Agenda item - Oral questions from councillors

A list of Councillors who have indicated their desire to ask an oral question at the meeting along with the subject matters has been listed in the agenda papers.

86.1         The Mayor reminded the Council that councillors’ oral questions would be taken in the order as listed in the council agenda and that a period of 30 minutes was set aside for the item.  Should any questions not be reached at the end of the time period, those councillors would have the opportunity for their question to be carried over to the next council meeting.

 

86.2         The Mayor then called on Councillor Smith to put his question to Councillor Kennedy as Chairman of the Culture, Tourism & Enterprise Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

 

86.3         (a) Councillor Smith asked, “Could Cllr Kennedy tell me what work the Culture, Tourism & Enterprise Overview & Scrutiny Committee has undertaken looking at library services in the City?”

 

86.4         Councillor Kennedy replied, “The Culture, Tourism, Enterprise Overview & Scrutiny Committee has looked at lots of library related issues including pre-decision input on to the libraries plan for 2009 to 2012, a workshop on mobile libraries, regular updates on the libraries plan. We are also looking forward to a report detailing more information about the PFI contract for our libraries and in addition to that both as chair of the committee and also as a regular member of the committee I have attended several excellent events at the library including a very good event which was aimed at raising levels of reading among school children in the City and several wonderful visits to our marvellous rare books collection.”

 

86.5         Councillor Smith asked the following supplementary question, “Would Councillor Kennedy join me in congratulating the administration for the completely protected library service in the recent budget process and would she perhaps explain to the residents including Christopher Hawtree why the Green Group voted against the proposal to provide 2000 new books at the city libraries?”

 

86.6         Councillor Kennedy replied, “Of course I will congratulate all involved in saving our library services.  We do stand alone amongst many authorities in the South East for being able to do that.  However Councillor Smith I am really sorry point 9.9 oral questions should relate to matters of general policy only and as Chair of a non-political scrutiny committee I will not answer your final question.”

 

86.7         (b) Councillor Hamilton asked, “At the Cabinet Meeting last week you stated that you had been talking to Portslade Community Forum with regard to setting up a consortium to consider future plans for Portslade Town Hall.  Furthermore you stated that officers at the council have been instructed to liaise with the Forum and I believe you may have discussed modernising the Kitchen and had a conversation with a project worker for how this could be developed for community use; however she is not on the Forum Committee.  The Chair of Portslade Community Forum assures me that you and council officers have carried out no consultation or communication with the Forum, please could you clarify what future liaison is planned with Portslade Community Forum. Thank you.”

 

86.8         Councillor Alford replied, “I was desperately interested to know what Councillor Hamilton would actually come up with today because clearly Portslade Town Hall is a fixation.  Just to begin with, yes the Community Forum has been contacted, they’ve actually supplied a list of active participants and I am quite happy to share this information with Councillor Hamilton at any time.  We actually have the name of the council officer who will be the liaison man with this group, and I am quite happy to share that with Councillor Hamilton also.  Yesterday the Cabinet held an informal meeting at Portslade Town Hall just to experience the facilities, and see what was going on.  Everyone enjoyed the day it gave them the chance to have a look at the facility.  What I have to ask Councillor Hamilton himself is does he have any plans to improve Portslade Town Hall.  I mean last week at Cabinet we spent an hour debating the issue with him.  You know basically bit by bit I believe we won him over to our argument.  Interestingly enough at the end of the argument he said on camera “it does not happen very often but I actually agree with Councillor Alford.”  I am quite happy to share any information with Councillor Hamilton at any time.”

 

86.9         Councillor Hamilton stated that “For a point of personal explanation, I said I supported Councillor Alford in spending money on Portslade Town Hall ,I did not say I supported Councillor Alford on selling of the rest of the property’s site to pay for it.”  He then asked the following supplementary question, “My supplementary is this, why has the Cabinet agreed to market land and buildings in Victoria Road, Portslade prior to any consultation with Portslade residents many of whom are outraged by your proposal?”

 

86.10    Councillor Alford replied, “There again it has been explained to Councillor Hamilton that basically it will be a 3 stage process, this was all explained last week, it’s an in principle decision at Cabinet so that goes ahead then basically we get somebody involved in the process who comes up with some ideas for the surplus land at that site at that point anyone that’s wants to, including Councillor Hamilton and anyone with a vested interest is at liberty to join in the debate to find a sustainable future for this Town Hall.”

 

86.11    (c) Councillor Fallon-Khan asked, “Will the Leader of the Council please make a statement on proposals for a coach park in Brighton?”

