Agenda item - Written questions from members of the public.

A list of public questions received by the due date of 12noon on the 9 December 2024 will be circulated separately as part of an addendum for the meeting.

51.1    The Mayor reported that 7 written questions had been received from members of the public and invited them to come forward and address the council.

 

1.        Christopher Hawtree asked a question:

 

In these times when health and diet are paramount, would Councillor Sankey please tell us how a proposed rebuilt sports facility which should be the mainspring of the King Alfred will accommodate all of the the great-value, very friendly gym now known as FitLab which, for six decades, has occupied four floors with 250 well-spaced items of “kit”, many of these more substantial than available elsewhere?

 

Councillor Robins, Cabinet Member for Sports and Recreation replied:

 

It’s a pleasure to see you again. Gym and fitness classes remain one of the most popular activities across our leisure centres in the city and are an important provision for people to maintain and improve physical and mental health. The new King Alfred Leisure Centre will have its own extensive gym area and will therefore not continue to accommodate Fit Lab in the new centre, which currently leases and occupies a space within the current building to provide its own commercial gym offer.

 

Fit Lab are aware of and have been consulted with about the council’s plans for the new facility.  The gym within the new leisure centre will be a large, high-quality facility with state-of-the-art equipment and will provide more space. For example, the new facility will be better able to accommodate a free weights area. There will also be new studio spaces to provide an enhanced programme of classes and other fitness-related activities. Thank you very much.

 

Christopher Hawtree asked a supplementary question:

 

It sounds, from what Councillor Robins is saying, there won’t be room for both the facilities provided, or the three facilities provided, at the Fit Lab, the gym next to the one run by Freedom Leisure and also don’t forget the boxing facility run by another company on Kings Esplanade as part of the King Alfred. But can I say, I know this is a weighty matter, but how does Councillor Robins regard the new hope provided this week for the site with the advent of Angela Rayner’s devolution priority programme which, over the next two years is set to come into being, creating essentially another version of regional authorities, and as Minister Jim McMahon has said, this will provide a stronger set of levers to drive growth in communities.

 

Would it not be better to wait a little bit longer for the regional authority to be set up here, as Angela Rayner has set out, rather than rush to something yet again where we’ve seen problems with the site in the past. Would it not be better to wait for this authority to become part of a larger one?

 

Councillor Robins replied:

 

I don’t think anyone can accuse us of rushing over the King Alfred site. It’s been over 30 years to my knowledge. What we’re aiming to provide is a better, bigger facility. I think that’s what people must understand. We’re not doing anything detrimental. We’re trying to provide a 21st Century state-of-the-art leisure centre complex, and that’s all we’re doing. I don’t know what devolution will bring or what it won’t bring, but what I don’t want to see is us to hold off again with the work that we need to do at the King Alfred, and eventually the current King Alfred will have to close perhaps and then we won’t be left with anything. So, again, thanks very much for your question and thanks very much for the nearly supplementary question and we hope to see you again soon. Thank you.

 

2.        Adrian Hill asked a question:

 

Local councils are responsible for air quality management.? Our city failed to achieve the 2010 air quality limits in the quickest time possible; a legal requirement. DEFRA’s data shows an estimated 3,000 residents have had their lives cut short after exposure to illegal levels since 2010. Around ? of asthma cases in our city are caused by air pollution. The most effective improvements have been delayed or blocked?by the council since 2010. A family were recently awarded compensation in London for similar pollution levels to us.? How much compensation is appropriate for those affected by air pollution in our city?

          

Councillor Muten, Cabinet Member for Transport, Parking and Public Realm replied:

 

Thank you, Adrian, for bringing this very important matter to this council. I just want to emphasise that we do take this very seriously, as I know you do, and respect you for the work you do in campaigning for this and recognising the priority you highlight for those people with respiratory ailments in particular, but for general health as well.

 

You’ve referred to the sad case of Ella Adoo-Kissi-Debrah, and what I understand to be an undisclosed compensation settlement from the government in response to that legal case regarding her untimely death due to her exposure to air pollution in London.

