Agenda item

To receive any Members' questions.

Councillor Ruffles asked the Executive Member for Wellbeing the following question.

 

“I’m aware that a number other agencies worked with Highways at County trying to ensure that our High Streets and Shopping Centres were able to re-open safely.  Could the Executive Member for Wellbeing please explain the role of our East Herts Environmental Health team, and describe any particular challenges they may have faced?”

 

Councillor E Buckmaster responded as follows:

 

“The Environmental Health team has been playing a pro-active role supporting local businesses throughout the Covid-19 pandemic. This has included contacting more than 400 local businesses to give detailed, bespoke advice including undertaking advisory visits or phoning or writing to businesses to share information about how to operate safely with regards to both staff and customers alike. This is key way in which the council has sought to ensure business owners and managers are up-to-date on the latest regulations.

 

“Environmental Health officers have been conducting a significant amount of their duties outside of the council’s normal office hours so as to reach businesses when they are operating. This is particularly the case with cafes, restaurants and pubs. When the 10pm closing time was recently introduced, the team conducted 42 joint visits with the police to local businesses operating in the night time economy on a single Saturday night.

 

“To date the team have followed up 557 individual reports from the public, members, the police and others about businesses appearing to not be following the guidance properly. The team’s stance whether in response to a report or during a proactive visit is a supportive rather than a punitive one with a four Es approach being adopted to ensure compliance for everyone’s safety; that is, engagement, explanation, encouragement and then finally enforcement, although to date this later approach has not been necessary.

 

“Support to help local businesses stay afloat at this challenging time has also included the Licensing team speedily setting up a process to licence tables and chairs on the pavement. Being able to serve customers outside can overcome some of the restrictions applicable indoors. Any premises that sell food or drink for consumption either on or off the premises may apply. This is a temporary measure which acts as an alternative to the pavement licences that Hertfordshire County Council has the power to issue. East Herts Council’s licences are time-limited and the fee is less than a third of the cost of a licence issued by the County Council because the measure is expressly about helping businesses while of course, not interfering with the safe use of pavements. To date, the council has issued two pavement licences in Hertford and one in Bishop’s Stortford. “

 

Councillor Ruffles thanked Councillor Buckmaster and asked as a supplemental question, what had been happening about Test and Trace.

 

Councillor Buckmaster responded as follows:

 

“It is worth noting that on top of this work, since the beginning of October, Environmental Health officers have also been involved with the local test and trace system. If neither the national tracing service nor the County Council can contact someone known to have been in close contact with a person with the virus, the Environmental Health team will pick up the case and try to find a phone number or knock on people’s door if that what it takes. Since the beginning of October, the team has worked on 44 such cases.

 

“The level of the workload and fast pace with which new national guidance is issued is challenging. This is continuing with much fresh information needing to be communicated to businesses and the public alike. The small team of officers have worked collaboratively across the county and have re-prioritised their work, often at short notice.”

 

Councillor Ward-Booth asked Councillor E Buckmaster the following question:

 

“Could the Executive Member for Wellbeing give Council an update on our Social Prescribing programme? Prior to Covid the service had been referring many hundreds of residents to community activities. How and to what extent could the service operate during the months of lockdown and restricted movement?”

 

Councillor Buckmaster responded as follows:

 

“I’m happy to report that East Herts Social Prescribing service has continued to operate throughout the Covid-19 pandemic, providing support over the phone. The number of clients referred to the service during April and May was lower than previously but have since steadily returned to pre-Covid levels.

          

“In 2019, 254 clients were supported through this service, and 122 so far this year. During lockdown more than 500 residents who had used the service previously were contacted as part of the welfare checks.

 

“Telephone support to new and existing clients has been very well received. Many of them are particularly vulnerable to Covid due to age and/or existing conditions, so the Social Prescribing service will continue to support them over the phone until further guidance suggests it is safe to return to face to face support.

 

“To date, East Herts Social Prescribing Service has used council resources and Hertfordshire County Council funds to focus efforts on the Stort Valley area in the east of the district. However we are currently looking at how to roll out the service more widely and/or combine its work with the county-wide Community Navigators and other similar services provided directly by the County Council and local NHS Clinical Commissioning Group. A further development of Social Prescribing is Healthy Hubs. This was launched using funding from County Public Health before lockdown as two physical locations to support people with advice and healthy lifestyle choices but unfortunately could no longer be held in that way.  However I’m pleased to say that this month we have been able to start again but this time virtually or online with a number of partners to help people with their physical and mental wellbeing.”