 

86.12    Councillor Mears replied, “I am referring to a report in the Argus from the Opposition Leader Councillor Gill Mitchell and comments about the coach park would be a waste of money. While we readily use taxpayers’ money on the site and in the area with court fees, waste clearance, for loads of anti-social behaviour which amounts actually to over £50,000, a huge sum of public money, and this proposal would hugely improve the vitality of the whole area.  It would also bring new investment into the city’s economy. One coach company has said they will increase their business by 30%.  This money is actually seaside town money very kindly given to us by the previous government, it’s not match funding it was given to us for purposes like this. I would have thought Councillor Mitchell would really welcome this proposal.”

 

86.13    Councillor Fallon-Khan asked the following supplementary question, “Would the Leader agree with me that this proposal is actually excellent value for money?”

 

86.14    Councillor Mears replied, “Absolutely, as I said earlier, we have spent over £50,000 of public money just to clear the site on a regular basis. To actually bring some investment into the area and to ensure that actually we increase our participation by a coach companies and they bring further investment into our city, to our economy is a really good thing so that is absolute value for money.”

 

86.15    (d) Councillor Davis asked, “Will the Cabinet Member explain why the £62,000 of S.106 money allocated to the Council from the Development of South Down House 72 flats on Somerhill Avenue specifically for and I quote the provision of outdoor recreation facilities in the vicinity of the new development i.e. in St Ann’s Wells Gardens has been sitting in the council’s coffers unused since at least 2009?”

 

86.16    Councillor Theobald replied, “The S.106 money is available to do works in St Ann’s Wells Gardens.  The reason why, you say this has been laying there since 2009, frankly Mr. Mayor this work is planned to be done this year.  It may well be the case that that money didn’t come over to us at that particular stage.  The fact is that a lot of works have been done in St Ann’s Wells Gardens and a lot of works are going to be done in St Ann’s Wells Gardens and I would have thought Cllr Davis would have been very pleased about that.”

 

86.17    Councillor Davis asked the following supplementary question, “Is the Cabinet Member aware that we are extremely unlikely to win back the green flag in St Ann’s Wells Gardens this month for a second year in a row because no money has been spent on the playground area and it is now deemed unsafe in places and not up to the required green flag standards?”

 

86.18    Councillor Theobald replied, “No I wouldn’t accept that Mr. Mayor at all.  We have been working on the various points that the judges in the green flag competition have raised as far as this park is concerned and all those works it is planned to do Mr. Mayor.”

 

86.19    (e) Councillor Barnett asked, “Does the Cabinet Member for Enterprise & Employment share my disappointment that the opposition parties voted against the Conservative Administration’s proposal to set up new future apprenticeships fund for the city at Budget Council meeting?”

 

86.20    Councillor Fallon-Khan replied, “I have to say I was particularly and personally very sad about that.  During Budget Council you will recall some of the Conservative amendments which were fairly harmless you know, 20,000 library books, apprenticeships, education business partnerships these are the sorts of things that we absolutely believe that some of the other political parties would have necessarily agreed with.  So I don’t even think that they actually looked at our amendments because if they did look at our amendments Mr. Mayor they would have seen that they have cut at the heart of apprenticeships and 16-24 year olds in the City once and for all.

 

            The apprenticeships in this City are now only really backed by one political party in the City and that’s us.  The education business partnership Mr. Mayor is something that I have now bought up 4 times to Councillor Mitchell.  She raised in the Argus a few months ago, made a statement that the Connexions service was going to be replaced by one-off education business partnership event.  Students, companies and apprentices and employees look at this service as absolutely vital and, I am looking at Councillor Allen here because I just cannot believe that he would have read those amendments from us and voted against it and neither Councillor McCaffrey and especially Councillor Turton.  So they cut right at the heart of that and I am very sad and we are going to try everything we possibly can Mr. Mayor to make sure apprenticeships survive in the City and small business and big business are willing to take them on, thank you.”

 

86.21    (f) Councillor Morgan asked, “In 2007 the Conservative Manifesto for the City stated that we will work tirelessly to redevelop the Brighton Centre and make the new building the cornerstone of the city’s prosperity. Why, 4 years later and 6 weeks before they leave office are we no further forward and no nearer seeing a new Brighton Centre?”

