Meeting documents

Questions to the Leader or any Cabinet Member must be submitted by 12 noon on Monday 8 July 2019.

 

A questioner will have a maximum of 1 minute to ask a question and the answer shall not exceed 3 minutes. Any questioner may put one supplementary question without notice within a maximum time of 1 minute and the answer may not exceed 2 minutes.

 

Questions shall be taken first from the Group Leaders of the political parties who shall be entitled to ask an initial Leader`s question from his/her group, of which written notice shall have been given to the Head of Democratic, Legal and Policy Services prior to the meeting.

 

The order of questions shall then permit the first question from each other Councillor to be asked before any subsequent questions from the same Councillor. One question will be taken in turn from the same Councillor unless there are no other questions to be asked.

 

Every member asking an oral question is permitted to ask one supplementary question without notice provided that it is not substantially the same as a question that was put to a Council meeting during the past 6 months.

 

Any question remaining unanswered after 30 minutes will be answered within 10 working days in writing after the meeting by the appropriate Member and appended to the minutes of the meeting. 

 

a)     Question from Councillor R Raja to the Leader of the Council or the Cabinet Member for Environment

 

The UK produced 11M Metric tonnes of Plastic waste in 2017 and recycled two thirds of it, or so it seemed. However, according to a report by the National Audit Office half of the UK’s recyclable waste was sent overseas for recycling but much of it is likely to have ended up in landfill or the ocean instead. The dumping of our waste in the laps of poor countries has recently been exposed by TV programmes and newspaper articles which have shown that waste from the UK including from Local Authorities ends up as toxic mountains in third world countries where it causes birth defects, impaired immunity, respiratory diseases, cancers and other ailments, not to mention the devastating effects it has on wildlife and marine life.

 

Would the Leader of the Council /Cabinet Member for the Environment categorically assure us that no waste belonging to WDC is ending up in poor countries in the Far East on the pretext of being recycled there or are we guilty of large scale fly-tipping as well?  

 

Verbal reply given by Councillor Mrs J Adey (Cabinet Member for Environment)

 

Different types of plastic containers collected in Wycombe are formed into bales and then shipped to re-processors in the UK and Europe, sometimes further afield. The containers are then re-processed to provide raw materials for the manufacture of new products. Recent information from the Joint Waste Team shows that an average of only 10% of the containers collected in Wycombe may eventually leave the UK or Europe for recycling purposes. These destination countries could include Malaysia, Taiwan, Vietnam, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Indonesia and India.

 

All recycling materials collected from the kerbside by the Council’s contractor and sent for sorting, bulking and onward transportation are subject to a regulatory process.

 

This regulatory ‘duty of care’ requires that waste is only ever transferred to an authorised dealer who has a valid registration as a carrier, broker or dealer of waste, or a waste management operator who has an environmental permit. Only reputable and compliant contractors are used.

Operators of MRFs (Material Recovery Facilities) like those used by the Council are required to keep records and report to the regulator details of what they send out, every three months. To check on all this, the Joint Waste Team has its own programme of ‘duty of care’ visits. All contractors taking recycling from us are visited, and the officers satisfy themselves that the operators are meeting the requirements of the legislation and all the necessary documentation is up to date and compliant. The MRF used by the Council’s contractor at the moment has recently been checked for this purpose and all was found to be in order.

 

90% of Wycombe’s plastic containers that have been collected for recycling remain in the UK. This fact, along with our knowledge of the controls in place and our use of reputable contractors means that we can have confidence that the chance of any plastic container collected within Wycombe ending up in any of the world’s oceans is remote.

 

Supplementary Question

 

It is reassuring to know that these policies are in place, but are they being followed to the dot? 10% going outside the EU is too much, I feared watching these recent TV documentaries that rubbish from Wycombe District would feature. I have not had the re-assurances I was seeking.

 

Supplementary Response

 

The major problem is when illegal waste is set in fire, we are confident in our operations.

 

b)     Question from Councillor M Knight to the Leader of the Council

 

In October last year the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published an influential report on climate change. This report warned of the serious and devastating consequences of global warming and the human contribution to the warming of the planet.