  

The protection of public health is paramount to this administration, and we are fully committed to meeting the Council’s statutory duty to monitor and improve air quality levels in the city to the benefit of all its residents. This is being achieved through the publication of the council’s annual monitoring reports and its Air Quality Action Plan. All these comprehensive documents are available on the council’s website which, from our previous discussions, I know you have read.

  

They show that pollution levels across the city have been reducing over time and, to reassure you and others, I am pleased to be able to highlight that the latest report on our monitoring data indicates that 2023 was the first year that legal limits were met across the city (including roadside hotspots). This has been achieved by the council working together with its national, regional and local partners to improve air quality.    

 

Air quality does fluctuate seasonally and diurnally, and we know there is still much more to do to reduce levels further. A one-size-fits-all approach is not the best for our city. Rather, targeted measures in each Air Quality Management Area within wider measures is more likely to deliver. Our Council Plan has commitments to deliver an accessible, clean and sustainable environment that we can all be proud of, and to ensure we live in a healthy city.  Ambitious targets above the legal requirements have been set in the 2022 Air Quality Action Plan based on World Health Organisation guidelines and as an administration, we are committed to, and are working towards, these. 

 

As a data-led administration, we have installed some 50 sensors that measure nitric oxide, nitrogen dioxide, ozone and particulate matter, alongside temperature, pressure and humidity. This autumn we’ve launched public access to real-time air-quality readings, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. We will continue this positive air quality improvement trend by advancing our targeted action and increasing awareness of how pollution affects our health and what we can all do to reduce it.

 

As I said, there is still much to do, but we are acting and delivering on our key points since 2022, on our air quality action plan, and we’re delivering within it.

 

Adrian Hill asked a supplementary question:

 

I am worried about a potential compensation scheme that might have to be paid out, but really it is action now that I want more than anything. I think I’m a bit surprised when you say ‘pleased’. It’s still four times World Health Organisation guideline levels and I don’t think we can be pleased or proud of that at all and I’d like to remind you of your manifesto pledge as well and you did promise to bring an end to polluting diesel vehicles. As far as I understand it, there’s been no action at all on cars, taxis, mini-buses, vans, lorries.

 

My question is: what is stopping you announcing a clean air zone and a full smoke control area?

 

Councillor Muten replied:

 

Thank you, Adrian, for your following question. On smoke control, we’re doing a very targeted and city-wide approach to raising awareness on smoke. It’s very much a strong campaign which has been launched this month to make people aware of the impacts that smoke has, chimney smoke in particular. This is one action which we believe will have impacts not just within our existing smoke control areas, but potentially citywide well beyond those. So I think that’s an effective thing. We’re installing EV charging which Councillor Sankey as Leader summarised in her report at the beginning of this meeting.

 

We’re actually leading the way as a Local Authority on public EV charging points in the city, promoting electric vehicles. We’re working with our bus operators to drive them to a place where all buses are ULEZ compliant, Euro 6 in particular. There is still some work to do there but they have shown their commitment to making that change. We’re working with them to bring in, in due course, EV buses. And we’re working within our parking tariffs, our residents parking tariffs, to bring about variable costs for parking permits based on vehicle emissions.

 

There are a number of measures, many of which are targeted and, as I indicated in my response, a citywide approach is not necessarily the best way to target some of the air quality action plan areas. For instance the AQMA in Portslade is very much focused on HGVs connecting to the port and that will be much more important to target in relation to how the port works, perhaps with cleaner vehicles to solve that particular challenge there. So we do have to look at each AQMA and target the change that we’re looking to do.

 

I’m more than happy to set that out and meet with you again if you wish to work through some of this detail. I assure you we’re working across the city with our partners to bring about the change you are calling for.

 

3.        Robert Brown asked a question:

 

With the Labour administration looking at parking charges across the city, will the Cabinet Member for Transport, Parking and Public Realm agree that our key workers, especially those who work in our hospitals and who are often low paid, deserve additional support when it comes to parking charges when going to work their 13hr shifts. 

 

What support, if any, will this administration give to support those NHS workers who cannot rely on public transport to get to work and are often finding that they need to pay in excess of £50 a week for parking?? 

 

Will this administration agree to look at what options are available and can be implemented, including parking permit options, for these essential workers?