 

86.22    Councillor Smith replied,

 

“Can I remind Councillor Morgan that in 2006 the then Chief Executive of this authority said the Brighton Centre was going to close at the end of 2007, going to shut its doors the whole lot.  We lost millions of pounds of business in the City through that and it has taken us, how many years, 3 / 4 years to build it up again.   I am pleased to say we are delivering between £60 million and £80 million pounds worth of income to this city which employs approximately 2000 jobs and a wider range of 14,000 jobs for the whole City.  Because of what happened to the King Alfred, no money was spent over all the many years, we decided, because the Brighton Centre was such an important building to the economy of the City, to spend £800,000 refurbishing the Centre.  I don’t know if any of you have been in there lately and looked at it, completely redecorated, new booking office.  We have got so many conferences, new ones coming here even today, 2 new conferences have been booked in, one for 2013 and one for 2017 which will bring about another £400,000 into the economy of the City. When the Members of the Labour Party get up and say about the Brighton Centre, King Alfred or any of these things that are left in our hands, yes we do want a new Brighton Centre it is very important but what we are doing we’re spending money to make sure it is a leading light in the City it is today. Thank you.”

 

86.23    Councillor Morgan asked the following supplementary question, “Why is Councillor Smith answering this question and not the Cabinet Member for Enterprise & Major Projects, why have they and this administration failed to deliver on the Brighton Centre, failed to deliver on any major project, failed to deliver on the economy and on jobs after 4 years in office?”

 

86.24    Councillor Smith replied, “I will answer it because the Brighton Centre is so important in this City and have you forgotten the King Alfred?   I could go on and on and on of things that haven’t been done in this City which should have been done. I was there at the very beginning 1977.  I was a councillor when the Brighton Centre opened I was very proud of it then, what’s happened since then, we have had other centres all over the country opening in Manchester, Birmingham since then, Liverpool, Sheffield, Glasgow all these places in competition.  We could have had a new Brighton Centre a few years ago, what happened when SEEDA gave us £16m this council, towards the cost of it with Standard Life, it went to the Secretary of State and they threw it out and the reason was Brighton was wealthy enough to find its own money.”

 

86.25    (g) Councillor Alford asked, “Could the Cabinet Member for Housing tell me how is tenant participation built into investment decisions in council housing?”

 

86.26    Councillor Caulfield replied, “Talking about another area of the council business that was never invested in under Labour.  I am happy to say that a range of levels of tenant involvement in any decisions we make in investment and improvement to our council housing stock right down to the grass roots of tenants associations, which then form part of area panels, which then feed into the Housing Management Consultative Committee which Members, if they decide to turn up, are also part of.  So there is a whole range of tenant involvement initiatives and the biggest part of that is the City Assembly which is held a number of times and actually is just tenant led itself, but I think the ultimate tenant participation would actually be to see a tenant councillor sitting in this Chamber and I hope that after May we might actually se that happen.”

 

86.27    Councillor Alford asked the following supplementary question, “So right obviously the obvious question now is, now we know how it’s done, well I have got to ask now is how exactly is this changed since before the Conservative Group came into administration in 2007?”

 

86.28    Councillor Caulfield replied, “Yes we don’t just pay lip service to tenant involvement; we actually do take it seriously.  I know Members on the opposition aren’t always happy about that, because we fundamentally believe that it isn’t for the state whether that’s the local or national state to dictate to people about their own homes.  As Cabinet Member for Housing, private housing comes under me and I deal with things such as squatters, HMO licensing, grant to improve houses.  I don’t tell home owners how to improve their homes or what to do with them so why should I tell tenants.  I would like to see ultimately the Cabinet Member for Housing role in terms of council housing to deal with the budget and to look after maybe allocation of resources but it’s up to tenants to say how they want their service run how they want their homes delivered and I know that Members are uncomfortable about that because some people pay lip service to it and we actually believe in it.  So when people talk to me about why haven’t we been involved in this decision, it’s up to tenants to bring these suggestions to us and we can have a debate about them but tenants must lead in this, it’s their homes after all.”

 

86.29    (h) Councillor Turton asked, “Could Councillor Theobald kindly update the council on the administration’s plans for permanent park & ride sites within the City please.”

 

86.30    Councillor Theobald replied, “I would just point out at the start that we do have a park & ride site in this City which, of course, is at Withdean Stadium.  I appreciate you don’t know this part of the City very well. The site has 162 spaces, parking is free of charge and there is a bus straight into the City centre, the number 27 that goes every 15 minutes.  So that is still there.  As far as the future is concerned, it is intended that any park & ride sites would provide an opportunity to increase the choices available for people to access the City centre and also the South Downs National Park. Identifying suitable sites within the City does present a number of challenges. 