Since then over 100 councils have led the way in the UK by formally declaring a "climate emergency" and setting targets in place to reduce the use of fossil fuels and the release of carbon into the atmosphere. For example, Oxfordshire County Council has pledged to become carbon neutral by 2030.

Climate change is real and is already having a negative impact on the natural ecosystems, flora and fauna of our planet which in turn is presenting a risk to human life. It is essential that those of us with power do all we can, at all levels, to take action.

Do you agree with me that as a council we should be declaring a climate emergency and together working to identify actions which can alleviate the problem?

Verbal reply given by Councillor Ms K Wood (Leader of the Council)

Wycombe District Council is committed to protecting the environment. This is evidenced in a number of ways, for example, its strong recycling performance and the adoption of an air quality action plan. Also, through its Planning and Green Spaces services, Wycombe supports sustainable development, protects biodiversity and maintains the environment of the District to a high standard.

 

Many of these activities will have positive impacts on carbon dioxide emissions at district level and in particular the air quality actions supporting the shift to electric vehicles and those aimed at changing the behaviours of drivers should have positive effects.

 

Clearly, air pollution is also associated with a number of adverse health impacts, particularly for the most vulnerable in society, including children and older people and those with heart and lung conditions.

 

The Council has a good track record in those areas where it can have a direct influence, and it will always play its part. The Council is also supportive of national and international efforts to tackle climate change and I shall be asking officers to write to central government in support of the development of challenging targets for carbon emissions reductions.

 

Supplementary Question

 

I am not sure that is an answer to my question, do you think we should have specific targets? Will you support future motions in regards to such, brought before this Council?

 

Supplementary Response

 

I note that Oxford County Council have targets relating to 2030, it is difficult for us to set targets as we are only here until April next year; 2020. We clearly support such targets, but is this the right time to bring them in? We should leave them to the new Unitary Council.

 

c)     Question from Councillor B Pearce to the Cabinet Member for Environment

 

Do you agree with me that Wycombe District Council and the travellers liaison office in Aylesbury, worked very efficiently and swiftly in removing the travellers from the Dean Street Recreation Ground in Marlow (I believe in less than 24 hours) and also when the same travellers descended on Fernie Fields Recreation Ground in less than 7 hours.

 

Can we therefore assume that this efficiency will continue if travellers descend on any other area in Wycombe District? 

 

Verbal reply given by Councillor Mrs J Adey (Cabinet Member for Environment)

 

All incursions are dealt with either by the Buckinghamshire Gypsy and Traveller Service or Thames Valley Police, usually both are contacted in the first instance.

 

Where incursions are dealt with by the Traveller Service they use powers under Section 77/78 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. This is a specific legal process that must be followed which includes carrying out the necessary welfare checks.  This is not a quick process and can take around 7 - 10 days.  Any eviction must be proportionate, legal and necessary.

 

Where cases are dealt with by Thames Valley Police they use powers under Section 61 of the CJPOA.  This is a quicker process and can be used in situations where there is damage to land or property, threatening, abusive or insulting behaviour is demonstrated or there are more than six vehicles on the land.  These powers are only available to the Police and it is for the Police to decide if it is appropriate to use these powers.

 

The cases you have referred to in your question were both dealt with by the Police using S.61 powers.

 

For your information the Council is considering applying for an injunction to speed up the process of eviction from Council owned land.

 

 

Supplementary Question

 

Did you know that Marlow Town Council has installed barriers to its recreation grounds? Should not Wycombe District Council install such on the Rye? If there was a Town Council would this not be done quicker? It was 9 days for removal from Kingsmead, how long will it take in respect of the Rye?

 

Supplementary Response

 

Barriers are all well and good but there are angle grinders! We have to have usable barriers to enable genuine users with vehicles (e.g. authorised events) to access the fields.

 

d)     Question from Councillor M Hanif to the Cabinet Member for Environment

 

The incidents of fly-tipping appear to have increased since BCC started to make it difficult for residents to dispose of excess household rubbish by closing Re-cycling waste stations.  Most residents see a clear link between closing of Recycling waste collection points and increased levels of fly-tipping, which blights residential areas and increases health risks and safety concerns. Also it is seen as a revenge of the consumer society we live in. 

