Meeting documents

The Committee will review and assess the progress towards the implementation of the Committee recommendations made within the inquiry report, as agreed by Cabinet in April 2017.

Contributors:

Mark Shaw, Cabinet Member for Transportation

Joan Hancox, Head of Transport Strategy

James Silvester, Transport Strategy Manager

The Chairman welcomed the Cabinet Member for Transportation, Mr M. Shaw, Ms J Hancox, Head of Transport Strategy, Mr J Silvester Transport Strategy Manager and Ms P Campbell-Balcombe, Schools Commissioning Manager.

The Cabinet Member gave a brief overview of the progress towards implementation of the Committee’s Inquiry recommendations. This can be viewed on the webcast in full, but included the following points:

• There had been issues with dedicated resource to drive this work forward after the experienced officer left 18 months ago. There had been a graduate in post, but this person had also left.
• The vacancy was about to be advertised again for a full time person to come into post to drive this work. The school crossing patrol manager was currently covering this work and they had experienced difficulties filling the post over the last 18 months.
• The Cabinet Member agreed that this was still a very important area of work and that the Council should still be encouraging walking and cycling.
• There was more that could be done to make walking and cycling routes safer to use.

The discussion highlighted that due to resourcing issues  some of the recommendations not being progressed as much as they should have been. Members asked questions and had some discussion around particular issues within the recommendations; however, the Committee recognised that without resource the work could not be driven forward.

The full discussion can be viewed on the webcast.

Areas that were discussed through Member questions included:

• Resource Issues: Members sought reassurance that all steps had been taken to successfully recruit to the post of school travel planner. Members were concerned about how the council would deliver this work without resource. Members were told that last year a graduate had been recruited and trained but this time candidates with a wider range of experience were sought
• Vision for the service: Members asked whether this was still a priority area and if work would be picked up and taken forward. The Cabinet Member told Members that as a service they felt it was vitally important, especially as the county grows.
• Members were very concerned that there was a policy and inquiry recommendations but that there had been no  one to deliver it and that 18 months since the inquiry recommendations were accepted, progress was lacking..
• Budget and Public Health: Members asked whether public health contributed to the resource for sustainable school travel, given the significant links to improved health. Members were told that there had not been any discussion on this to date, but that the Cabinet Member would value having those discussions.
• Need for accurate maps for walking routes: Members raised concern that the maps sent to school did not take into account where footpaths had been closed due to works taking place, without informing schools and parents. The Service agreed that more could be done to make sure that at the beginning of term they informed schools and parents if walking routes were disrupted.
• Recommendation 3 - Planning permission for new and expanding schools: In relation to Recommendation 3, Members heard how the S106 policy had been changed, so that sustainable travel infrastructure was now funded by the developer rather than falling to the council.  This recommendation was viewed as completed.
• Recommendation 4: Members were told that this would be taken forward within the integrated transport review. There was a member briefing on 26 September on this.
• Unsafe routes: Members were not convinced that routes were being fully assessed and cleared to make them safe. Members felt that what constituted "safe" was not the same within the TfB contract and what Members and the public would expect. Members asked for there to be a clear definition drawn up for local Members of what "safe" and "unsafe" routes would look like.
• Recommendations 5 and 6 and 7: Members were told that these recommendations had not been progressed and would be taken forward once the post had been filled. 

Members were disappointed that recommendations had not been successfully implemented, but recognised the issues the service had faced with resourcing the school travel planning and significant loss the council had when they lost the experience travel planner 18 months ago. 

Members agreed that they would complete the RAG status against the recommendations after the meeting, with a focus on the key areas outstanding and question areas they specifically required further updates on in 6 months’ time once a new person had been recruited. The RAG status would be shared with the Cabinet Member and Officers and would be added to the agenda for the next meeting.