 

Councillor Ward-Booth asked, as a supplemental question, whether the Executive Member could provide more information on Healthy Hubs.

 

Councillor Buckmaster responded as follows.

 

“In East Herts, this funding is being used for publicity materials and resources for participating partners to provide advice and support sessions and with the existing Social Prescribing service to act as a referral and signing posting route.

 

“The original plan was for partner organisations, such as Mind in Mid Herts, East Herts Citizens Advice and East Herts CCG among others, to run one-to-one and group sessions at Wallfields, with a satellite offer in Bishop’s Stortford.

 

“As mentioned work has now been undertaken to move the Healthy Hub to a virtual platform. In September, the Healthy Hub was completely relaunched offering 25+ virtual sessions a month starting in October, including sessions covering mental wellbeing, healthy eating, coping with cancer, support through bereavement and becoming a ‘dementia friend’.

 

“The Healthy Hub activities are being promoted via our Social Prescribing scheme, the council’s social media, and by the partners delivering the sessions. Uptake for the first sessions has been modest, with only a handful of people signing up, however, this is to be expected given the switch in format. Officers are confident that participation will grow as the scheme becomes more established.

 

“A rolling programme of virtual sessions, which are free to access, will continue to be delivered every month until face to face sessions are able to resume.

 

“Finally, I must offer my deepest thanks, not only to our staff who have worked so hard, but also to our members who have demonstrated great resilience, and of course our parishes and community that has stepped up to support vulnerable residents across the District. I know from conversations I have had recently that many, such as BS Operation Community are beginning to gear up again should the need arise.”

 

Councillor Andrews asked the Leader the following question:

 

“What steps is the Council taking to lobby central Government for additional funding for local authorities, such as East Herts, to help contribute towards the financial difficulties faced by the impact of the coronavirus pandemic?”

 

Councillor Haysey responded as follows.

 

“Let me first of all say that up to 15 October the government has already paid £43.8 million to East Herts Council with a further £9.2 million due but not yet received. The money already received is made up of:

 

·               £41 million for East Herts Businesses - business rates relief, government grants to businesses, discretionary business grant money and support for Bishops Stortford BID

·               £0.9 million for increased Local Council Tax support claims, increased Housing Benefit claims and money for discretionary accommodation for rough sleepers

·               £1.8 million in grant to compensate the Council for lost income and also for new burdens

The money to be received is made up of:

 

·               £8.7 million for business rate relief

·               £0.192 million for increased housing benefit claims

·               £92k for Test and Trace

·               £49k for COVID Marshalls

·               £71k for discretionary accommodation for rough sleepers

“The government scheme to compensate councils for the loss of income from sales fees and charges requires the Council to absorb the first 5% loss fully, after which the government will compensate 75p for every £1 lost. The rules on the compensation scheme exclude commercial rent losses and any investments but covers income which is transactional between the customer and the council so covers, for example, income from parking charges, theatre tickets, and planning applications. Claims are based on losses against the budget which helps the Council as fees and charges had been increased and thus the income budgets as part of the 2020/21 budget.

 

“There is still a lot to do and we need a longer term financial security and settlement, but we are grateful to the government for listening to the concerns of local authorities so far.

 

“This answer will be put on the website shortly tomorrow and further detail will also put onto the website.

 

“The Council continues to support the work on the Local Government Association in making the case of additional funding and we talk to our MPs to get the message through to government about funding.”

 

Councillor Andrews asked, as a supplementary question, what networks and opportunities the Leader had used to get the message across to government about the burdens local authorities were facing.

 

Councillor Haysey responded as follows.

 

“It is important we all recognise that local authorities have worked very hard in stating to Government the requirement for additional funding. The Leaders of HCC and the district and borough councils have been meeting, since March, initially once a week, and now once every two weeks, and we have conversations with the Ministerial Office every two weeks. The Local Government Association (LGA) has been very strong in lobbying the Government.  “The Leader of the County Council is the Chairman of the County Councils Network, and has close contacts with Ministers. I am the Chairman of the East of England LGA and we are working on a regional basis to make sure the Government is very clear what challenges they face.”

 

On being invited to ask her question, Councillor Goldspink said whilst she had submitted to the Executive Member for Financial Sustainability the following question, it had been partly answered in his response to the public question asked by Mr Ramsden. Her initial question had been:

 

“Will the Executive Member for Financial Sustainability commit to publicising the latest report on the financial viability of the Council’s Capital Projects, and will he also publish the business cases for the projects and make them all easily available to members of the public?”

