Agenda item

To receive any Members' questions.

On a point of order, Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink requested an opportunity to respond to the earlier comments made by the Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport under the Minutes of the previous meeting item.  The Chairman advised that this matter should be dealt with at a later meeting.

Councillor Mrs M H Goldspink asked the Leader of the Council if he could outline which shops and businesses in Bishop’s Stortford were offering their toilets as public conveniences and how much the Council was paying them.  She also asked if he considered that the signs were good enough for members of the public to find the facilities.

The Leader referred the question to the Executive Member for Community Safety and Protection to respond to.  The Executive Member reminded Members of the scheme to implement community toilets in towns where possible in 2008.  Its aim was to provide more and better facilities for the public, support to local businesses and efficiencies to the Council.

The scheme had been implemented successfully in Bishop’s Stortford and he specified the three participating businesses.  The Council also contributed to the Town Council’s opening of the toilets on The Causeway during the summer months and public toilets were also available in Jackson’s Square, Market Square and to customers visiting the Council’s offices at Charringtons House.  He believed this provision was a significant improvement over previous arrangements.

The Executive Member stated that businesses participating in the scheme were paid a sum of between £600 and £1000 per annum as a contribution towards their operating costs depending on the level of facilities provided.  A number of new signs had been erected in the town centre, including in the windows of the participating businesses, and leaflets were also available.  He concluded by commenting on the many positive comments from residents that had been received compared to only three complaints.

Councillor M Wood referred to the letter from Grant Thornton, dated 22 October 2010, to two residents regarding their objection to the Annual Accounts for the year ending 31 March 2010, and asked the Leader if he agreed that the Council seemed to have escaped any form of censure from the External Auditors by a seemingly narrow margin.

In response, the Leader did not agree and wondered whether Councillor M Wood had read the same letter.  The Leader read several extracts from the Auditors’ letter which he felt demonstrated that Councillor Wood’s view was ill-informed.

Councillor M Wood read an extract from the letter and asked a supplementary question on whether he agreed that paragraphs 34 and 45 of the letter were hardly a ringing endorsement for certain aspects of the C3W process.

In reply, the Leader did not agree with Councillor M Wood’s interpretation.  He referred to a number of other extracts within the letter which he believed represented positive comments.  The Council had taken a pragmatic and proportionate approach, which had been recognised by the External Auditor.

He stated that the Council had been grateful for the comments made in respect of the lack of an expressed discussion on the wider social and economic impact of the move to Hertford and had accepted them as a lesson for the future.  The Leader reiterated the External Auditors’ view that a public interest report was not warranted.

Councillor K A Barnes asked the Executive Member for Housing and Health if he was aware of, and able to confirm, that two properties in Scott Road, Bishop’s Stortford, owned by Circle Anglia Housing Association and part of the stock transfer arrangement, were recently taken out of the stock available to applicants on the Council’s housing register and were re-designated as intermediate rent properties, having been made available via Lea Valley Homes to applicants outside of the East Herts District who qualified for, and were able to afford intermediate rent.  He also asked if he could explain the reasons for this and if any similar exchanges had taken place within the District.  Finally, he sought an assurance that East Herts residents were given preference to Housing Association properties, within East Herts, whilst there were large waiting and homeless lists.

In reply, the Executive Member for Housing and Health stated that the Housing Options Team had become aware of the two Scott Road properties being offered as intermediate rent properties after carrying out a random trawl of Residential Social Landlord (RSL) websites.  He reminded Members of the social housing arrangements with Riversmead and Circle Anglia housing associations and the nomination rights on relets that the Council held, as a result of the stock transfer in 2002.  Officers had been surprised at these particular lets and he reiterated that the Council only made nominations from within its own register.

The Executive Member stated that he had been unhappy with the Scott Road lets and had discussed the need for a strategy or formal understanding with Circle Anglia.  He would be having a further meeting to take this forward. 

The Executive Member commented on the improved standards of housing as a result of the partnership working with RSLs.  He provided reassurance on nomination rights and procedures and the additional points awarded to people with a local connection.

He confirmed that he was aware of one other such sale, which had involved a property adapted for special needs.

He concluded by commenting that the Scott Road lets had perhaps served as the key to unlocking the provision of 34 social housing units at Plaw Hatch Close.  He believed that the outcome, if not the method, should be seen as positive and that, he hoped that the future would bring improved transparency of such developments to match that of the choice based lettings scheme.

In response to a supplementary question, the Executive Member for Housing and Health stated that he was not aware of the additional furnishings included within the sale of the two properties.  It was possible that, as they had been sold by a third party housing association, different standards had applied.  He hoped to obtain more details from his forthcoming meeting with Circle Anglia.

Councillor V Shaw asked the Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport why he had dismissed her proposal and Ware Town Council’s for town enhancements without consulting the Planning Department, who supported long term funding for Tudor Square and consequently felt it met the sufficient criteria for funding.

The Executive Member for Planning Policy and Transport advised that a formal proposal had now been submitted and a number of questions would need to be answered.  He reiterated his support for enhancements in Ware, but that issues relating to joint funding, revenue costs and an appraisal of economic benefits had to be addressed.  He referred to the Bishop’s Stortford town centre scheme, where the Council had provided £50k capital funding.  He reminded Members that this scheme had involved funding from other partners, one of whom had led the project.

The Executive Member commented that the Tudor Square outline planning application was a development control matter in which he had no role.

The Executive Member reminded Members of the key principles for capital funding from the town centre enhancements budget.  These concerned economic sustainability, strategic priorities, match funding from other partners and complementing existing and ongoing developments elsewhere in the town centre.  He reiterated his support for an acceptable scheme which met the criteria.

Councillor V Shaw asked a supplementary question on how the criteria for her scheme could not be justified when Riversmead Housing Association were on board and enhancements had been included within the section 106 agreement relating to the Asda planning application.

In reply, the Executive Member reiterated he had no role within the planning process.  Officers were in discussion with Ware Town Council on its proposal, but the three key issues he referred to earlier had to be addressed.