Would the Cabinet member for the Environment/Waste recycling agree there is indeed a link between closing of recycling waste collection points and increased levels of fly-tipping, accepting also that the council's waste management strategy is nothing short of shambles and is a result of this council being in cahoots with the BCC by not opposing the waste site closures or do you have another explanation for this mess?

Verbal reply given by Councillor Mrs J Adey (Cabinet Member for Environment)

 

On the 1st of April this year Bucks County Council closed Bledlow Ridge Household Recycling Centre, reduced the opening hours of others and introduced charges for disposal of non-household waste such as rubble and soil.

 

In the first 3 months since these changes there appears to have been a small decrease in fly-tips in April, a small increase in May and a further increase in June.  These figures are taken from Fix My Street which is on the County Council's website and it is possible that a single fly tip may have been reported several times.  In addition, the closure of the recycling centre and the debate around fly-tipping has received a lot of media attention and it is likely that this will have increased awareness and usage of Fix My Street.

 

Having regard to this I would take the view that 3 months data is insufficient to suggest a long term trend.  However, the matter needs to be closely monitored and I have asked officers to do this and keep me informed.  I will also ask for the matter to be discussed at the next Joint Waste Committee meeting.  I can assure you that Council is NOT in cahoots with the County Council and the closure of the household waste recycling site, change of hours and charging was a decision made by the County Council as the disposal authority.  In fact the Joint Waste Committee of Wycombe, Chiltern and South Bucks wrote to Bucks County Council voicing our collective concerns.

 

As you will have seen, if you read your Wycombe District Times, an article showing that over 75% of waste which is taken to household recycling centres is still free to dispose of and perhaps this message needs to be emphasised to residents.

 

Supplementary Question

 

Do you not agree that this is short sighted and not cost effective, when you make it difficult to dispose of waste, you are more likely to experience fly tipping which is far more expensive to put right?

 

Supplementary Response

 

I have answered already that this is a question for Buckinghamshire County Council.

 

e)     Question from Councillor S Graham to the Cabinet Member for Environment

 

The Bucks Free of 21st June 2019 carried a picture of over grown bushes along John Hall Way, High Wycombe.

 

The picture showed the overgrown bushes covering a large part of the footpath, which means that people have to step on the road and this would be especially difficult for anyone in a wheelchair. 

 

Would the Cabinet member for Environment agree with me that this is an unacceptable state of affairs and can she tell me of any steps she has taken to ensure that overgrown bushes are cleared from roads and sidewalks on a regular basis before they cause an obstruction, especially during the summer months?

 

Verbal reply given by Councillor Mrs J Adey (Cabinet Member for Environment)

 

This question is really one for Bucks County Council.  In the instance cited it was unfortunate that the overgrown vegetation was not picked up as a part of the monthly inspection regime that is in place for John Hall Way. 

 

However, following notification of the issue an ad-hoc inspection was carried out, the severity of the incursion noted and a works order was raised and actioned  promptly.  The Transport for Bucks Highways Inspectors have been reminded of the need to ensure that footpaths are not blocked by vegetation.

 

As an aside, much of the vegetation that does impinge on the public highway does emanate from residents' gardens.  I should therefore urge residents to manage their vegetation such that it is not allowed to grow over the public highway to ensure the safe passage of pedestrians is not compromised.

 

Supplementary Question

 

If you look across the District you see that many sidewalks are overgrown, should these not be remedied?

 

Supplementary Response

 

Again as said it is a Bucks County Council matter I would suggest taking it up with them.

 

f)      Question from Councillor M Asif to the Leader of the Council

 

We will have a considerable number of challenges and decisions to make as we move towards a unitary council.

 

Does the leader agree with me that the officers are key to a successful delivery and that we have the team in place to do this? 

 

Verbal reply given by Councillor Ms K Wood (Leader of the Council)

 

I agree with Cllr Asif that we have a considerable number of challenges and decisions to make as we transition to the Unitary Council. An overarching Programme Governance structure has been put in place, led by Rachel Shimmin, Buckinghamshire County Council Chief Executive and the designated Implementation Executive for the Shadow Authority, and with senior officer representatives from all five Councils. All five Councils are also represented by officers on the Unitary Programme Boards and Project Work streams. The overall Programme is supported by the Unitary Programme Management Office.