          

Councillor Muten, Cabinet Member for Transport, Parking and Public Realm replied:

 

Thank you, Robert, for your question. I believe the short answer is yes and that’s because we are already on it. But let me put it in some context.

 

Last summer, as a Labour administration, we swiftly acted to halt the Green-led administration's plan to hike on-street parking charges, including a proposal to quadruple fares around the hospital. Their plans unfairly targeted our NHS key workers, hitting those least able to pay. 

 

May I spell this out: Last year the Greens planned to increase parking around the Royal Sussex Hospital and Queens Park by up to 300 per cent. That is £1.40 to £5.60 an hour. Labour stopped that. From £2.80 to £9.30 for two hours. Labour stopped that. From £5.50 to £15.70 for four hours. Labour stopped that.  £7.60 to £22.70 for 11 hours. Labour acted.

 

A horrid regressive Green Party plan targeting our key workers that had to be stopped. Labour said no! Enough is enough. We took action. We commissioned a citywide review of parking with the aim of making parking fairer, simpler and to serve the city.  Our parking review produced over 30 top recommendations to improve parking services for residents, businesses, and visitors, including NHS staff. These recommendations, approved by Cabinet in September, will guide our service's business plan for the next three years.  

 

As part of this plan, we are reviewing tariffs for both off-street and on-street parking. We're making many council car parks more affordable, optimising space, and supporting our local economy. We currently issue hundreds of concessionary parking permits to family members & friends who are carers, professional carers and doctors, allowing them to park close to those they care for and support.

 

We are committed to supporting NHS services and ensuring our transport infrastructure facilitates commuting. On-street parking restrictions in these areas is generally from 9am to 8pm. Out of hours shifts will only require parking fees for these hours.

 

While we have good public transport, we recognise there is more to do for our key workers, especially those working in hospitals who often work long shifts on low pay. This is why my Cabinet colleague Councillor Burden, and the Chair of our Health and Wellbeing Board, Councillor De Oliveria, are always liaising with both myself and Councillor Williams to get a better deal for key workers on both parking and housing. 

 

We work as very close partners with the NHS, and Labour are always working hard to make this partnership deliver the best for our residents. As a progressive Labour administration, we are committed for the Council’s Transport Team to work with NHS staff representatives and others to explore options and implement parking solutions, including parking permits for essential workers. We are on the side of low paid key workers.

 

Robert Brown asked a supplementary question:

 

I do welcome the fact that you will be talking with the NHS and other partners. Will you also make a guarantee and commitment to also include the additional health and social care workers, especially those across the hospital’s footprint and especially in the ward were I live, in the Kemptown Ward, where we often find people looking at their clock while they’re supposed to be looking after their carers, and indeed parking on the pavements keeping an eye out for the parking wardens.

 

Councillor Muten replied:

 

Yes I’m more than happy to take that forward and work alongside Cabinet colleague Councillor Burden and Councillor De Oliveira to see how that best works with our partners, and I will talk to transport officers to see how that can be best done. We do issue permits for many of those workers and we’ve got to see if we have got those numbers right, have we got things that work. I certainly discourage pavement parking, I’ll throw in that opportunity to respond to that point. We’ve got to find something that works better and that’s what the parking review is there to do, to help serve this city better that we have done before. Thank you.

 

4.        Josie Cohen asked a question:

 

As a Jew and Israeli citizen, I find the memorial in Palmeira Square to Israelis killed and taken hostage on 7th?October - and Israeli soldiers killed fighting in Gaza since then - deeply distressing. It is increasingly affecting my mental health. The memorial dominates the square with ribbons on the trees. It’s been there for 14 months and, for all that time regardless of how you feel about Israel/Palestine, it’s been impossible to enjoy the square, or even walk past it, without being reminded of this terrible conflict. Palmeira Square is a public space belonging to all residents. All other memorials – like the one to Sarah Everard – are eventually removed after a respectful amount of time’s passed. Is the Council’s plan to make this memorial permanent? If not, what’s your timeline for working with the local Jewish community to move it to a private community space or remove it?