 

Councillor Goldspink said she had been disappointed in the response given earlier in the meeting. Therefore, as the first part of her question had already been answered, she would move straight to her supplementary question. She said she was disappointed that this response had indicated that the project board reports could not be published as unredacted documents, so when would the reports be published and when would the briefing take place?

 

Councillor Williamson said he understood that the provisional date for the briefing was 11 November. In terms of when the reports were to be placed in the public domain, such publication would only be at such time as any sensitive information was no longer sensitive. That would only be possible once all contracts for the projects had been placed, so it was difficult to confirm a timescale.

 

At the invitation of the Chairman, Councillor Goldspink asked a further supplementary question.

 

She asked when Members would be able to view the reports, would this be before the briefing or at the briefing?

 

Councillor Williamson said he would seek confirmation about that point, and let Councillor Goldspink know as soon as practical.

 

Councillor Goldspink then asked her second question on notice, which she put to the Executive Member for Planning and Growth, as follows:

 

“Why did the Executive Member for Planning and Growth decide to take a Non-Key Decision on this Council’s response to the Consultation on the Government’s White Paper on changes to the Planning System, rather than bringing it to Full Council for open, public discussion?”

 

Councillor Goodeve said it had not been possible to draft the response to the white paper in time to meet the committee cycle deadlines for reporting to the recent meeting of Council. This approach had been followed on previous occasions in relation to Government consultations where the timescales had not dovetailed with the committee cycle deadlines.

 

Councillor Goodeve added that the Council’s proposed response was, however, available for the public to view on the Council’s website. As the timings had not allowed for including the response on the Council agenda, a Members’ briefing had been held on 15 October to ensure Members were briefed on the Council’s response and that they had an opportunity to ask questions. 

 

Councillor Goodeve said it should also be noted that the consultation was open to everyone to respond to and the Government is keen to hear from a wide range of interested parties from across the public and private sectors, as well as from the general public.

 

Councillor Goldspink asked, as a supplemental, why, when the draft responses were available over a week ago, could the report not have been brought to full Council tonight, to debate it in the public domain. She said there were flaws in the document, and it would have been good to demonstrate to residents of East Herts that the Council was responding in a robust manner. She asked whether Councillor Goodeve shared her disappointment that such an opportunity had been lost, due to the response being dealt with away from the public gaze as a non-key decision.

 

Councillor Goodeve said she did not share that view at all. The matter had been in the public domain and had had substantial public attention, including from professional bodies. The document was available on the Council’s website, and the response would not be submitted until later in the month.

 

Councillor Corpe asked the Executive Member for Environmental Sustainability the following question:

 

“On 11th February 2020, the Executive received the recommendations of the Task and Finish Group on Parking. Among its recommendations was a suggestion to change the threshold for eligibility for Restricted Parking Zones (RPZ), which would alleviate many parking issues faced by residents in our wards. I can personally say that All Saints Ward would greatly benefit from such a change in position. The Executive asked officers to bring a further eport setting out cost implications. I recall that Officers stated informally that such a report would take some 6-8 weeks to produce.

 

We are now eight months down the line, and no update on this item has come forward. The pandemic of course has changed priorities, but also exacerbated parking challenges, so the changes in policy are needed now more than ever. Can the Executive Member for Environmental Sustainability please comment on when we might expect the council to adopt the recommendations of the Task and Finish Group, and change the policy on RPZ eligibility?”

 

Councillor Graham McAndrew responded as follows.

 

“Officers have been extremely busy responding to the impact of COVID-19, however an update report will be presented at the Executive meeting on 24 November 2020. As stated in the February meeting, the recommendations will be presented in the context of financial impact which has changed significantly since the beginning of the year. Receiving the report in November will be timely in light of the medium term financial plan and preparing next year’s budget.”

 

Councillor Corpe asked, as a supplemental question, whether the recommendations regarding the RPZ could be dealt with individually rather than all together, so that some could be taken forward.

 

Councillor McAndrew said no specific approach to the recommendations had yet been determined, and the report would take such matters forward.

 

The Chairman said the 15 minutes allotted for Members’ questions had been exceeded, so no time remained for the next two questions. The responses to all questions, including those which had not been answered due to lack of time, would be published on the website.