 

            I’ve mentioned Mr. Mayor, the challenges that are involved, the previous administration tried and failed and we have looked at the various sites they came up with and we have now looked at over 100 potential sites. It’s not easy Mr. Mayor bearing in mind we have a national park on one side and the sea on the other.  But we have had a new approach based on the delivery of a number of smaller park & ride sites and that’s a key element of our sustainable transport policy.  The next stage is a research exercise and that involves putting forward for consideration by the council potential sites within the City that could operate successfully but there are further detailed assessments and modeling that is required and of course, I mentioned this earlier on in this meeting, our transport model which will be with us very shortly now and that will help us very considerably because obviously, if you are going to put a lot of cars in one particular space you need to know the effect on the roads and such like around them, thank you Mr. Mayor.”

 

86.31    Councillor Turton asked the following supplementary question, “Councillor Theobald refers to the previous Labour Administration had identified over 100 potential sites and more work is being done.  The Tory Manifesto in 2007 promised us effective delivery of park & ride within this current council cycle, it refers to a new approach, the new approach is the old approach put off doing anything about sustainable transport in this City, don’t do anything, pack it in with cars and let the pollution go, that’s your approach.”

 

86.32    Councillor Theobald replied, “I have got absolutely nothing to answer, I mean I am amazed given the amount of time the Councillor must have had to think about what questions he can ask to try and catch me out, that that is the best he can do, then frankly that is not very good at all. I have already explained what we have got to do and what we are endeavouring to do. Find smaller sites but I got back to what I said originally, we have a park & ride site and I am just amazed that the Members opposite don’t know where that is.”

 

86.33    (i) Councillor Carden asked, “Dear Cllr Theobald can you please tell me how a Bridle Path of many years standing becomes a Twitten.”

 

86.34    Councillor Theobald replied, “Well it’s very nice to get the actual subject matter and the question which does enable me to answer it. A public bridleway is a legal definition for a right of way used by the public for walking and riding. A ‘twitten’ is a term used widely in Sussex and indeed it is certainly used widely in Patcham and there is a little booklet that refers to the ‘twittens of Patcham’. A ‘twitten’ is a term used widely in Sussex to describe a path or alleyway which can depending on it’s legal status be a public right of way and a bridle path. That’s the legal answer that I’ve got.

 

86.35    Councillor Carden asked the following supplementary question, “Thank you Mr Mayor. What does the council do to perform maintenance and maintain these ‘twittens’? I would like to know.

 

86.36    Councillor Theobald replied, “Rights of way are the responsibility of this council and they will continue to be the responsibility of this council even when the South Downs National Park and we have staff who maintain rights of way. We also have highways staff who maintain alleyways”

 

86.37    (j) Councillor Lepper asked, “Is Councillor Theobald aware that in October 1998 a Council report went to a committee in those days stated that Hollingdean needed a traffic calming scheme and as a result of that report some safety measures were carried out specifically in the dip, but everybody knew then that the measures had to be carried out on a wider scale. In fact by 2002, Hollingdean was ranked second in areas identified for traffic calming and finance was found to begin designing a scheme and public consultation began. The scheme ranked first was Woodingdean and that did in fact go ahead. In 2007 it would appear that the criteria and policy had changed and that area traffic calming schemes were no longer carried out. But in a letter to me at that time, I was told that road safety targets would be monitored annually and that the programme would be reviewed approximately every three years. Since then at regular intervals I have asked, not just as a local councillor but chair of the Hollingdean Local Action Team that a reassessment is carried out. I have also presented five petitions including those from parents of St Joseph’s School, residents in Stanmer Villas and Roedale Road calling for measures to make the area safer. The LAT has also offered up Hollingdean for a pilot area for a 20mph scheme. All these requests have been dismissed and local people believe that this administration does not take seriously local concerns about road safety. As it is now more than three years since 2007 can Councillor Theobald tell me when this area will be reassessed as part of that review promised in 2007?”

 

86.38    Councillor Theobald replied, “Well what is interesting is these sorts of questions come up just before an election don’t they Mr Mayor. It’s also interesting that the councillor was a leading member of the last Labour administration and it’s interesting to know why these things didn’t happen during their term. But Mr Mayor the council has taken positive steps to improve road safety at the dip. The road has undergone a number of improvements that included adjusting road layout and improved signage and lighting. Collision data for the last three years shows that these measures have and are working as the number of collisions has fallen significantly compared with the original road layout. Whilst the council doesn’t consider Hollingdean Dip to have a specific safety concern, we are sensitive as we are throughout the city to the concerns and perceptions of residents. So we have developed a new methodology for assessing the requirements for pedestrian crossings that not only takes accidents into account but also includes pedestrian demand and I will ask officers to look at your request with this in mind.

