Agenda item - Written questions from members of the public.

A list of public questions received by the due date of the 2 May 2013 will be circulated separately as part of an addendum at the meeting.

117.1          The Mayor reported that 3 written questions had been received from members of the public and invited Mr. Jenner to come forward and address the council.

117.2          Mr. Jenner asked the following question; “With the pressure on budgets and reduction in some areas of funding due to the Conservative Coalition Government imposed austerity cuts, please can you tell me if the total level of funding from grants and commissioned contracted work with the community and voluntary sector has increased or decreased in 2013-2014 as compared with the last financial year 2012-2013 and the previous one of 2011-2012?

This includes all funding across all departments including Housing, Children’s Services, Adult Social Care, Leisure and Sport.”

117.3          Councillor Littman replied; “Working closely with community and voluntary sector organisations is central to supporting our most vulnerable and disadvantaged people across the City and tackling inequality, a key priority for the Council. We have a long standing close working relationship with the Community and Voluntary Sector Forum and will continue to engage fully with our colleagues as financial pressures grow across both the public and third sectors.  We’ve worked with colleagues to develop a new commissioning prospectus which is beginning to bear fruit and we’ve invited CVSF colleagues to join our Budget Scrutiny process for the last two years and have appreciated their valuable input to the process. Despite the growing financial pressures we have maintained our investment in the 3-year Strategic Grants Programme and we are working closely with the sector on a range of service reviews including the Youth Service and Day Services to name but two.

Identifying all third sector providers in our financial systems is difficult but, from the business and organisational directories available to us, we have identified commissioned and contracted services with over 340 third sector organisations in the ‘BN’ postcode area. Council expenditure on these in 2012/13 was £23,000,000 funded by a range of sources including 3-Year Strategic Grants, Supporting People budgets, Community Care budgets and other General Fund and Housing budgets. By comparison, our best estimate for expenditure in 2011-2012 was £23,500,000 indicating a small reduction of 2.2% in 2012-2013. However, in the context of reducing central government support and a reduction in the council’s overall funding of 3.2% last year, the impact on the sector was in keeping with financial pressures across all areas.

For 2013-2014, we published our budget proposals in November 2012 and provided detailed information to the Scrutiny Panel, including CVSF colleagues, showing where we expected proposals to have some impact on third sector agencies. Some of these were positive, some were negative. Although many aspects are still being consulted on, our best estimate is that savings of up to £700,000, that’s 3%, which may impact on the sector, the large majority of which relates to efficiency savings that were already planned through our work with providers of Supporting People services.”

117.4          Mr. Jenner asked the following supplementary question; “I would like to know whether in line with the commitment to a living wage by Green Administration, how many of the 340 organisations pay their staff at a level equal to or above the living wage and is there any contractual commitment to encourage them to pay staff on the living wage over the period of their contract?”

117.5          Councillor Littman replied; “That question is not one I can answer off the top of my head but I will get a written answer to you.”

117.6          The Mayor thanked Mr. Jenner for his questions and invited Ms. Sharp to come forward and address the council.

117.7          Ms. Sharp asked the following question; “I’m here representing some residents. While very supportive of the Council’s efforts to increase recycling rates in our city I’m aware that there has been a pilot communal recycling scheme in Brunswick and Adelaide Ward, there are real concerns from residents in Belfast Street, Connaught Terrace, Booker Street and Sterling Place about the proposed scheme and I understand it is a consultation.

Please can you confirm that you’ve considered the difference in the housing stock between Brunswick and Adelaide Ward and Zone 2 of Central Hove and recognise that recycling rates could be lowered as a result of the Communal Recycling Proposal? This has been expressed by some residents who have contacted me.”

117.8          Councillor West replied; “I’m very pleased to hear that you support our desire to increase recycling rates in the City which are actually quite low especially in the City Centre. The boundary of the proposed communal recycling area broadly covers the more densely populated city central areas and within that area there are differences in the types and variations of the dwelling. Some areas have got more HMO’s than others and we’re aware of that.

