates that Spelthorne is operating democratically.”
Question from Councillor B.B. Spoor
“The Council has private landlords on its books that agree to take in those that are homeless for whatever reason. The homeless include the vulnerable often with learning difficulties, the disadvantaged often single parents with children and the unfortunates in society. The property is often on the baseline of letting potential and making it available to the council provides an income stream without tenant pressure.
If the Council has contracted the landlord to provide a home that surely is safe, secure and habitable for the residing tenants and these basic amenities are not met where does the responsibility lie to correct them? Ultimately, they fund the payments to the landlord so when things go wrong where does the Duty of Care fall?”
Response from the Leader of the Council, Councillor I.T.E. Harvey
“Thank you for your question, Councillor Spoor.
All councillors will be well aware that Spelthorne is currently facing a severe shortage of both social housing and available affordable private rented accommodation which has led to increased homelessness in the borough.
Housing is one of Spelthorne’s key council priorities and the Council is addressing these issues head on in a number of ways including:
· the council’s recent purchase of the Harper Hotel (for improved emergency accommodation)
· the proposed redevelopment of The Bugle public house into flats
· the proposed redevelopment of Churchill Hall into housing
· the council’s new Rent Guarantee Scheme.
Spelthorne Borough Council actively seeks to assist households in urgent housing need into suitable private rented sector accommodation. We currently place potentially homeless households into private rented accommodation through our Rent Bond Scheme and we are planning to launch a new Landlord Rent Guarantee Scheme in Autumn 2016.
In some of these placements Spelthorne provides some assistance with rent shortfalls (and this will be a feature of Landlord Rent Guarantee Scheme placements.) However the contractual rent responsibility is between the landlord and the placed tenant, i.e. it is important to note that the council does not lease the properties and it does not have a direct ‘landlord’ role.
In both these schemes prospective tenants are introduced to landlords however the property management and repair responsibilities of the tenancy remain with the private landlord. However Spelthorne does have an enforcement role if significant risks are identified in private rented properties (to support and if necessary force landlords to improve conditions.)
Although Spelthorne does not have any contractual responsibility for the repair and security of properties under the above schemes, we are aware of the prevalence of poor housing conditions in some local private rented stock and accordingly take measures that properties under the scheme are assessed and inspected prior to placement. A risk based visual inspection is completed and only low risk property placements are assisted. (Additionally, for some placements where the council has a rehousing duty towards the tenants, the council has a legal duty to ensure that accommodation offered has suitable property conditions at placement stage.)
Where significant risks are identified the property would not be used and would be referred to our Environmental Health team for potential enforcement action.
Through our focused risk-based inspection at placement stage we seek to assure good property conditions at the tenancy start and to focus landlords on their maintenance responsibilities. Although we do not have a property management or repairs responsibility if problems do arise during the tenancy, we do have an interest in ensuring tenancy sustainment and therefore will liaise between landlords and placed tenants to advise them on their respective responsibilities.”
In accordance with Council Standing Order 15.2, Councillor B.B. Spoor asked the following supplementary question:
“Is there going to be a route for tenants on housing benefit who feel that they are being put upon by their landlord and cannot get any response from their landlord?”
Councillor I.T.E Harvey, Leader of the Council, gave the following response to the supplementary question:
“What you refer to is called
‘retaliatory eviction’. This is covered by a recent
modification to Section 21 of the Housing Act, whereby if a
landlord tries to convict* evict someone who
has recently made a complaint about the landlord within the last
six months the court is minded not to grant possession to the
landlord. The Council is only assisting with the rent. The contract
is between the landlord and the tenant.” [*amendment made at Council 20/10/16]