Agenda item

[That the Leader of the Council, Cabinet Members for City Environment and City Economy respond to questions received.]

That the responses to the written questions be noted.

a.     LGA conference

Councillor Wendy Thompson asked the Leader of the Council: -

Could the Council Leader detail the costs and explain the economic benefits for Council taxpayers for himself, the Deputy Leader and a Director staying for three nights at the Crowne Plaza Hotel in Birmingham for the recent LGA conference, a hotel only thirteen miles away from Wolverhampton.

The Leader, Councillor Roger Lawrence, responded that the LGA Conference was the most important local government event of the year and provided a key opportunity to engage with partners for the benefit of everyone who lives and works in our City. The conference moves between different locations in the UK and, given its significance, was budgeted for every year.

He added that this year, due to the busy agenda of formal engagements, one-to-one meetings during the conference and the exhibition area, it was deemed appropriate to have accommodation for three delegates for a total of nine nights at £130 per person per night – for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of transparency that was the Leader, the Deputy Leader and the Council’s Strategic Director of People.

He added this small investment was important because, not only were there delegates from Councils up and down the land, but also key national players and influencers who the Council needed to engage with. Anyone who was familiar with the conference would know that during the three days, it was non-stop speakers, briefings, meetings and networking opportunities from very early in the morning until late into the evening. Key engagements included meetings with the Key Cities group (two), Transport for West Midlands (TfWM), SIGOMA and the Combined Authority. The Deputy Leader also spoke at the Localis event during the conference.

He added the City of Wolverhampton Council was in a competitive market place seeking to raise the Councils profile and attract jobs and investment and of course so was everybody else. The Deputy Leader and he felt that the Council needed to be in the thick of the action, batting for the City of Wolverhampton at every occasion that presented itself. As such, the Council delegates needed the flexibility of being close to the conference venue to maximise time spent pursuing opportunities and networking with key contacts."

No supplementary question was asked.

b.    School repairs

Councillor Wendy Thompson asked the Leader of the Council: -

Could the Council Leader explain why a Wolverhampton secondary school which had a major refurbishment costing millions of pounds under the Building Schools for the Future programme only six years ago now has a headteacher appearing on television complaining of over three hundred repairs being required.

The Leader, Councillor Roger Lawrence, responded that the item referred to was a piece of journalism based on the financial pressures that schools across the country were faced with.

He added it was with interest that he read the findings of the recent report produced by the Institute for Fiscal Studies that clearly showed that there had been an 8% reduction in per pupil funding between 2009-2010 and 2017-2018. It was also recognised that devolved capital funding from central government to schools was reduced a number of years ago which had further compounded the financial issues that schools were faced with.

He added, the school in question was voluntary aided, under the Lichfield Diocese and as such the buildings were the responsibility of the Diocese. Any issues with building defects had been compounded by the school’s poor relationship with Carillion, the appointed contractor for the refurbishment of the school.  Despite ongoing attempts to rectify any building defects there has been no resolution or agreement around the building issues at this school, with the school and Diocese regularly failing to allow access to Carillion staff to allow for works to take place.

He added the Council with the agreement of the school and Diocese had given instruction for an independent building specialist to review the situation at the school and to make clear recommendations as to what should be done in order to remedy the situation. Initial visits had taken place with the findings due to be brought forward in due course.

Councillor Wendy Thompson asked the following supplementary question:

She was informed that costs would be in the region of 5 Million to repair the school, would all the building work be completed and whether the Leader had visited the school to evaluate the condition.

The Leader, Councillor Roger Lawrence, responded that the prioritisation of the project specification had not been undertaken wisely previously. He added the Council was currently in productive dialogue with the School and Lichfield Diocese. The initial costs were speculative and once the report had been received from the independent building specialist, the Council could then determine which issues needed addressing. Councillor Lynne Moran would also be involved in the process

c.    City centre economy

Councillor Simon Bennett asked the Cabinet Member for City Economy: -

Following concerns raised in the local press from a resident, who shares the feelings of many local residents, on the subjects of unaffordable parking and confusing bus lanes, what is the council’s plan to tackle the city centre economy.

Councillor John Reynolds responded the City of Wolverhampton Council was heavily committed to supporting and nurturing the City Centre Economy.  It was an effective approach with a potential £1 billion of investment underway or planned.  In order to understand the scale of this support he requested colleagues take time to read the “Enabling a vibrant city centre” report that was considered at the Stronger City Economy Scrutiny Panel on 26 June 2018.  The report sets out the many activities and mechanisms of support including work programmes to encourage additional footfall in the City Centre.  To give a recent example the Food And Drink Event attracted 25,000 visitors to the City, 7,000 more than last year.