If the scheme is rolled out, we expect to see an increase in recycling rates but we also expect to see other improvements including cleaning the streets as there will be less wind blowing recyclables about, less clutter on the streets because when people put boxes out they get in the way of people walking about and generally an easier system for people to use and to not have to remember which day collection day is because they’ll be able to deposit recycling at any time.  So there’ll be all sorts of benefits that will actually make recycling more likely to happen which is what we found in Brunswick and Adelaide but the rates at which we improve the recycling rate are going to vary across the whole area once the area is expanded.

As you quite rightly say, this is a consultation and the decision on whether to roll the scheme out is yet to be taken. The intention is to bring back a report with the consultation results to the July Environment, Transport and Sustainability Committee.  At this stage the responses are being analysed and will be reported to Members so I can’t really comment further on what recommendation we may receive about the ultimate decision on the scheme.”

117.9          Ms. Sharp asked the following supplementary question; “I’m pleased to hear that it is a consultation, I’m afraid there’s a lot of cynicism from the residents that I represent. Can you provide evidence that the recycling in the pilot was increased because when this question was put to Gillian Marston, whom I understand is employed the Council, she confirmed she was unable to provide ward by ward statistics about recycling. So if that’s the case I am concerned that the premise of this consultation as being that the pilot was successful, when it appears that no evidence is available.  Please could you provide the evidence?”

117.10      Councillor West replied; “It is actually quite difficult to give a ward by ward breakdown because it depends on the collection areas but I’m sure that we will be able to give you some information that would help with the evidence for what we are doing here.  The specific evidence that we have received from the pilot in Brunswick and Adelaide was that recycling rate there went up by 70% when we measured it which was at the early stages of the pilot and we believe, because the bins are actually fuller than they were at that point, that we are actually getting an even further improvement on that now.

So that is the strongest evidence that we have that communal recycling will bring great benefit in recycling rate but I can certainly try and get you some more information about current recycling rates in different parts of the City Centre but as I say that information can be difficult to tease out on a  very localised basis.”

117.11      The Mayor thanked Ms. Sharp for her questions and invited Mr. Tomlins to come forward and address the council.

117.12      Mr. Tomlins asked the following question; “The behaviour of council officers and departments should not be regulated by just a ‘what we can get away with’ approach. There are codes of practice that I’ve read that all Council Officers should follow. I’ve made many serious allegation of mal practice amongst Council Departments and Officers who’ve managed my dismissal as a teacher from a Local Authority School.

Why have I been actively prevented until this moment from registering any sort of complaint or protest about what I consider to be seriously unprofessional behaviour this total lack of accountability is surely against the values of an open transparent and democratic Local Authority?”

117.13      Councillor Littman replied; “The issue of appointment and dismissal of teachers is a matter for schools under the Local Management of Schools framework. Your dismissal was considered by the Employment Tribunal which concluded that the dismissal was fair. The right to appeal that decision was up to you. However, Council officers have responded to your complaints and your dismissal and have explained to you the process which you could use should you wish to pursue this further in accordance with the school complaints procedure by way of the Secretary of State for Education and you have been provided with details of that.

It was not considered appropriate to take an earlier question from you which was submitted to Council in October 2012 because your employment tribunal had not concluded at that stage and also the wording of the question risked you making allegations about named third parties which would have breached the Council’s procedure rules and these circumstances were not considered appropriate to accept your earlier question.”

117.14      Mr. Tomlins asked the following supplementary question; “You might know that the same school has charged me with harassment for asking about references so I get to talk about my case again in a court and I get the chance to explain all the allegations that I’ve made and if that is the case and these are accepted by a Magistrate in a court then I hope the Council will take a different view and especially look at the way that some very senior Council officers have denied, covered up and pretended that this never happened.

So I hope I can come back, if that’s the case after my trial, and raise this question again when it will obviously become more pertinent.”

117.15      Councillor Littman replied; “The result of the Magistrate Court will have a bearing on whether or not this goes any further.”

117.16      The Mayor thanked Mr. Tomlins for his questions and noted that concluded the item.