 

Councillor Alexander, Cabinet Member for Culture, Heritage and Tourism replied on behalf on Councillor Pumm, Cabinet Member for Communities, Equalities and Human Rights:

 

The ongoing situation in Israel and Gaza saddens not only Brighton & Hove, but the world. Many of the city's residents have loved ones in the region and are involved in one way or another. The grief that began on 7 October 2023 is still the same grief.

 

I hear and regret the impact on you, Josie, and I hope that the answer provides you with the needed reassurance. 

 

The Council are in discussions with the Sussex Jewish Representative Council who represent Jewish communities in the city on this matter. Both the City Council and the Jewish Representative Council agree about the temporary nature of this memorial, and we are working towards a solution and timeline. 

 

This is a live situation. People are still missing and separated from their families, and some in the Jewish communities find daily prayers at the site reassuring. Our aim is to manage the sensitivities of the community and the different impacts raised by this question, and to work towards alternative ways of commemorating those killed in the 7 October attack in 2023.

 

We are about to approach the second Hanukkah since October 7 and I understand that this festive season will not be any easier than the last one, so I hope colleagues join me in wishing the Jewish communities a happy Hanukkah. 

 

Josie Cohen asked a supplementary question:

 

Obviously as a Jew and Israeli, I'm deeply distressed and I think part of the issue is every time you pop out to get a pint of milk or walk your dog, it's really in your face and it just feels like a misuse of, sort of, public space which should be for everybody.

 

And I think really the Council has two options so, you know, it's been there for 14 months, make it permanent and go through the proper process, due process, of full public consultation or, as you say, it's really great to hear it's temporary. So I suppose my question back to you is when can local residents of Hove expect a timeline so that we can know, at least tell us when the Council will provide a timeline for it to be moved?

 

Councillor Alexander replied:

 

This actually falls under Councillor Pumm’s, who can't be here today's, remit rather than mine. So I will pass the question on to him and ask him to give you an answer on that. But I do know that there has been a lot of conversation so far. So just off the top of my head, I would say that this would be due to happen in the next couple of months.

 

 

5.        Dominic Nee asked a question:

 

Air pollution has been above legal limits in Brighton and Hove for years. It is estimated to kill more people than smoking globally and will be having extremely harmful effects on our population. What are you doing to raise awareness about this issue, including measures people can take to reduce exposure?

 

Councillor Rowkins, Cabinet Member for Net Zero and Environmental Services replied:

 

Thanks for coming here today, welcome, and it’s right to raise this issue. It’s good to see this coming up the agenda, and I think that’s illustrated by you being the second person in the last ten minutes or something who’s brought the issue of air quality to us.

 

You may have seen that only in the last week we launched a new campaign aimed at raising awareness focused on the harm caused by burning wood and other solid fuels, and obviously there’s been a lot of coverage of that nationally as well because of the time of year we’re in. Burning solid fuels, and domestic burning in particular, is now the largest source of particulate pollution which I’m sure you know.

 

We’ve also begun an enforcement pilot in our 5 Smoke Control Areas which, I have to say, although they’ve been in place since the late 60s, early 70s, they have been largely symbolic up until now.

 

Crucially, and Councillor Muten referenced this earlier, in October this year, we launched the largest real-time air quality monitoring network in the country. This includes more than 50 individual sensors that measure a range of pollutants as well as other atmospheric data, providing all of that data live on a publicly available website. This means visitors to that website can see live data in map format, so they get a really quick indication of the situation where they are, and it also enables them to drill down into more of an analysis from any given site, any one of those 50 or more, over a range of both different types of pollutants and timeframes.

 

The benefits of that are twofold; from our perspective it’s going to give us a far more detailed evidence base to inform our future actions, and secondly, I think this speaks more to your point, the aim is that it will really help residents understand the risks in their areas, make informed decisions, but similarly just to raise the level of awareness. I think the thing with the solid fuels is that the level of awareness of people burning in their homes in terms of the harm it’s doing to public health is really very low. So our focus is really to try and change that in as short a timeframe as possible.

 

Multiple council departments are collaborating on this issue, and I think it was the first item on the agenda of the first Overview & Scrutiny Committee meeting earlier in the year.  So that illustrates that we are taking it very seriously. Councillor Muten, from the transport perspective, has also been working on a number of measures focused on traffic, such as red routes to ease congestion and keep traffic flowing and, of course, significant acceleration of our EV charging network. We will certainly continue to look at further measures, informed in no small part by the larger data and evidence base that we’re now gathering.  