He added it was recognised that traditional retail models were in decline nationally and it was vital to the vibrancy of our centres that the Council ensure they offer what people would find attractive. 

He added journey time reliability was an important aspect to the uptake of public transport and the presence of effective and free flowing bus lanes was clearly an important element. Some of the high numbers of improper use of bus lanes is evidence of the need to enforce against their abuse. 

He added the City of Wolverhampton Council would continue to ensure that its bus lanes were effective and clearly and legally signed.  Additionally, the Council would ensure parking charges and enforcement activities were proportionate and most of all transparent.

He added the Council needed to be constantly challenging the strategy for the City Centre,  he was pleased to announce the Council would be launching a new City Centre Commission which the council would facilitate but would involve experts across all the key areas that were critical to the future of the City Centre. This commission would in simple terms help to ensure that our strategy was appropriate, robust and dynamic enough to address ongoing change”.

Councillor Steven Bennett asked the following supplementary question:

Due to the closure of Civic Halls, what action was the Council undertaking to combat the negative impact on businesses.

The Cabinet Member clarified the supplementary question must be in relation to initial supplementary question asked.

The Cabinet Member responded that the Council was proactive with its investment programme in the City and that young people and businesses also had confidence with the City. He added this was demonstrated by the recent purchase of telecom house.

d.    Bus shelter

Councillor Wendy Thompson asked the Cabinet Member for City Environment: -

What were reasons for the bus shelter in School Road Tettenhall Wood which was demolished at the beginning of December 2017 not being repaired despite requests from local Councillors.

Councillor Steve Evans, responded the primary reason for the delay in reinstating the School Road Tettenhall Wood bus shelter was due to the question of ownership. The council had still not been able to verify the ownership of the structure, however given the importance of the shelter to the local community the council would now take responsibility for the structure and reinstatement works.

He added it was believed that the shelter was built in the 1930’s/40’s and the council have also been trying to source the original drawings/information to ensure the brick work would replicate the original design. He confirmed that the works required to reinstate the bus shelter back to its original state would start on site on the 2 August and would take approximately 3-4 days.

Councillor Wendy Thompson asked the following supplementary question:

Why hadn’t the Council pursued a claim against the driver of the vehicle whom demolished the wall of the shelter.   

            The Cabinet Member responded that Council employees would pursue the insurance company of the responsible driver to recover costs.

e.    Green spaces

Councillor Jane Stevenson to ask the Cabinet Member for City Economy: -

Did the Council agree that we have a responsibility to preserve our green spaces for future generations of Wulfrunians?

 Councillor John Reynolds responded, the Council was committed to protecting and improving valuable green spaces across the City, for the long-term benefit of residents and visitors.  A well-managed network of open spaces makes a vital contribution to the quality of life and health of people across Wolverhampton and supports regeneration and investment.  The Council owns and manages much of the open space in the City, providing a range of opportunities for sport, exercise, play and contact with nature.

He added the Wolverhampton Local Plan includes policies protecting open spaces across the City from development which would reduce their value.  On 11 July, Cabinet adopted an update to the Council’s Open Space Strategy and Action Plan, which sets quantity, accessibility and quality standards for different types of open space.  Having an up-to-date Open Space Strategy and Action Plan was vital for the Council to make the best decisions about investment in open spaces across the City.  The document highlights where there were gaps in quantity, quality and access to different types of open space across the City, and how these could be addressed.

He added the Report highlights the success of the Council and its partners in securing and spending millions of pounds on a range of open space improvement projects across the City over the past two years. The update refreshes the list of priority projects in the Action Plan, to help focus funding, land disposal and policy decisions over the next two years.  The Plan in the Report shows the strong relationship between priority open space projects and regeneration schemes across the City.

He added in some parts of the City there was a large quantity of open space, but some was of low value.  There may be opportunities in such areas to dispose of small pockets of poor quality open space and compensate for this loss by providing new open space or investing in and raising the value of other open spaces nearby, to benefit local residents.  Such disposals were limited in number and only take place following comprehensive community consultation and agreement of a suitable mitigation package.  The Open Space Strategy and Local Plan (including the Black Country Core Strategy) policies provide a robust framework for making such decisions.

Councillor Jane Stevenson asked the following supplementary question:

Can the Cabinet Member guarantee to the residents of Finchfield that every penny from the capital receipt from Wolverhampton Environment Centre would be spent on the nature reserve?

The Cabinet Member advised that during the 1980’s – 1990’s a competitive tendering process had taken place, which resulted in the centre being taken on board by the CVO and since then the centre had closed. He added that 90% of the centre was open space and 10% was built on. He added that it was for Cabinet to determine the expenditure from the capital receipt.