 

86.39    Councillor Lepper asked the following supplementary question, “If he’d have listened to the question I talked about an area traffic calming scheme and he has fallen into the usual trap of just talking about the Dip which is only part of the problem. I have asked at regular intervals, and I do have the correspondence to prove it Geoffrey, it’s not just at election times, as I have been instructed to do by the Local Action Team for a reassessment of the Hollingdean area, which does include the Dip, but it takes into account the entire 50 bus route which passes St Joseph’s School, the Children’s Centre Hollingdean Sure Start and the entrance to Cedar Centre Special School. The question is when is he going to ask his officers to carry out an assessment of Hollingdean for traffic calming as was promised in 2007? And it was the Labour administration that worked up the traffic calming scheme.”

 

86.40    Councillor Theobald replied, “Mr Mayor, we get lots of requests, I can’t just say well that because Councillor Lepper has got up at election time to say yes I will do so and so just like that Mr Mayor, I really can’t and I don’t think it would be appropriate.”

 

86.41    (k) Councillor Marsh asked, “In this recent leaflet circulated by Councillor Caulfield, it’s a non party political leaflet which is paid for by the way by the tax payer but is a very clear statement where it says that residents can receive free or cheap electricity under a council initiative.  I would like to ask Councillor Caulfield the evidence on which this is based and whether she can clarify how exactly residents of our ward can receive free electricity?”

 

86.42    Councillor Caulfield replied, “Actually if opposition councillors again came to Housing Management Consultative Committee (HMCC) they would hear the evidence and have heard debates around tenants discussing it.  We are in discussions, it was at my Cabinet Member Meeting (CMM) only on Tuesday after HMCC where we showed evidence in the report that we do have electricity companies willing to sign up with us and we are also in consultation with another local authority to go in and look at installing solar panels and we are really excited about this project because what it will mean for council tenants in this city is that energy companies will install these solar panels for free. The tenants will benefit from the electricity that is provided and what’s up for discussion is what we do with the surplus.  So that could come to the council, that could come to the energy company, depending on the sort of negotiations we go into and this was debated at the tenants meeting last night that we both attended Councillor Marsh so you did get the answer then as well, thank you.”

 

86.43    Councillor Marsh asked the following supplementary question, “Further along in this leaflet it does refer to the feed in tariff scheme which Councillor Caulfield hasn’t actually mentioned and I want to ask is she aware that the Government is currently reviewing these feed in tariffs, whether she is aware that according to Climate Change Minister Gregory Baker there have been no representations received from this Administration regarding this review which is rather surprising and does she therefore not agree that her Administration should pursue making representations to the Government as a matter of urgency to ensure that Brighton and Hove City Council has a say on what is clearly an important review?”

 

86.44    Councillor Caulfield replied, “On a couple of issues, we do know there’s going to be changes made to the feed in tariffs and that is why we wanted to move quickly and why we brought the recommendation for the feed in tariff’s to Budget Council, which the Green Party voted against in the Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Budget and the Labour Party abstained and tenants are very aware of that.  In relation to the Energy Minister, it’s Greg Barker actually,  Councillor Mears actually met with him last week at number 10 Downing Street and negotiations went very well and we are very pleased and that is why we are ahead of the game with most local authorities because we know changes will be made and that’s why we want to get these installations in quickly.”

 

86.45    (l) Councillor Mitchell asked, “Would the Leader of the Council comment on the Local Economic Partnership, its relationship with this council and how likely she believes Brighton & Hove will fare in receiving funding from the Government’s new Regional Growth fund?”

 

86.46    Councillor Mears replied, “I am pleased that the Government has made it possible for our city to qualify for Regional Growth funding; I recognise there is stiff competition to receive this funding from across the country.  The authority has encouraged private sector business to also bid for the funding.  And I think that we ought to need to recognise the Local Economic Partnership (LEP) is also about inward investment to the area.  In the Budget yesterday, George Osbourne announced that LEP’s will be able to become new enterprise zones which would allow us to retain business rates locally and would streamline planning which is something that we very much welcome and will be looking into.”