 

Officers are key to supporting our transition and to maintaining the provision of essential public services during transition. We are indeed fortunate that we have an officer group with a wealth of experience and skills to support the transition to the new Council. Provision has been made to support the transition programme and continuity of services. The Shadow Executive and senior managers need to ensure, and keep under constant review, our capacity to manage and deliver this change. We as Members can also make a contribution by being mindful of the considerable workloads arising to officers in delivering change and maintaining services to our residents and customers.

 

Supplementary Question

 

We have all been informed that the Chief Executive is leaving at the end of this month. I agree in respect of her immense contribution to the Council, but should this departure be before the staff are assisted through the changes with the new Unitary Authority?

 

Supplementary Response

 

The Chairman allowed Ms Satterford to respond in respect of this supplementary question.

 

As you will know the recruitment of the new chief executive for the Unitary Authority is underway, interviews are this Thursday and Friday, with ratification next Tuesday. At that point we will have a new Chief Executive, a new person to steer the new organisation. I am grateful that the Council supports my departure.

 

The new Chief Executive can plan long term, they will need an extremely able team of officers to manage the transformation. The District Chief Executive role is very much over.

 

Thank you Chairman for allowing me to speak on this item.

 

g)     Question from Councillor K Ahmed to the Leader of the Council

 

On the 31^st July 2019 we celebrate the 100 year anniversary of the Addison Act, which paved the way for large-scale council housing. We must now be mindful of the 200,000 people in temporary housing across the UK and the 1.2 million households on social housing waiting lists.

In High Wycombe there is a lack of new social housing being built. Social housing has been sold off under the Right to Buy scheme without being replaced, leaving people in Wycombe without the opportunity to rent at an affordable price. Can I ask if the leader is happy with the general state of social housing in Wycombe and what she has done to address these issues, in light of additional borrowing available from central government? 

 

Verbal reply given by Councillor Ms K Wood (Leader of the Council)

 

A quote from ‘Inside Housing’ professional magazine for housing summarises the current position well:

 

" There may still be a myriad of challenges to face when it comes to providing good quality, genuinely affordable housing for those most in need, but without the passing of an Act of Parliament 100 years ago, the sector [we work in today] may never have come to exist. That alone is worth celebrating."

 

Currently, we as a Council have relatively low numbers of household in temporary accommodation compared with local authorities in the south east with the last published figures in December 2018; 1.09 persons per 1,000 households in TA compared with a South East Average of 2.36. Milton Keynes had 6.86, Slough had a last published figure of 8.26, with Luton 16.33 by way of a comparison. This does not mean we are resting on our laurels though, as we are moving forward with our plans for new temporary accommodation which will be a vast improvement on our current provision.

 

In regard to new social housing, a large number of new social rented homes are being built with 197 affordable homes delivered in the district in 2018/19 with more currently being developed and delivered by our partner Registered Providers. All new build social housing is let at an affordable or a social rent and is capped at local housing allowance levels to ensure rents are affordable to local residents.

 

As such, we are happy with the general state of social housing and with the partnership work carried out by our experienced officers with the large number of Registered Providers who have homes and offices, in the district.

 

Supplementary Question

 

We relieved ourselves of the burden of social housing with the sell off to Red Kite. Wycombe District has not done enough to address social housing issues. Red Kite has used it stock to support a fancy private enterprise project ‘twenty 11’, in respect of Social Housing are not the people of Wycombe worse off? 

 

Supplementary Response

 

We are expecting approximately 100 affordable homes to be provided this financial year (19/20) from at least 4 different registered providers of housing. This is not all new build with around 84 new build and around 16 purchase schemes funded by WDC.

 

We are investing over £2.5m of Wycombe District Council’s funds including s106 developer contributions to deliver these new homes. I think we are doing pretty well.

 

I would add that the housing stock was not sold off it was transferred.

 

Questions 8 to 10 were not put as the 30 minutes time period had expired. In accordance with Standing Orders, a written reply would be sent to the questioner by the appropriate Member within 10 working days, and would also be appended to the minutes of the meeting.