 

Dominic Nee asked a supplementary question:

 

Thank you for the work you've been doing, really good all the stuff you’re doing about the wood burners, but what specifically will you be doing to raise awareness about that and how will you be measuring the effect that that's had on public awareness?

 

Councillor Rowkins replied:

 

It's a great question and what we're aiming to do is simple, hard-hitting messages. We've got a series of four or five not quite infographics, but graphic sort of tiles, for social media. They’re going into various print media as well. We’re going to be running those on a sort of ongoing basis. We’ve got them at bus stops, because we’ve got capacity to advertise or put council messaging in some of the bus stops. We’re focusing some of that in some of the smoke control areas but it’s not limited to those areas.

 

In terms of how we measure the output of it, I mean that’s potentially hard to measure in the short term, but certainly, as part of this kind of changing approach to solid fuels, there’s going to be a real concerted analysis of this information that we’ve gathered over the course of the winter to inform what we may well do next winter, which we may go even further, who knows. But we really want to sort of establish that proper data set

 

Measuring the impact of the messaging is quite hard to quantify, because even if there is a change in smooth and solid fuels, that could be down to a range of other areas but it is something that we’re developing a sort of broad set of tools to tackle and it’s certainly something that I want to see us improve.

 

6.        As the questioner was not present at the meeting, the mayor proceeded to the next question.

 

7.        Nigel Furness asked a question:

 

The adoption of Cabinet has removed the possibility of residents and opposition members to exercise committee scrutiny. Does this conform, Councillor Sankey, with the Gunning Principles, the first of which states: “Proposals must be at a formative stage; the decision-makers should not have already made up their minds”?

 

Councillor Sankey, Leader of the Council and Cabinet Chair replied:

 

Thank you, Nigel, and good to see you again. Yes, our arrangements now that we have moved to a Cabinet system certainly conform with all public law and public policy guidelines. Actually, I've been really heartened by the emerging role of both of our Scrutiny committees, both People and Place, who have been meeting regularly and deciding themselves which issues they want to look into that the executive may be considering. They have also been then meeting reactively, when they know that there is a decision coming up, when cabinet is due to meet on something, for example Patcham Court Farm, King Alfred and performing that scrutiny function really, really effectively. And obviously they can meet at all stages, so before Cabinet has even got a thought or an idea about something. I think there’s currently an investigation going on into the regulation of short term lets, something that we've not yet developed any policy on. So they're involving themselves and they're taking the reins of policy development.

 

Similarly, we recently had a joint scrutiny session preparing for the budget planning process for the year ahead, which myself and Councillor Taylor attended, and at that moment we were talking really in terms of principles and broad directions of travel, so certainly well before decisions have been made.

 

So the answer, the short answer to your question is yes.

 

Nigel Furness asked a supplementary question:

 

Now, Councillor Sankey, given your huge appetite for democracy and people-power in particular, and coupling this with the announcement earlier this week by your government that as a result of your expression of interest now in gobbling down, shall we say, the whole of Sussex, that the elections, both county and local, are likely to be scrapped this year, very democratic I’m sure you’d agree. Would you, Councillor Sankey I have to ask, is this in accordance with the Gunning Principles and does your appetite extend sufficiently to allowing the people of East Sussex, West Sussex and Brighton & Hove to have a democracy, a democracy sorry, what a mistake, a referendum by enshrining in our constitution, a direct democracy, as advocated by people in other countries far larger than us and also by Reform UK?

          

Councillor Sankey replied:

 

Thank you Nigel, for your supplementary question. I'm proud to be an elected representative in the oldest unbroken democracy on Earth. I don't think anyone can teach us anything about democracy, and I really welcome the White Paper because I think it puts, at its heart, bringing decision making closer to communities and trying to decentralise what has become a very over centralised system in the UK over many decades.

 

So I think that this will be a an opportunity and a moment for democratic renewal, actually, as we take forward conversations about what that White Paper means for us here in Brighton & Hove and more widely in our county of Sussex.