 

86.47    Councillor Mitchell asked the following supplementary question, “I thank the Leader of the Council for her partial answer and I would like to invite her to explain how it is intended under this new model that local business groups and fora will continue to be linked to and represented on the LEP, and would she take this opportunity of expressing her genuine and continuing support for these local groups?”

 

86.48    Councillor Mears replied, “Thank you Mr Mayor. I very much welcome the establishment of the Coast Capital LEP which provides an opportunity to provide private businesses large and small to champion economic recovery and the long term growth of our city and the wider region.  My ambition for the new appointed LEP board is that it will provide a strategic platform for business leaders working with local government to promote investment, create jobs and raise the prosperity of our city.  As a local authority, to realise our role is to work with the business sector to achieve the best possible outcomes for local people.  The city council has a seat on the LEP board and we will work to ensure that the LEP is sufficiently influential with Government and reflects our priorities and that’s across the piste Mr Mayor, we will be ensuring that our businesses in the city, right across the piste are actually consulted and included.”

 

86.49    (m) Councillor Hawkes asked, “Whilst realising that Travellers in the city have only recently come under your portfolio, why is it that the two groups of Van Dwellers in North Brighton at Varley Halls of Residence, Coldean lane and Thirty Nine Acre Field on Ditchling Road have been allowed to remain for almost a year spoiling the beautiful environment around Coldean?”

 

86.50    Councillor Caulfield replied, “Thank you for your question and I to share your concerns as the area is near my ward and I do receive quite a lot of complaints from local residents around the two encampments.  It’s not for the want of trying I can assure you and we have had several legal discussions around this and the groups have got legal cover themselves, they have got Legal Aid in fact.  But we are at the stage where we now do have a court date next week on the 29^th and we are hoping that a full court hearing will be scheduled soon so that we will get an eviction notice. Unfortunately they are a very well organised group and they do have a lot of legal support and they are talking about making this a test case for national purposes and what I am particularly disappointed in is this group of Van Dwellers have no regard for local neighbours and the local neighbourhood.  But also they are doing a disservice to the Gypsy and Traveller community in this city because people are assuming it’s Gypsies and Travellers and it’s not, they are Van Dwellers and they are very much linked to the Van Dwellers that have been in Stanmer Park that thankfully our Rangers got rid of and a group of squatters that are organised around this city as well.  So I want to make clear we are very committed to evicting them from both sites, it’s under legal proceedings so it’s difficult and we are trying to move it on as quickly as possible, but I want to emphasise that they are a group of Van Dwellers and not Gypsies and Travellers and it’s a great shame that they are having a negative impact on that Community.”

 

86.51    Councillor Hawkes asked the following supplementary question, “I did also use the term Van Dwellers, there is no doubt about that.  But are you prepared therefore, I am aware of the court proceedings obviously, are you prepared to consider the sites urgently one way or the other please?”

 

86.52    Councillor Caulfield replied, “Yes we are, and we have sort advice from a barrister as well because there was debate whether to fight these court cases because they will be very expensive on the tax payer and the advise was that we must because they want to make us an example and a test case, and if we don’t we will be opening the flood gates to other Van Dwellers to take up any vacant land in the parts of the city. So we are absolutely committed to fighting this and will deal with it as urgently as possible. And I do acknowledge that Councillor Hawkes said Van Dwellers as well.”

 

86.53    (n) Councillor McCaffery asked, “Noting that despite the amendments to the budget and the potential restructuring I understand that the Education Welfare Service is significantly reduced, could Councillor Brown inform me what mechanisms are proposed for monitoring and assessing the reasons for absence from school, often a key indicator that there are serious issues in the family or with the young people’s mental health?”

 

86.54    Councillor Brown replied, “Thank you Councillor McCaffery. Even before the budget we were considering planning to integrate the Education Welfare Service more fully with the mainstream Children Social Work Teams. This will create a simpler more coherent care pathway for children requiring support and will stop duplication of services, because generally if the children are known to social services, they are the ones who are also working with the Education Welfare Officers, so hopefully it will stop the duplication which is better for the children and for us.”

 

86.55    Councillor McCaffery asked the following supplementary question, “As I mentioned in my first question some of the issues are around young people’s mental health. Would Councillor Brown please tell me the average length of time that young people with serious psychological problems currently have to wait to be seen by a Tier one psychologist, that’s the top tier, and how long they will have to wait in the future?”

 

86.56    Councillor Brown replied, “Thank you Councillor McCaffery. I think they were two very complicated questions and I don’t think you’d expect me to be able to answer off the top of my head but we will give you a written answer.”